City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, I'll call this meeting to order. Uh, to the clerk, can we get a roll call tonight, please? Mayor Proan Bliss, I'm here. Councilman Fleming here. Councilman Mir here. Councelor Roarback here. Councilman Soldus, here. Council Wright here. Mayor Graphstein. Uh, can I get a motion to excuse the mayor tonight? Your honor so moved. Your honor support. Support. Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Oppose say no.

Motion passes. All right. We will be begin tonight's meeting with the invocation and pledge of allegiance led by me. As the city's 70th anniversary comes near, let us gather tonight with grateful hearts for the seven decades of hard work that has gone into building this community at Madison Heights. We give thanks for the spirits of creativity and unity that have always carried us through. And may that spirit continue to bind us, reminding us that new ideas are the most valuable currency for our city leaders and that our shared commitment to this community always outweighs our differences. We pray for a flourishing spirit of volunteerism, recognizing that our strength as a community has always lied in every person's willingness to contribute their time and talent to the city. May we find joy in serving our neighbors and enriching Madison Heights through our collective efforts. Also, grant us all wisdom and grace in our interactions. When differences arise, help us to remember to seek to understand before we speak out. May empathy guide our conversations and may our shared humanity always be our common ground. We look to the future with optimism, trusting in Madison Heights's resilience and incredible potential. New voices will rise, bringing fresh ideas with them, and may we always be blessed with leaders who embody the dedication and integrity that we have seen in our city's history. May each of us be inspired to contribute to the vibrant and connected community that we are all so fortunate to call home. Amen.

I pledge algiance 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. All right. So, we don't have any presentations for tonight. Uh, so let's go to the public hearing on the CDBG program. Each year, the city submits a program year application to Oakland County for inclusion in their annual action plan to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Staff recommends funding three project areas this year. code enforcement, minor home repair, and public services, which is senior seasonal yard cleanup. After city council conducts the required public hearing, staff recommends that city council authorize the program year 2026 CDBG application as presented to be submitted to Oakland County for inclusion in the Oakland County's annual action plan to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and authorize the mayor to execute all documents, agreements, and contracts which result from this application to Oakland County.

All right. So I will first open the meeting to the public. Uh it is only to talk about the CDBG program year 2026 application. So if you have comments related to that, I'd invite you up to the podium. Uh three minutes or less, please. Uh if not, I will close the public uh hearing as quickly as we need to. Public hearing. Yes,

I have a question about that. I was just glancing at it today. It said 103,000 for code enforcement. Can you tell me what exactly that would be used for? Is that for salaries or is that for enforcing something? I'm not certain what it covers. So we we we typically don't do a lot of back and forth, but the clarification I I know our city manager can give that really quickly. So

So it is salaries for the code enforcement officer that works in the CDBG qualified area and the expenses that go with that person. So all the benefits, the vehicle, the gas, all those kinds of things that go with that code enforcement officer. And the city is restricted on how much money we can put towards other things like to minor home repair and the season senior seasonal cleanup. So we're maximizing that um already because that's definitely a need in the community. Hey, hey, ma'am, could I get your name for the record? Lynn Calu. Perfect. Thank you so much. Would anybody else like to speak? Yes, please come on up to the mic.

Good evening. My name is Candy Hoverarter. I live at 3128 Brighton Road in Howell, but I'm representing the Meals on Wheels program that serves your seniors in Madison Heights. So, I'll just give you just what it is we do here at Meals on Wheels. We serve a meal Monday through Friday to the seniors that are in need. For some of these seniors, we're their food source. So, we'll bring them frozenss for the weekends. Periodically, we drop off u blizzard boxes. And we just did this on last Saturday. Volunteers came and picked up boxes of shelf stable food. And we encourage them to use that food in case we can't come like an ice storm or some kind of an event like that where we can't come. We want them to make sure they have food. So that's what those are for cuz we don't ask our delivery drivers to go out, you know, if it's horrible weather. We can't risk their safety either. So we try and take care of these seniors, you know, as best as we can. All the volunteers go through a background check so you don't have to think who's coming over today. It's kind of a morning thing. We make the food in Brighton and we got the contract here for the like the Troy area which runs you know all of this Southfield this area as well. So we took that over about three years ago. So it's us and we're doing good here. We just need some help with this. We figured out that last year we served um what was it like 20,500 meals and when you figure out we asked for $4 a meal which would be you know like $20 a week if they can pay it. We feed them anyway. We have, you know, some grant funding and other people send in extra money and sometimes businesses will give us money or we cater. We try and generate income. But when you figure out how much it was we got from the residents of Madison Heights, it was 93 cents a meal. So, we just need some help with that if we can. We're not worried about not feeding them now. Just something, you know, to consider to help us out because we want to keep doing it. I don't know questions or We were just asking, yeah, for some money to help us keep on, you know,

keeping on. Like I said, we we are going to find a way to keep doing it, but if we could get some help from the city of Madison Heights, maybe with these CDBG funding, that would be appreciated. That's all. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Thank you.

So, mayor, I' mayor prom. Mayor, I'm not sure what to call you today. I'll call you mayor prom. Um, just one point of clarification. So, starting in program year 2024, Oakland County, which is where our CDBG funds funnel through, capped um public service programs at 15% of our total subreient allocation. So, if council were to decide to give money to the Western Oakland County Mills on Whales, as just requested, you would actually have to take it from the public services senior seasonal yard cleanup um line. So, there's no that we're already at the cap there. Thank you for the clarification. Any other comments from the public before I close the public hearing? All right, I will close the public hearing. Uh, what is the wish of council? [snorts]

Your honor. Yes, council robot. I move that council um uh authorize the program year 2026 CDBG application as presented to be submitted to Oakland County for inclusion in the Oakland County's annual action plan to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and authorize the mayor to execute all documents, agreements or contracts with which result from the application. [snorts] Thank you. Is there support? Your honor. Yes. Councilman Mayor

support. Thank you. All right. We have a motion and support on the table. Uh any comments from councel? I will just add so I will I will vote yes and support this. But if our staff and perhaps in partnership with some of the additional boards and community groups in our city uh could get together and assist the meals on wheels program. Uh anything that we can do. I know the city drove a huge increase uh in donations for our food pantry. Uh it'd be great if we could do the same thing for the meals on wheels program. Uh so all those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

Oppose say no.

Motion passes. All right. Next up we have meeting open to the public. Uh so this is your time to talk about anything. Uh you will have three minutes at the microphone. Please address all of your comments to me as the chair of the meeting, not to any individual council member. We will provide clarification if needed, but it is not a chance for back and forth dialogue. Okay. All right. Meeting is open to the public. Timothy Ginster, uh, 28757 Dartmouth. Subject: Opposition to proposed parking development at 12 Mile and Dartmouth Street. Members of the city council, I'm speaking to formally express my opposition to the proposed parking development project at 12 Mile Road and Dartmouth Street. Specifically, the plan involving the tear down of the property adjacent to my home, 2757 Dartmouth Street, as a resident and taxpayer of Madison Heights since 2017. I am deeply concerned about the negative impact this project will have on traffic safety, neighborhood livability, and property values. Parking and proposed house tearown. The applicant has requested special land use to demolish an existing residential home and use a space for three parking spaces. I question where the authorization came from to even consider tearing down a home in a long established neighborhood simply to accommodate a few parking spots. There is no justification for demolishing an established residence for such a purpose. Approving this request would set a dangerous precedent soon with a commercial encroachment into residential neighborhood is acceptable. I'm not opposed to the applicant's desire to rebuild a restaurant only to the unnecessary demolition of an existing home to expand parking. According to the current traffic study, the existing Dartmouth alley is already sufficient to accommodate the necessary access.

I do have traffic and safety concerns. Each morning and evening, I personally witness the heavy cong the traffic at 12 mile Dartmouth intersection. During peak hours, 7 to 9:00 a.m. and 4 to 7 p.m. traffic routinely backs up due to large trucks and vehicles exiting the nearby gas station and Tim Hortons. The street is narrow, often forcing southbound drivers to yield to northbound traffic due to limited space and parked cars. Adding a new commercial east west egress and three parking spaces would escalate these hazards and pose additional additional risk to both pedestrians and drivers. There's no way the current proposed egress with three parking spaces can handle hundreds of vehicles daily. Again, the current alley is already available abuing the applicant's property for expansion. The proposed southern concrete wall and fancy landscaping will not eliminate the resulting noise, air pollution, and traffic congestion 20 ft from my home. I foresee significantly degrading the quality of life for myself, family, and surrounding residents. Easements and utility concerns. My property currently relies on power and cable lines connected to the to a utility pole located in the Dartmouth Valley. If these lines ever needed to be relocated as part of the development, this would affect my property value and potentially landlock my lot, restricting any future improvements for the addition of a pool. I'm submitting drawings showing the current layout for your review. You can bring that to me.

Thank you.

You have about 30 seconds or so. Um, what I prop when I purchased my home, I did so with the understanding that I was investing in a residential neighborhood, not living beside a hight traffic commercial corner. The proposed parking development would fundamentally alter the character of our area, reduce property values, and compromise the safety and peace Madison Heights residents expect and deserve. I urge you to prioritize the safety and well-being of current residents over commercial expansion. Please reject the current parking as a principal proposal and consider alternative solutions that align with the city's commitment to responsible development and community preservation. Should this proposal move forward, I will be submitting a formal letter of opposition to be entered in the public record. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Next, [clears throat] please.

Well, good evening. I'm Kathy Sapia, 50-year resident and homeowner of the residential neighborhood of Dartmouth, Carum Drive, and Bair Streets. Where to begin? Well, let's start with the people. Will the people here today from the neighborhood please stand? Come on up. Yeah, more than the same 10 people. Thank you so much for your time today. I know it's hard out there. It's dark. Chris, I'd like would you bring that up, please? I would like to enter into the minutes a petition and diagram. You all have it on your um at your seats stating, "I do not support the Dartmouth Alley access project." There are 80 signatures on this petition gathered by doortodoor canvasing in our immediate neighborhood. I will tell you, as stated in my email to the council, many signees express regret on not being able to be here tonight due to work, babysitting issues, and they don't drive at night. Let's see how those 80 signatures look. Okay. Every red wedge there is a signed petition. This is our immediate our immediate neighborhood. We were challenged and berated at the October 13 meeting that it's only the same 10 people that care. Well, we met that challenge. On the other hand, Mr. Nager, I see, has already submitted to the council a preprinted preprinted form letter that he had customers sign while at different properties he owns in Madison Heights. So, where were Najor's sneees from? All over, blocks and even miles away from our immediate

neighborhood. I checked the addresses and only one of his sneees is from our immediate neighborhood. A picture is worth a thousand words. Let's see how it looks. The immediate neighborhood that says no to the Dartmouth Alley access. the immediate neighborhood that says yes to the Dartmouth Alley access. In case you can see it, it's one people. This is who we and I hope the council represents on the vote today. The famous traffic reports. Numbers, numbers, numbers. What we should look at is people and experience versus statistics and numbers. The sinar consultation group hired by the major company said there's no meaningful increase in traffic compared to the former restaurant. Really? 14 years no more traffic. Experience Bubba's 33 on Hall Road. The same experience as Marinelli's. Not even close. Here's another traffic analysis remedy.

Ma'am, you you're at three minutes. I'll let you wrap up your thought. Okay. I got one line, one um one page. Thank you. I don't think anybody wants to be here till 10. Okay. Finally, the proposed Disneyland walkway for the residents to use. I can tell you from my caven seeing I experience talking to the residents of the neighborhood, no one is going to take that walk to the restaurant. In fact, many residents have already stopped going to the gas station. They are disgusted with the entire 2-year experience of a land grab of trying to turn a residential property to a reszone commercial property for profit. Please vote no today. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Appreciate it. As people make their way to the podium, if uh we could please if you want to speak, if you could please uh line up like one behind so that way we can try our best to expedite through these. [clears throat] Uh just for the record, I'm about four minutes, but I'm speaking for both of us, so I'm gonna

That That is fine. I will I will adjust accordingly. Hello, this is Chris and um I'm Patty Webster at 28747 Dartmouth. Uh we strongly oppose the special land use request and fully support the concerns raised by our neighbors, but two key issues stand out. First, the SEC special land use request fails to meet the standards set forth in the zoning ordinance section 10.06. At prior meetings, city attorney Tim Burns clarified sections 10.06, 06 F3 and F4 stating that when a special land use involves converting residential property to parking, the applicant must demonstrate a reasonable need for additional parking that cannot be met on the adjoining parcel and that the conversion will not harm the neighborhood's character or residential quality. Mr. Mr. Nger's proposal includes 169 on-site spaces, which is nearly 200% of the maximum permitted parking and 250% of the minimum required. This clearly demonstrates that the property more than adequately accommodates any foreseeable parking demand. The proposal far exceeds the thresholds that could reasonably justify additional parking under the special land use criteria. Since the site already has ample parking, the standard listed in section 10.06 is clearly not met. There is no evidence, none, showing that three additional spaces are needed. In fact, the materials in the staff report and agenda packet clearly support the opposite conclusion that sufficient parking already exist and no additional parking is warranted. Moreover, the park and ride lot adjacent to the property provides additional capacity that could easily accommodate three vehicles and further demonstrates that overflow parking can easily be accommodated without encroaching into our residential neighborhood.

Secondly, it will impact the character of the neighborhood. Designed for family living, a drive-through parking lot introduces non-residential traffic, lighting, noise, and pollution, and would create continuous vehicle movement on an already busy street. This is incompatible with the quiet residential character of Dartmouth Street classified in the 2021 master plan as an urban local street that is that is intended to carry a small portion of vehicle miles traveled. As noted in the city staff report, Dartmouth already experiences slightly higher traffic volumes than other local streets in the city. The traffic study indicates that the AM peak period is the critical peak hour, while the restaurant's busiest period occurs during the PM hours. However, these pictures that Kathy, I think, has uh taken on the street during the PM hours clearly shows the traffic buildup that occurs during the so-called non-critical period. Approval of the special land use will conflict with the master plan's goal of protecting neighborhoods from incompatible or disruptive development. The purpose section of the zoning ordinance chapter 24 subdivision regulations explicitly states goals to promote and protect public health, safety, peace, morale, comfort, convenience, and general welfare, secure adequate traffic circulation, and reduce congestion, and provide the best possible environment for human habitation. Approving the special land use would undermine these objectives, said a president, that could erode existing residential protections, inviting further commercial encroachment into established neighborhoods. This raises the question, how many times in Madison Heights history has similar exception been granted within a residential zone and at what cost to the community character? Approving the special land use without meeting the ordinance standards would contradict the

intent of the zoning codes and could be viewed as arbitrary and capricious under the Michigan zoning enabling act 110 of 2006 which requires that all conditions for a special land use be satisfied prior to approval. The council's duty is to uphold those standards as written. If they aren't met, the appropriate action and the legally required one is denial. Respectfully, we urge you to deny this request based on the evidence in the record and to protect the integrity of our residential neighborhoods and our zoning ordinance. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Katherine and I reside at 28183 Dying Drive. I am here tonight to oppose the alley vacation request PE25-01. [clears throat] While I am not directly opposed to a Bubbas 33 development within the existing space, I do strongly object to the removal of a residential home to make way for additional parking and an entrance and exit. The Oakland County Road Commission's findings confirmed that the proposed 12-mile entrance will be a rightin, right out only, making the Dartmouth development a primary entrance and exit for everyone else. The findings stated that the 12mile Road Drive approach shall be a rightin, right out approach. Its proximity to both DDI interchange and Dartmouth eastbound and northbound turn lanes creates a situation where crashes may occur. The report goes on to say that the Dartmouth 12mi signal does not currently have a dedicated left turn phase for Dartmouth. The intersection would need to be reviewed to determine if a dedicated left turn lane for Dartmouth would be warranted. If it was warranted, the geometry of the southern leg of Dartmouth would need to be revised to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane. The RO for Dartmouth appears to be limited. If Dartmouth were to be widened to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane, Dartmouth would need to be expanded eastward. This would impact the existing signal mass arm poles, which would require reconstruction of the entire signal. As you know, based on previous planning commission meetings, it was found that this area already has a higher number of traffic accidents as compared to other local intersections, even those with higher traffic volumes. My question, and it doesn't have to be answered tonight, is who's going to be paying for these additional accommodations, if that is the recommendation. After reviewing the lengthy agenda packet, one other thing became clear. Many of the residents, the 99 who signed the support letters, were not directly impacted by the proposal based on their address. It is easy to support a project when you don't have all the details and

when it's not in your backyard affecting your daily life, your family, and your home values. Each letter was the same and although I value their input and everyone has a right to their opinion, they all started. I am a resident of the city of Madison Heights writing in support of Bubbus 33 project. But I ask were the details of the development and the alley vacation shared with those individuals because again I also support Bubbas 33 making Madison Heights their home but not at the expense of cutting into our residential neighborhood. I am not anti-development. I support thoughtful community focused growth that enhances the health and happiness of our neighborhood. Removing a home to expand a parking lot and add to an existing traffic concern, especially when the planning commission and even this council have already advocated for more housing. That does not seem like progress to me. Where do we draw the line? I ask the city council tonight to stand with the residents of our subdivision and protect our space, our safety, and our peace. Thank you. [applause] Hi, good evening. My name is Kelly Erla and I live at 28724 Dartmouth, steps away from the area being proposed to be reszoned. Um, I'm here tonight as a concerned resident who deeply cares about the safety and the character of my neighborhood. Our neighborhood is already struggling with a significant amount of traffic issues. Dartmouth has become a common cutway for people trying to avoid congestion on the freeway and on Dartmouth Street. Every day we see cars speeding down the residential roads, often well past the speed limit. I've personally witnessed near misses of people on the roads, including myself and my child. My husband and my neighbor's car have both been hit and run in the road in the last 6 months. The area simply was not designed to handle the level of traffic a restaurant

like this would bring. The flow of vehicles increasing, including delivery trucks, customers, and late night traffic would spill directly into our residential streets. We're talking about people having cocktails after dinner and driving right home. This is not a good move. This is not what we need. Beyond the safety issues, the constant traffic, noise, lighting from the commercial operations would permanently change the character of our neighborhood. Many of us moved here for a quiet, family-driven neighborhood. That's not what we're going to get if we have flashing red Bubba 33 signs. I understand the desire to support business growth and everything else in Madison Heights. We all want to see our f our city thrive, but this is not the way to do it. This is absolutely not. And the fact that it has taken this many meetings and required this many people to sit in the room and tell you that your residents, the people that live there, do not want this. We don't want this. Period. Everyone here will sit back. That's all I can say. [applause] Hello, I'm Craig Herbert. I live on KAM 283 or 635. Um I'm not in support of um the widening of the Dartmouth um alley access. Um we see traffic in the morning that is congested in that area. Um you got the Tim Hortons and the gas station and the misalignment of um Dartmouth going through to the Home Depot and um complexes over there. Um nobody knows what to do. Um, it gets congested, it gets backed up, it's a pain in the butt. Um, I just wanted to get up here and say I'm not in support of this. Thank you. [applause]

Hi, my name is Colleen Turkot. Uh, I haven't been to one of these meetings before because I work on Monday nights and it's hard for me to get a shift off. I work at the Green Lantern. I work at a restaurant that's in a neighborhood. I know what that looks like. It's not pretty. So, ever since that that freeway was closed when they were building that diverging diamond interchange, everyone knows our neighborhood is a shortcut now. We get all kinds of traffic through there anyways and it's terrible. And I have to say, I work I live on Kum. I work at Green Lantern. Sometimes it takes me 10 minutes to get to work and half my commute is just getting out of our neighborhood. Sorry. We don't need this extra traffic. We don't need to tear down a house to have more parking for a restaurant. It's It's just nobody wants it. I I don't support it. [applause]

All right. Is there anybody else who would like to speak?

Please. My name is Mark Kohler. I live at 561 Bair and I've been here 47 years in the city of Madison Heights. And I don't want to see that alleyway opened up either because that intersection is terrible. People when you pull out, people are pulling out of Home Depot or whatever. They turn left in front of you. We, you know, there's so much traffic there that it's just terrible. Well, I have to wait through two or three lights sometimes just because of that. People coming out of Home Depot, Tim Hortons, all that. And I just want to make sure that you guys know that none of us want that. We don't want that there at all. And that's it. And thank you very much.

Thank you. [applause] Anybody else like to speak before we close public comment? Right. Seeing nobody, I will close public comment. Right. Next up,

we have the consent agenda. There are several items. We have the family court awareness month proclamation, which we have somebody here to accept that. Uh, we have the DPS Edison Park Basketball Court, the rescheduling of the next council meeting, moving it forward to November 19th uh to accommodate the swearing in of new members, the city parks and wreck uh workshop minutes uh meeting minutes of September 29th, and then the regular council minutes of October 27th. Uh, what is the wish of council with the consent agenda? Your honor.

Yes. Motion to approve the consent agenda. Do I see a support? Your honor. Support. Perfect. Uh, all those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Oppose say no. Motion passes. And I want to take a minute for us to quickly uh give the uh proclamation here for the family court awareness month. Uh so would the representative please come up. Thank you so much. [applause] Yes, please podium. And I'll invite you to the podium to say a few words, please. Good evening. My name is Gerilyn and I'm a member of Protective Parents Michigan. I would like to thank the city of Madison Heights for pro for proclaiming family court awareness month. Um, one in three Michigan families are directly impacted by domestic violence. But abuse also affects each one of us and our communities. Without proper training for family courts on domestic violence, children continue to be exposed to abuse and families need more social support, putting an extra strain on local services like shelters, counseling, and child protective services. Post separation abuse in family court puts the children in harm's way because abusive parents are more likely to seek sole custody and are successful 70% of the time. Tragically, abuse is often not understood or believed by the courts, and many children are ordered into unsupervised contact with abusive parents. These statistics show why family court reform and domestic violence education is needed. Up to 60% of perpetrators who abuse their spouse will abuse their child. Adverse childhood experiences such as abuse negatively impact a child's development, their relationships, and their mental and physical health. Most child abuse is perpetrated in the family by a parent, and one child dies every

six days in the United States amid custody fights and family court cases. Since 2008, 39 Michigan children have been murdered during divorce or custody battles. The goal of family court awareness month is to have court professionals who are trauma informed and educated on domestic violence and are using current evidence-based research to make safe parenting time decisions and prevent future tragedies. Abuse is about power and control first and foremost and maintaining that power and control can occur in many ways and look different in different relationships. We want the court to be educated about domestic violence so they can recognize it, understand it, and can make safe decisions for our children. Studies from the University of Michigan indicate that domestic violence is frequently undetected in custody cases or ignored as a significant factor in custody visitation determinations. However, court professionals who do receive training on domestic violence make safer parenting plans. For our children's sake, we need the family court to be educated on all types of abuse. Emotional abuse, financial abuse, coercive control, and post-sepparation abuse. These education recommendations for court personnel are listed in the federal version of Cadence Law, and we would like to include them in Michigan law as well. Cadence Law is focused on prioritizing child protection over parents rights and judges would need to consider past history of domestic violence when making custody decisions. Our children's lives are literally dependent on the courts becoming educated on these issues. Thank you for acknowledging family court awareness month um in Madison Heights. If anyone would like to support Cadence Law, please contact your state representative. If you or someone you know is struggling to protect children in family court, please connect with Protective Parents Michigan on Facebook and the

rowanpro.org website. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. And let's give Protective Parents of Michigan another round of applause for the great work that they do. [applause]

All right. Uh and also to note uh in that consent agenda motion, we also voted to approve a basketball court uh going into Edison Park. So I think it's noteworthy to call out. All right, there's nothing in communications tonight, so we'll move on to reports. Uh this is the city planner the special land use request PSP25-5 and that is the 28767 Dartmouth Street parking as a principal use.

So the applicant and property owner Nature Companies has requested special land use approval from the planning commission and the city council under sections 10.06 and 15.05 05 of the Madison Heights zoning ordinance to develop a drive aisle and parking as a principal use of a residential parcel. The new drive aisle and parking space spaces intend to serve the proposed restaurant development on the adjacent site to the west. The subject property is located at 28767 Dartmouth Street and is zoned R31 family residential. Per section 10.06, 06 parking as a principal use of a residential parcel is subject to special land use approval with additional use specific standards. Staff recognizes the importance of the secondary ingress egress point off Dartmouth to enable the development of the adjacent commercial property. The recently completed diverging diamond interchange at I75 and 12mi severely restricts the ability to make left-hand turn lanes into the commercial property onto 12mile and the ability to directly enter the property from westbound 12mi road by allowing access to and from the signalized intersection at 12 in Dartmouth. The proposed drive aisle aims to alleviate the site access issues and provide secondary emergency access to the property. With the original submitt, staff and the planning commission cited concerns regarding lack of landscaping and screening along the southern property line and adjacent to the Dartmouth rightway. Further, staff recommended providing a 5-ft wide sidewalk connection along the northern edge of the subject parcel to allow residents in the surrounding neighborhood to safely walk to the resident restaurant without needing to walk all the way to 12 Mile Road. The revised concept plan aims to address both of these concerns with additional landscaping and a sidewalk connection now being proposed. Additionally, the revised plan removes non-p parking spaces, leaving a total of

three, and rearranged the parking into parallel parking spaces along the north side of the drive aisle. A no right turn sign at the exit was added to the plan to discourage existing vehicles from turning right onto Dartmouth into the neighborhood. The applicant has also submitted a traffic assessment which analyzes the existing future conditions of 12 mile and Dartmouth signalized intersection. This assessment concludes that the proposed restaurant will have no meaningful increase in traffic compared to the former restaurant. And while the existing alley could theoretically be used to provide access to and from the restaurant, it may result in unsafe conditions due to the si single lane width. Further, the traffic assessment concludes that the proposed two-way driveway coupled with operational improvements at the signalized intersection at 12 Mile in Dartmouth will allow for safe and convenient access for customers, employees, and d delivery vehicles and allow more vehicles to clear the intersection at each cycle. Further coordination with RCOC or the road commission of Oakland County and potentially MDOT will be required for any improvements to the existing traffic signal at 12 in Dartmouth. Note that in the absence of a new commercial driveway, the existing 17 ft public rideway could continue to be utilized and provide vehicular access to and from the adjacent commercial property. City council has the following options pertaining to the special land use case. One, you can approve with or without conditions the special land use based upon the revised conceptional plan submitt dated August the 28th and submitted traffic assessment with appropriate findings. Two, you could deny the special land use with appropriate findings. Or three, you could postpone the action on the special land use to a date certain. If council decides to approve the revised special land use, staff recommends that the conditions of approval listed in the staff memo be included in the motion. If

council decides to deny the special land use, then staff recommends findings listed in the staff memo be included in the motion. I would note a couple of things. This restaurant can be developed per right on this property without any approval from city council. So even if you deny tonight, the restaurant could still move forward. They could also use the alleyway even without approval tonight. The house can also be demoed without um council approval tonight. So this is just a special land use. And I will call um Matt planner Matt somewhere. I thought he was here. and and Brad Bickl of Nordic and Frraouse who is the city engineer to the podium to elaborate a little more and I think they have a PowerPoint as well to at least show a visualization of what we're talking about.

Yeah, we'll see if this planner met with a PowerPoint. What? Yeah, that never happens.

Thank you. Members of council did prepare a beautiful PowerPoint for you. We'll make sure it works. Of course it doesn't. So I'll see. Okay. So as city manager Marsh mentioned the applicant here is major companies and the request is a special land use to develop a drive aisle in a parking lot rather just a couple of three parking spaces uh on a residential parcel. This property is zoned R3 which is a single family residential district. Uh the intent of this driveway, this secondary driveway is to provide access to the adjacent restaurant site which you can see on the screen there. Uh and if I could get to the next slide, uh there is the uh the zoning map. So R3 is the parcel that's highlighted and then everything to the to the left and to the north there is zoned B2, which is community business. So this special land use is only for the drive aisle. This is not for the restaurant. That is a byite use in the B2 zoning district. Uh and it's also as Melissa mentioned that the alley that's existing on the north side of this parcel can continue to be used for access to the site. So the question is why is there a secondary access proposed? Well, if we can go to that that slide that has the the yellow circles um right here. Yep. So the larger circle is the house that's proposed to be demolished as well as the alley. And that circle on the north on the top there is the existing access to the residential to the commercial parcel. And there's the diverging diamond which is just to the left of that which has really impacted access to the site. RCOC has already said this is going to be a right in right out development if it's improved. meaning that people can't turn left into the site from 12 mile and they

can't leave the site by going left back to 12 mile towards I75. Uh so if this um goes through if this secondary access it will involve the demolition of that house and the vacation of that 17t alley on the north side. That's the next agenda item that we have here. This application has bounced back several times between planning commission and city council. Uh you did see this plan before. We do have a copy of the previous submitt up here somewhere in one of these slides. Kind of want to go through what has changed since then. Um the previous version did have 12 parking spaces uh and they were at the southern side of the site. This one has three parking spaces on the north side. Um, I'll just go through the project details. Um, there's it's a 7100 foot restaurant that's being proposed on the adjacent parcel. Uh, three parallel parking spaces on the north side would be there. Uh it's a 7100 foot restaurant. The uh three parallel parking spaces on the north side of the alley. There's a green belt proposed on the south side with trees, shrubs, perennial plantings, and a 6ft tall masonry wall, which is beginning towards the center of the site going towards the rear. There is a sidewalk connection and a no right turn sign that would prevent access onto Dartmouth exiting the site. Uh there are use specific standards for parking as a principal use. These are listed in section 10.06 of your in the staff report. Uh and there are certain

special land use standards that would need to be met as well. But this is primarily a secondary access point to the restaurant. Want to emphasize the alley can continue to be used and the building the restaurant can be permitted by right as under major site plan review. So happy to turn over to Frank.

Good evening. Thank you Brad Bickl No and F engineers. Um I guess to elaborate on that a little bit. Um we understand that there is a concern the congestion at this area. So we did require that the applicant provide a traffic study so we could actually dig into the data and that's kind of what we do right. We wanted to say okay what is the situation? And you know based on that we did see that there was there was a problem there. Traffic heading southbound from the Home Depot. there is that turning conflict. Um, however, based on what was evaluated out there, it was making it through the typical traffic cycle. So, people were permitted to turn left. Um, as outlined as well, the peak for that intersection is during um the daytime and the morning hours when Tim Hortons is obviously, you know, hitting its peak revenue. um that doesn't quite coincide with what would be experienced by this development which would be typically more in the peak hours. Um obviously we know that there are traffic throughout the day at these other establishments but looking at the peak for both are at different times. Um the challenges with this site is a lot of people have heard the diverging diamond. I'm sure the city's heard that so much over the years with the with this u expansion. However, um that is a challenge for this development for this site in particular. It doesn't matter who comes in there. That's the challenge that didn't exist as Marinelli that exists now. So based on what everybody has mentioned, the the uh turning restrictions that are now been established for this development, which we agree with, we wholeheartedly agree with the road commission on imposing those because it isn't a safe condition. That being said, the concern with not allowing that improvement of that alley from our standpoint is that you're taking a situation that, you know, is it's going to force people to make bad decisions more so. So, being that they can't turn left, what's going to happen is they have two choices. as if it stayed as is. They're either going to

drive up to that alley and say, "Okay, I'm going to try to head in or head out of that alley and I'm going to meet potential other traffic because of the turning movement restrictions at the main entrance." There will be more traffic on that alley. That's no question. The report says that. I think everybody here knows that it is going to have increased traffic. So, the concern is having that head-on potential collisions in that alley. That's going to increase if we don't improve that alley. The other thing is that's option one. Option two, they're going to look at exiting the site. Everyone's going to want to, for the most part, the study showed that people are going to want to get to I75. So, what's going to happen is much like they do at Home Depot right now, they're going to make that illegal turn left and, you know, go against the rules and it's going to potentially add, you know, additional crashes and a safety concern there. Um, it's a much safer, not to say that it's not going to impact the signal, but it in our opinion, it's a much safer avenue to direct people to a signalized intersection through the proper means of ingress egress and have that scenario versus having them make additional poor decisions if the uh improvements weren't made to direct them to that signal.

Questions? Um are there any slides that you didn't get to with the technical difficulties?

No, that's I mean so this is on the left side here is the general site plan. So you can see that there are three parallel parking spaces on the north side. There is a sidewalk connection that has been added uh on the south side per our recommendation. Um and on the right side is the landscape plan. So you can see there's significant landscaping that's been added along the south side and that was after coordination with the adjacent property owner who had concerns about the masonry wall that was originally proposed along the entire length of the southern boundary. There was concerns about how that would interact with their driveway. So there's some some more landscaping that has been added to that as well. The no the no right turn sign remains. That was in the con the previous conceptual version. Um there also is a little bit of a um reduced taper exiting the site which should deter people from turning right into the neighborhood as well. Um but we did we felt that the applicant has worked with us to meet some of the concerns that we had with the previous concept plan, but I think the traffic as has been expressed by the neighborhood is still the major item. Um and they did get a traffic assessment. I think that they're going to talk about that when they come up here. I have a question.

And I think you could you go to the slide of the current alley because I think you were going to talk to Brad's point what the current alley appears like. I saw it in your slide but it got flipped. Yeah, your PowerPoint was flipping. Kind of strange.

Yeah, this is a picture of the current alley. That picture was taken in September. Um, so that is the existing alley that if this this driveway were to fall through that [clears throat] they would be utilizing most likely to get access to the the Bubbas and then to leave the Bubbas. So this is 17 ft wide um which is only going to be good for as said oneway traffic. Um but that's the house on the left side that would is proposed to be demolished as part of this. This is the alley also that's subject to the alley vacation of course. Do do you also have a slide in there of what the proposed do you have the renderings of what the alley would look like that you

Oh you know I don't think that's in there that is presented as a um yeah I don't think I included in the PowerPoint. It is included in your packet um but it's simply a it's a color version of the site plan that was presented. Yeah. So, it's it's a color version of that landscape plan. So, the applicant may have it available. Um, it was sent over as a PDF, but I don't think it's included in the PowerPoint. I think it'd be great if we could get that pulled up at some point. Yeah. To the city manager. Are there any other folks that are are speaking before I ask the wish of councel or

um there's allow the applicant to speak? Yeah, just the you the applicant is here and should be allowed to speak at this time if you want if council wants. All right, I'll I'll allow the the applicant to speak. Uh if you could try to limit to 10 minutes total with the lot of you, I would appreciate it.

I want to be as fair as possible. the residents kept theirs to three minutes with each person. If we could try to be as succinct as possible, that would be great. Thank you.

And we'll try to do that. Thank you. Thank you very much, city council. My name is John Gabber and I'm the attorney for the applicant this evening. Um we have our [clears throat] whole team here and Lauren Warren, our traffic engineer, is going to speak briefly after me and I think Brian Najer has a few comments. Uh, a lot of the comments have been made already and I certainly understand the plight of the neighbors. Uh, if this were in my neighborhood, you know, I might share some of those feelings, but what we're [clears throat] looking at here is a safety concern. I mean, essentially, you know, we're not requesting your approval for the restaurant. We're not requesting your approval for the existing public alley to be able to use it. What we're here for is to try to make a unsafe condition safer. And the reason that we're in that position is because of the intersection with I75. Uh and as you've heard the right in right out only from that that access drive. So we need another access drive to enable the site to function properly and to get traffic out onto 12mi road that wants to go westbound. So, what we're governed by here is the the standards of the SLU approval, the parking as a permitted use, and the general SLU approval as well. You've seen that in your packets. Um, we've provided some information and I'd like to go through a few of those criteria in the interest of time. Um, we will meet the design standards and and I'm referencing 10.06. Parking is a principal use. We will meet the city design standards. We've submitted revisions to our plan. We've complied with all the requirements that city staff has asked us to comply with. Um the parking [clears throat] will be landscaped as you as you can see with the uh with the sidewalk adjacent to it

for pedestrian traffic. Um, but essentially the biggest criteria here is whether or not the parking in this area and the drive-through in this area will be detrimental impact on the residential character of the adjacent neighborhood. That's one of the main standards in that criteria. And we believe that with the landscaping and the sidewalk in that plan uh and the grass lawn and such, it's going to soften the look of that area and obviously add to the aesthetic uh uh beautifification of that area. But we also believe more importantly that safety is a paramount concern here. And essentially safety is is as you've seen uh the existing 17t wide drive is not safe for two-way traffic. It needs to be wider and to do that we need to implement this plan. Um the proposed use we believe does not significantly increase traffic in the neighborhood as our traffic study has shown. The restaurant traffic is going to go northbound to 12 mile unless it's somebody who lives in the southerntherly direction that could use south Dartmouth. The no right turn sign will help. And what's [clears throat] really significant is is the reason for the cut through traffic previously is no longer there because you have 12 mile open. You have those improvements concluded that can be utilized. And then finally the you've heard from even some of the neighbors that the AM impact there is very serious of you know going out north on Dartma to turn left uh on 12 mile road. that's not going to be impacted by this particular use because it it's a lunchtime and an evening use. It's not an AM use. So, it's not going to have any impact on the you know the [clears throat] major detrimental time that affects the neighborhood. So, I think that's that's very important to to

consider. And essentially what what we also want to consider is is you know whether or not we're going to move forward with this project uh if this is approved or not. Mr. Najer will speak to that as well. So, at this point in time, uh, you know, I just want to reiterate that safety is a paramount concern here. I realize the city, uh, you know, prioritizes safety and that's what we're trying to do in this circumstance. It certainly is is not the fault of this property or the parcel owner that uh the intersection for I75 was constructed the way it was, designed the way it was and and obviously impacts ingress and eress to the site. But given the fact that that is the condition, this is the safe way to address it to ensure that there is safe access going both into and out of the site to facilitate its use. So, with that, I'd like to turn the floor over to Lauren Warren, who's our traffic consultant, who'd like to add a few comments. Thank you.

Good evening, everyone. Lauren Warren, um, professionally licensed engineer and traffic engineer in the state of Michigan, as well as several other states. I bring 20 years of experience to this field. I live in the world of traffic and safety every day. Um, I personally performed a an observation at this site during both the AM and the PM peak to observe the issues that are going on. Um, so I can hopefully, you know, mitigate the issue that is existing and that's the key. There is an existing problem here. Without the restaurant, there are cues. We hear that. That is true. the primary issue and um I won't go through my 40 pages of documentation for you all but um if you look at some of the uh drawings in the executive summary that really gets into the primary issue which is that there is a very heavy southbound right turn from the shopping development. It's a very large development. Dartmouth also leads over to John R which causes additional cut through on that on that roadway. The main conflict coming out of the neighborhood is the northbound left. And what happens is if somebody is waiting to turn left, they have to wait for all those people to turn right over and over and over. We're talking like 200 cars in the morning peak, which is a lot. Um, so residents make risky maneuvers. We call it the the yellow trap. They often go on the the yellow or the red cycle, the the signal because they can't get out of the the development. So, um, as as John and, um, the others have said, I was hired to look at that, work with the county, which I work with daily on other projects, to develop a mitigation that would hopefully solve what is happening out there right now. Um, and that's above and beyond what what is really needed for this parcel. um the parcel compared to the other um restaurant that was there. You will see an increase of

four trips daily in this site. That is based on the uh IT transportation handbook which is used widely across the nation based on land uses and trips that are that are um expected from a restaurant of this size in the AM and the PM peak. So I'm not making these trips up. This is there is a very very very large handbook um based on a lot of research that goes into this. Um so I guess I will be here if there are any other specific questions about the traffic analysis and the plans to move forward. The plan is not to widen Dartmouth. We believe that we have found a low um hanging fruit that we can improve this with signal timings and an additional um lane change of assignment on the southern leg that will really help um move traffic through um and clear that so that when the northbound signal does have the green they have more green time to exit the neighborhood. Thanks. So yeah, before you walk away, you said lane change and there might be folks, myself included, who want a little clarification on that. Sure.

What do you mean by a lane change?

Um, so currently the southbound approach of Dartmouth is a through right turn and a dedicated left turn. What um the applicant is proposing to the road commission is to change that to a dedicated right turn and a southbound through left. This would actually address some of the misalignment issues of the current roadway between the two because you have currently you have different lanes aligning where traditionally you would really like those left turns to align more um squared. And then there would be a right turn green arrow, which I think John R has one, Stevenson has one. Um that would allow when the um eastbound, westbound, left turns are green, that would also allow the southbound right turn to be green. Therefore, clearing those people out. So when you do have the northbound, southbound signal, the northbound would have a little bit more gap time to make it through on the green.

Cool. Thank you, your honor. I have a question about the southbound through left. Okay. So, what happens to the traffic that's on the northbound side in the Home Depot where they don't you don't have a stop sign for for traffic that's going north and south there. Um then you'll have this backup that's they're waiting to turn left. That's because it's still the same lane that's going south. True. They don't have a Can you Yeah. Okay. So, if you're if you're if you're going southbound out of the Home Depot parking lot, right, and you have this left-hand turn lane now, and you have the right hand lane is straight and it turns right also. Yeah.

Right. Okay. But right in the parking lot of the Home Depot is that that's that's an actual street that goes around, you know, the the Lowe's, right? So, if you have that traffic backup waiting for the left-hand turn lane there, you're going to be impeding the traffic, the cross traffic that goes between Lowe's and

Okay. Okay. I' I've got you. Um, so we did take new traffic counts as part of this um to try to address current conditions. These were taken last month. Um, and there are only um two or three vehicles that make that through maneuver during the AM and the PMP that were counted. I listen to all of you. Thank you. Um

the queue that is existing now from the left turn is what I'm saying will not is not anticipated to be longer because the three vehicles are now into that lane. Does that make sense? So you're moving a handful of cars over each cycle into the left turn lane where previously they were in the right turn lane. And so the queue I mean you're you're shifting cars. I think your issue it will well my issue could still be the same if you're putting left-hand turners right which are take longer because they have to wait for oncoming traffic to cross the road right and then you put the right-hand turners I mean the right-hand turners and the straightforward drivers that are going going straight across

there. It's more people can make a right-hand turn faster than you can waiting for a lefthand turn. And so then you're putting this longer line to wait behind somebody who's making a left in the same lane. That's what I'm saying. Um so the the applicant could look further and work with that. Madison Heights does own Dartmouth and does own that ring road if that is a recommendation that the council would like to look at is adding another stop sign for southbound Dartmouth so that on the north side of the road so that that doesn't quue past that driveway. That's I think that that's your recom that's your recommendation out of that. All right, let's concern.

Let's let's try to finish up the presentation. I open the door on that by asking the clarification. So that is on me, but let's uh try try to allow the applicant to finish their presentation before uh we discuss as a council.

Sure. Good evening everyone. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Um I'm Brian Ner from Nager Companies. the uh the developer for the site and you know uh it's been a long process and just to give you an idea of the time frame um we started this back in February uh where we actually um executed a lease with Bubbas uh we handed in our initial plans uh at the end of February for review um I'm trying to give everybody you know to paint a picture here of the amount of time and effort that has gone into this project uh this is not something that, [clears throat] you know, we've taken lightly. Uh we did a town hall meeting with the neighbors. Um you know, I I'd like to stress that we're we're community partners here. Um I'd like everybody to to to be excited about this. This is not like a win-lose uh situation here. The fact is is that, you know, this is a a site that was a restaurant for many many years. um you know by right we we can put another restaurant here and and and there's there's multiple other uses. This this project is going to be developed um one way or another and and we're trying to make it the best possible project that we can bring to Madison Heights. I believe in that. Uh you know this is what we do. Uh we we develop quality projects. I tried to engage with the neighborhood to to take in concerns and you know the the planner the planner Matt actually went over a lot of that. So some things were taken into consideration. We making fixes here. Um what we're proposing here in my opinion is a is a very uh you know viable development. Uh you know the the the drive is come up as an issue. the, you know, traffic on Dartmouth has come up as issues. What

we've done is to try to solve all these problems. So, what I'm asking you for is let us continue to try to solve problems instead of, you know, just coming out here and saying, you know what, this is not going to work. Well, if we say it's not going to work, you know, this thing is going to be developed as something. What we're trying to do is to bring the best possible project to Madison Heights. And we've really worked on that. I mean, you know, this has been almost a year, so there's a lot of, you know, back and forth landscaping, you know, driveways, traffic studies. We we have a lot of professionals here that have weighed in and given you counts and landscaping and engineering. I mean, there's there's a lot of professional people that are that are trying to make this a great development. So, I ask that you consider all that because the property is going to be developed. We want to make it the best development in Madison Heights. And if if it ends up that we fix some problems there at 12 Mile in Dartmouth, then great. Let us help you work on that. This is the opportunity. Let's take the time now to seize this opportunity to fix these problems. If you know, no is the answer, so be it. There there will be problems. The problems will probably get worse. Uh what I'm asking is as a part of this thing, we're able to bring in professionals, traffic engineers, other engineers, we're we're fixing some of these problems. So, in my opinion, this is going to this is going to be a great improvement to the city. And I pride myself as being a a great community partner. I'm not, you know, some developer from California or New York. We're here. We're local. We We're going to own it. We're going to manage it. It's going to be beautiful. And, you know, we ask for your support. Thank

you. Thank you. Any other presentation from staff? Anything else? All right. I think that's it. What's the wish of council? Your honor. Yes. [clears throat] Council Robot. I move that council denies the special land use PSP25-05 as it doesn't comply with special land use standard section 15503. Right. Is there support? Your honorable supporting. All right. We have a motion on the table to deny from Council Robach. Second by Councilman Fleming. Open it up for discussion. Your honor. Yes.

I'll just start because I made the motion. Um, you know, I appreciate the time the developer has taken to to uh uh to work on these issues and to come up with solutions. And I, you know, as a developer, somebody who has been successful in developing properties across the area, I know that you also knew there were big issues that were on the table here when you were looking at um the development of this parcel um that could arise, especially based on the location um and the revised double diamond interchange that was there since the last time a restaurant was uh placed in that location. Um, so I I just believe that, you know, we as a council have a duty of care first and foremost to our residents and the people who live in the neighborhood. And I understand that there is going to be a development on that site. Um, I also understand that there are, you know, very potentially, I don't know how long most of these people have lived in the neighborhood or in the houses that they've lived in. Um, but many of them may not have [clears throat] lived there in the last, you know, more than 14 years. Many of them may have lived there when Marinelli's was there before and after, but that doesn't matter. [laughter] A lot of folks um may have never had a restaurant in their backyard and one way or another they they might still have a restaurant in their backyard and that's you know they purchased their house where they purchased it and that's understandable. Um, but when I'm thinking about the the demolishing of this property and adding the the two-way um entrance and exit onto Dartmouth Street, there are too many problems that I do not believe will be solved by the proposed um uh traffic study um assessments. I read through that very carefully. I understood what I was reading. Um this is not my first time looking at something like that. And I do not think that um that a two-way

intersection coming and going onto that tiny spot onto Dartmouth Street is going to be a an effective um no matter how wide the vac the the alley is and you know because we're tearing down that if the house is torn down and all of that stuff no matter how wide that is it is still becomes an unsafe place for the residents that live there and Mr. Chair people. Yes. I'm sorry. I hate to cut off the council, but before she go into too much more detail on your comments, um I'd recommend that um you actually represent the motion as submitted by city planner and the model templates.

I thought I did. Well, you just said you move to deny and we should go through the template and then you need to specifically include in the motion the specific reasons that you believe that you're going to deny it. I did I not I said uh based on

to to the city city attorney would you like to read language that uh council robot could include in her motion then? Um, yep. Motioned by Council Orbeck, second by Councilman Fleming, that the city council hereby deny special land use request number PSP2505 for parking as a principal use on a residential zone parcel at 28767 Dartmouth Street based upon the following findings. One, the applicant requests special land use approval for a drive, aisle, and parking spaces on a residential parcel at 28767 Darth Mile Street is permitted by section 10.6 Six of the zoning ordinance to the planning commission held a public hearing for PSP 2550 at their August 19th, 2025 meeting after which a recommendation of denial to city council was made based upon the originally submitted concept plans. Three, the applicants submit revised concept plans on August 28th, 2025. City Council considered the revised plans at their September 8th, 2025 meeting and remanded the revised special land use application back to plan commission for review and recommendation. The revised plans adequately address and alleviate viate the commission's uh original finds for recommended denial. Number four, the plan commission considered revised plans at their September 16, 202 meeting after which the plans were forwarded back to city council without a formal recommendation. Five, the proposed parking as principal use is not consistent with the use specific standards set forth in section 10.06 andor the special land use review standards and criteria set forth in section 15.05.3 in particular. Um, I wouldn't want to paraphrase for you on the reasoning, but I believe that would be that um the you find that the applicant uh did not meet the their burden for addressing um the requirements of section 10.06

in regards to the need necess necessity of parking and uh secondly didn't address section 15.05 05 uh subsection three in regards to um specifically um that the um parcel didn't meet all of the require all all the following standards including specifically that it was not um compatible with the sounding property and that uh the ingress and egress um created traffic hazards and traffic congestion that was incompatible both the neighborhoods.

All right. Well, we have a city attorney for a reason. Uh would the maker and the second be willing to adopt the language of the city attorney that was just read into the record into their motion and second? I would. Yes, I do. Perfect. Thank you. Uh you have the back. Okay. Thank you. Um kind of lost my train of thought. My apologies.

No, it's okay. I appreciate it. I thought I was I I missed that section of the memo, so I apologize. Um, so I am I'm just going to stop there just saying I think that we have a duty of care first and foremost to the residents and I believe that they have shown up um on a on a an effective way to advocate for their own um their own neighborhood and their community and the way that they um uh intend for that to be. I think there are other solutions that doesn't involve um creating tearing down a house, creating a new uh uh like somebody who's already who's not like who's like a one house away from commercial development. Um instead, they'd be right next to a commercial development as well as across the street from it. Um there are many reasons in my in my opinion that this doesn't work as as a solution in totality and um but as the motion stated um I believe it goes against our special land use. Thank you.

Uh anybody else from council wish to comment? I know this is a big one. So council mayor your honor.

Yes. So, I just have a bunch of random thoughts running through my head. So, let me let me spew them out there. Um, first, I appreciate all of the the feedback that we've gotten from the community in that area. Um, and uh extremely well thought out, well executed. Kudos. Um, I agree with council or mayor mayor Graphstein's comment that Kathy, we need you on some of our boards and commissions. So, please please look into that. Um, but other thoughts running through my head are um you're going to end up with something in your backyard anyway, whether it's a Bubbas 33 or a car wash or uh M Mr. Natur Mr. Natur is in the business of of trying to develop property. He's not just going to let that property sit. So, um, what's the best thing to put there? I don't know. U, but again, the thing is, is there going to be something there? Several of you commented that you're all in favor of development. So, I I guess my thought is was what kind of development do we want to see there? um if Bubba's 30 and and the other thing I want to point out is what we're considering is not what Mr. Nature is going to do with that property. What we're considering is how to get access to that property if we're going to allow him extra ability to get access to that property. That's the only thing we're talking about tonight. Um, so what what he puts in your backyard and and a lot of you have talked about yes, it is our job to listen to our citizens and I'm listening. Um, I also know there's a

fair amount of citizens who would love to have above us 33 m Marinelli used to be because when Marinelli's closed down 10 or 12 years ago, we all thought something spectacular was coming there the way they just packed up and left and nothing's happened in in 12 years. So, um, so it's exciting that something might be happening there. I know it's not uh uh you know and again I I believe something's going to happen there. So, what that turns out to be, we will we will see in the future. So, again, the only thing we're trying to focus on or I'm trying to focus on in this vote tonight is do we allow access to that property some other way than the alley. So over the last several days, I've uh thankfully haven't got arrested for loitering in your neighborhood, but uh I sat there um you know, in several different places, and I see the traffic that's coming down. And yes, some of these cars were not very, uh not very speed, uh uh cognizant. They came flying around that corner off 12 mile and they just kept going. Uh so I understand that concern. Um, I certainly think we need to do something with that intersection and and you folks have been trying to bring that to our attention for a few years. So hopefully uh we can keep working with the uh uh road county commission of Oakland County and do something with that intersection. Um the other thoughts I have is my my biggest concern is is safety. So, I I sat there on the entrance uh going on to 12 Mile and I sat there just envisioning all the people that are going to try and make an illegal lefthand turn out on there if we don't give them some other way to get out the property. It's going to happen. And, you know, the accidents

that's going to cause scares me a little bit. Um and and you know, like I said, I know it's going to happen. The other thing that that we're need to consider as council is these establishments should have two entry points for emergency vehicles. So if something should happen at whatever gets developed on that property uh that we need an emergency vehicle get there and something's going on at 12 mile running a fire truck down that alley today might be a little susp. So, um, the other thing that that we, uh, I think our our development staff pointed out is if you leave it just to the alleyway, you're going to have cars budding. And, uh, I sat there in that alleyway for a while. It's not a short alleyway. So, if I get halfway through and someone comes whiffing around that corner from Dartmouth, uh, you're going to have some accidents there. So, what is the right answer? I don't know. I'll tell you in about 45 seconds or 45 minutes whenever we get to take the vote. Um, I still don't know what the right answer is. But my again, my biggest concern is for the safety of that that development and and I just I don't u, you know, the other thing I wanted to bring up and I told you random thoughts floating here. Apologize for not being very cohesive or or anyway. So, we talked about uh yes, one of the uh specifications for approving a special land use is is we have to consider the noise um that it will cause and and yep, we need to focus on that. That is part of our discussion. But again, I want to point out that it

only pertains to the driveway. So, we can't consider noise at the restaurant or car wash or whatever else might get developed there. The noise it's going to generate, that's that's part of being a business. So, in in approving a special land used, the the noise that we have to consider is just what the roadway is going to offer or are going to cause. So, I just some random thoughts running through my head. Thank you for letting me spill those out. Thank you. They were hurting getting all stuck up in here. So, that is fair. Any other members of council wish to speak on this topic?

Your honor. Council, right? I I first want to just again thank everyone for coming out, including our business partners and uh the naggers for coming to talk to us and trying to explain what they're trying to do rather than just railroad it through. Um I think as I understand we're voting on understand it as you do bill that we're voting on the alley vacation and by right they have the ability to move forward with the project. The question is this is the Oh, this is for Excuse me. Vacation is the next one. This special land special. Yeah, sorry. They're together. I understand they're Lego building here. But um I

I think the principle is still the same. Just that we got to partner together as a community to find some type of a solution. And the one thing that I think that keeps coming up is the traffic the traffic the traffic. And I guess one of the things I wanted to ask the staff is just to strategically long term um continue looking at options to address the traffic there in through the community. I know that you know options been brought up like you know restrictions that maybe not be wanted but at the same time we got to do something. Um and just this vote alone approved or not won't fix the problem. So I as staff just to check into some alternatives for addressing the traffic on 12 mile working along with the road commission. That's it your honor.

Cool. Thank you. Anybody else?

All right. Well, I I also uh have had a lot of thoughts on this. Uh fortunately or unfortunately for you know me wanting to be at home for dinner and spend time with my kids. I've now seen this presentation in different variations I think six times. uh something like that throughout the years. And I think the challenge and why this is such a difficult vote for us to make is because a restaurant can go there anyway. And so the real question that we're asking ourselves as you're heard council me say is and and to a degree councelor right is what is the best solution with the garbage that M dot has given us for that site because all you know a huge portion of that traffic and a big issue of eliminating that left turn is tied to MD dot and their decision with the diverging diamond. Um, but I would also say that, you know, as somebody who loves or loved Marinellis, uh, I'm old enough to have enjoyed Marinellis for many years. Uh, and I I just I remember multiple times driving out through that alleyway when another car came in. And so that example that Councilman Mir gave is a legitimate one. And so we're trying to weigh all of these things. You know, I'm trying to listen, hear all of these concerns about people turning into the neighborhood at the same time trying to figure out are they still going to turn into the neighborhood using this existing drive and and that's and and that is the biggest challenge here because if I think if you vote if anybody votes no, I think the next question to ask is how do

you get rid of the alleyway then? Because if you truly don't want the cars to go into the neighborhood, then leaving [clears throat] it as is and a development coming in using the existing alleyway is only going to stress the neighbors more. Could you make it one way? This the signage as I remember uh what do the alleyway?

Yeah. So the the the signage as I remember coming out of the alleyway from Marinelli's was that it was one day way that it didn't have the the right turn. You had to go through and turn left. Uh as as I remember, but my memory is not as good as it was a decade ago. Um but I I think uh a lot of these things we also have precedent on too. So, this council unanimously approved Woodpile Barbecue to tear down a house and build extra parking in a neighborhood downtown.

It is it's in the DDA which and and sorry I I can't go back and forth with the audience on this. Um but [clears throat] it is it is in in the DDA and so there is some differentiation there but there is precedent there and so yeah I look at that I look at the size of the two-way and I do understand the whole scope of if you tear down a house you're encroaching into the neighborhood and now you're one house closer into the neighborhood but if you look at the picture of the existing alleyway there's a house adjacent to that right now, which is the house that they're talking about tearing down. And so I really struggle with this because I don't know that there is a right answer. If we vote no and we deny it and the restaurant gets built anyway and all of that traffic adds through this terrible small drive and fire trucks try to get in, have we created a bigger problem? But if we vote yes and we can't seem to figure out and solve this traffic issue, now you have the additional traffic uh that they delineated that's coming on and now has the two-way through. And I honestly don't I would I I don't know what the right answer is on this. I think this is one of those votes that none of us will know until 5 10 years down the line. Uh, I think it's very similar to Meyers. At the time, the the general public did not want Meyers. Uh, so much so that the city council actually denied it. There was a lawsuit that was brought by Meyer that then forced council through a settlement to allow the Meyer to come through. And I think, you know, we all miss some of those Franklidd Wright homes in that subdivision, but we also realize that

that subdivision did not have city water. It did not have paved roads, and it was not going to be built up because the residents had voted against it multiple times in that neighborhood to be able to build it up. And so in hindsight, it's probably better that we have the Meyer than if we had just let things go as status quo. And I think this will be a similar type vote. Um I'm getting the impression from the comments of members that the best case scenario is even that it would be a split vote. I don't I'm not hearing any indication that this uh is likely to pass. Uh, but I think as as everyone here that has come out, that took the time to speak, that is civically engaged throughout this process, I would only urge you to be very cognizant that something is going to go in there. And as Councilman Mir noted, what is it that you'd be okay with? And if we're looking at uh 80 some odd signatures in this petition to say no to this expansion, what is the thing that 86 petitioners would be excited about? And I think that that's the best and most productive conversation that the future council can have. Uh because fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how much you like me, this is my last full meeting. Um and and so future councils are going to need to really identify what's going to happen with that space with the traffic and how do you mitigate some of these issues. So I think I'll ask for a roll call vote just because of the importance and I want to make sure the the record reflects and then I will also ask the

city attorney did we get everything on the record tonight that you needed on the record? Mr. Mayor, I would want to note for the record that we presented um where we had were prepared to present templates for motions for both approval and denial. Um my reading of the language wasn't an endorsement uh as the council's position as a public policy matter on whether or not they want to approve or or deny um in that regard. Okay. Do you need any of us to read that or is that something that you can just state into the record as you just did? That's fine what I just said.

Okay. Your honor, I want to add to this conversation. Um, I want to start by saying that, you know, every morning we have a lot of commuters who start out in the HOV parking lot that is right next to this uh the parcel here and they have to navigate throughout the city to get back on the freeway, by the way. Uh, they have to find out a way to go down uh 12 mile road to the east and find out a way to get back to the west. Um, kind of sort of like how it is for Bubba's 33 on Hall Road where they can't make a left-hand turn. There's only one way out. Uh, they can only go to the e uh to the east um out out of the driveway and then they have to go across three lanes of traffic and get on uh do a Michigan U-turn to go to the west. I also want to make makes this comment about the traffic that's coming from the alleyway. Now, I know that uh we've said that it somebody said that it wouldn't add more traffic, but it actually does. There was a contradiction there that it wasn't going to add more traffic and then it was going to add more traffic. And it is going to add more traffic to that small section between the um gas station and also the um Tim Hortons and that little small square part of part of the uh the intersection on the southbound side. My my problem with that is that without the traffic light, having any change to the intersection is just going to be a stalemate possibly. And that's going to cause uh a we already have accidents that almost occur on a daily basis from people that turn left coming from uh the Home Depot parking lot over to uh going uh east on 12 Mile Road. We have um people that are impatient, unfortunately, that want to turn in front of the people that go straight

from uh going south to north. We have uh that that happens all the time. And and now we're going to be be adding a backup uh from from the alleyway. Now, I I do want to have the restaurant there, but I think that until we can solve the issue that we have with the traffic light that right now is not not the time to to really give any, you know, to add on to this alleyway whatsoever. Uh because it will create a two-way traffic that will allow more traffic onto Dartmouth, uh no matter which way people end up going. And it's to me I I'm I'm really concerned about the safety of our citizens in Madison Heights and uh and what what could or possibly happen to them. And I know that you may not be able to turn left also on on the 12mi road, but also it's the same safety concern when we look at other businesses on 12mi road. Whether you're going to be at the Midas or the Siros restaurant or four below or the uh car wash that's there on the south side of the street making a uh lefthand turn on the 12mi road. You have to cross three lanes. You have to get into the lefthand turn lane and it's it's 12mi road between John R and the freeway is really really busy. It's one of the busiest intersections in Metro Detroit. Um and I I don't know. Uh, I just think that drivers will have to just be more attentive to what they're how they're driving and the decisions that they make. Um, that's all I have to say. [applause] Your honor, your honor, could we have a minute before you vote to respond to a couple of the comments that were made?

As for your indulgence, it's it's the No, I'm sorry. It's it's the application that we submitted that we've been working through. All right. to to to the to the public. Uh I I will give him the chance to respond because bec I I understand that. But but from a legal perspective, if we do not, it could create issues. So could you please let me allow him to respond? I will give you five minutes max, please. And then council, and if they don't have any more comments, we'll vote. because I do not want to open the city up to any additional litigation.

No, thank you. We we appreciate uh the indulgence. Um you know, we we are planning to move forward with this project regardless and we do think that this is, you know, has the potential to create an unsafe condition. We understand the the implications here. We've committed to working with the road commission on the intersection uh the comments that were just made and and I believe that's one of the conditions uh to the resolution in your packet for approval and we're we're going to do that. We're going to comply with those requirements and we would just ask for the opportunity to do so because [clears throat] the road commission has to be satisfied with this as well because they have jurisdiction over 12 mile road. So, it's the city working with the city and the road commission and we understand the issues. We understand the implications. We're just trying to make this the best scenario possible. And [clears throat] what I'd like to do is to turn the floor over to Mr. Najer to finish up if you could please.

You got about three and a half minutes, please.

Um, thank you again for the the spirit of debate and everybody's um comments. I I would just like to reiterate uh our safety concerns here. Um proceeding with this development which is a byite development and we can put the restaurant there. Just have to submit the plans. We're going to be creating a a very unsafe condition. That alley will be used. It will it will go both ways. There will be more traffic backups. There will be more accidents. It's not our choice to move forward on with that with that configuration. Uh I'm asking you guys again to reconsider. We want to make this a safe development. We want to make this the the opportunity to work with the road commission for Oakland County is on the table. We we have real solutions here. We have a traffic expert. We've paid a lot of money for these results. uh they they they've provided solutions, three solutions, two of which are not not recommended. I felt like we were lucky to find this I would call silver bullet in the in the traffic report that that can easily fix this problem. If everybody here is serious about fixing that intersection and that problem, the best thing to do is to allow us to go forward and to continue to work with the road commission to solve the problem. If we don't get approval from you guys, then we can't continue to fix that problem. We can't even work on that problem. That problem exists and it's going to stay there forever. We want to work on this problem. We want to fix the problems. We want the traffic to go away. We want it to be safe. We want it to be walkable. But by telling us no, we're just going to do what we're allowed to do, which is to build a restaurant there. And it's going to create more chaos, more backups, more

traffic, and it's going to be it's going to be a dangerous situation. So, it's it I'm I'm trying to to to allow you guys to open up and say, "Let this guy work on this. we can get some real progress here and at the end of the day I think it's going to be a much better situation. Again, thank you for your comments. Thank you. Any any responses from council? Anything else before we vote?

I'm sorry. I I can't I cannot respond to the gallery right now. Uh so any other member of council? All right. With that, I will ask the clerk to do a roll call vote. The motion is to deny the special land use request for 28767 Dartmmont Street, uh, parking as a principal use. Uh, if denied, uh, that will also in all likelihood remove the alley vacation request, the next report from our agenda as that request would be withdrawn, I'd imagine, if it were denied. Your honor, can you just I know you just said it, but I want to clarify. So, if you are if you want to agree that it should be denied, you should say yay.

Yes. If if you want to deny, say yay. If you do not want to deny and you want it to move forward, then you would say no. [clears throat] Thank you. Needs four votes to pass. There are six members. Okay. All right. Ready? Let the clerk to the roll call. Councilman Fleming. Yes. Council Mir, no. Councelor Robbach, yes. Councilman Sulttus, yay. Councelor Wright, yes. And Mayor Potmblas.

Although, yes. [applause] All right. So now we have the alley vacation request. Uh I'm assuming from our planner we were withdrawing the request for the alley vacation. I'd like to well offer have you offer the applicant the chance to withdraw it formally and Yes, please. Thank you.

Yes, your honor. Um on behalf of the applicant, we would like to withdraw our request that we submitted for the alley vacation in light of the special land use uh decision of this council. Perfect. Uh to the attorney, do we need to take any action or is it just considered withdrawn and we move on in the agenda? Um yeah, I just consider it withdraw and move on the agenda. Right. Thank you so much. Thank you.

All right. Uh we have no items for future public hearings. So now we'll move to item 10, bids, awards, and purp bid awards and purchases, which is uh the DPS contract extension for Italia construction. The city utilizes a contractor for annual sidewalk replacement program as well as pavement and landscape restoration relating to water and sewer maintenance work. For many years, the lowest qualified bidder for this work has been Italy construction of Washington Township. On the heels of another successful construction season, Italy has wretched out to the city offering an extension of their 2025 pricing. Staff recommends that council approve the contract extension with Italy construction of Washington Township for the 2026 construction season. All right. What's the wish of council?

Your honor. Yes, council. Right. I'd like to make a motion to approve the extension with the Talia construction of Washington Township for the 2026 construction season. Funding for the program is through various activities in the line item budget and I think we should move forward with it. Okay. Is there support? Your honor. Dr. Robot seconds. Any discussion? Your honor, just to say that I think that, you know, Talia has done a great job and I know that like in most industries, there aren't a lot of providers, but of what I've seen from them, they've done a good job. So, I fully support moving forward with them. Okay. Any other comments from council?

Yeah. I just want to uh your honor, I want to make a a comment here that they were they were the lowest qualified bidder. uh they weren't just bidding on their own and and um I think that um people you know the transparency of telling you that is that we're just not giving away um you know contracts to just whomever you know and uh that there was a bid for the contract. That's it. Any other comments for council?

Uh let me ask a a question really quick if I remember correctly. uh they had asked for an amendment to our last contract uh early on in the contract that would that would have raised their rates. We as a council denied that request. Uh and so if that's true and if staff can confirm, I'm uh equally happy and impressed that they are the lowest qualified bidder coming back to us now. Uh because we did not give them that that out of branch at the time. uh you know as just clear facts from due diligence uh we did not want to risk any city budget to be able to help out a private company that uh under bid what the cost ended up becoming. Uh and so if that is correct and city at city attorney or city manager if somebody could tell me

I think it is without having the information right in front of me but that is what my memory says. Yes. I don't know maybe maybe Councilman Sult do you remember that? No. No. [laughter] Okay. All right. Well, at any rate, uh if if our recollection is is accurate, we had denied them. They had sought a price increase in year, I think one and a half of a four or five year agreement. And so, I will give them appreciation for not just doing a great good work all of that time while they were losing money on our contract, but also to be the lowest qualified bidder coming back to us. Uh, I think hats off to them. We appreciate them.

Not so much to bail them out next time, though. Put that on. [laughter] All right. All in favor of approving the contract with Italia, signify by saying I. Oppose, say no. Motion carries.

All right. So, now we move on to the OLSHA senior snow removal program. On September 30th, the city issued a bid for the senior chore program funded through the Oakland Livingston Human Services Agency. The purpose of this bid is to provide snow removal services for low-income seniors and disabled residents in the city as part of the ongoing senior home chore program. Staff has identified 72 residents who meet the eligibility criteria and qualify for these services. Staff recommends that council award the senior chore snow removal contract to the lowest responsible bidder Allen's Landscaping and Lawn Services LLC at a unit price of $35 per lot for the 202526 snow removal season pending legal review and to authorize the city to proceed to the next lowest bidder who has luxury lawn and snow at a unit price of $55 per lot in the event the contract with Allen's Landscape and Lawn Service is terminated due to non-performance or other issues.

All right. What's the wish council? Your honor. Council right. I'd like to make the motion to award Senior Chore Snow Removal Contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Allen's Landscaping and Lawn Services LLC, at the unit price of $35 per lot for the 202526 snow removal season pending legal review and to authorize the city to proceed with the next lowest responsible bidder, luxury lawn and snow, at a unit price of $55 per lot in the event of the contract with Allen's Landscape and Lawn Services LLC is terminated due to non-performance or other issues. Well stated. Uh is there a support? Your honor, I'll support. Thank you.

All right. We have a motion and a second. Uh any discussion on the OSHA senior snow removal program? Your honor. Yes. The reason why I wanted was happy to move forward with this one was one because we um the service they provide, but also we have a bidder and we have a backup because we've seen the need for that in the past. And kudos to our city staff for uh thinking ahead to potential issues we could have to be prepared for it. So that's why I wanted to move forward with this motion and I'm happy to support it. I love the contingency plans. Uh any other comments from council. All right. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Oppose say no.

Motion passes. All right. Now we have item number 12. Uh that's the my life health and wellness center uh marathon health service agreement.

In January of 2015, the cities of Madison Heights, Ferndale, and Royal Oak partnered to open a My Life Health and Wellness Center, also known as a clinic in the lower level of city hall. The center was created to provide alternative cost effective primary care to the employees and their dependents. Since the opening, the center has maintained strong participation, averaging around 66.9% over the past decade and saving the city hard dollar cost of $325,000, which equate to direct medical cost to the city along with substantial additional savings to the employees. The city originally contracted with a company care here to operate the My Life Health and Wellness Center in 2015. Since that time, this company has been acquired by Premise Health. Given this transition and the fact that it's been 10 years since their original service provider selection, the participating cities, which also now include Oak Park and Hazel Park, evaluated the qualified providers capable of delivering services. Marathon Health emerged as a clear choice, having recently entered into a contract with Oakland County and successfully operating sever several wellness centers across the state of Michigan. City Council is asked to consider the proposed health services agreement between the city of Madison Heights and Marathon Health. Under this agreement, Marathon Health will assume the operation of the Myife Health and Wellness Center under terms consistent with the existing partnership with Madison Heights, Ferndale, Royal Oak, Hazel Park, and Oak Park. The new agreement continues to provide advanced primary care, wellness, and disease management services, as well as occupational health programs for employees and their dependent. It also includes flexibility of adding new municipal partners through the joiner process and updates provisions related to performance standards reporting and cost sharing. It's important to note that under this contract, the city of Madison's cost would increase about $2,000 a year, but we would have more hours that the clinic would be open.

However, if a local community joins, which it's given that they probably will, our cost will actually decrease $10,000. Staff recommends that city council approve the health services agreement with Marathon Health LLC and authorize the city manager to execute all necessary documents to continue participation in this regional employee wellness partnership. All right. Thank you. Uh what's your wish council? Your honor. Yes. For the hat trick. [laughter] I'd like to make a motion to approve the health services agreement with Marathon Health LLC and authorize city manager to execute all necessary documents to continue participation in the regional employee wellness partnership.

Thank you. Is there support? Your honor, I will support. All right. So, we have a motion and a second. Any comments from councel? Your honor.

Yes, councelor. Um, I just want to say I remember one of the first things when I first was elected to council in 2019, city manager took me around and when she showed me the clinic downstairs, it's the first time I really realized what was happening and how how that worked. And I was so impressed with the creativity and the ability um to to find a creative solution to bring health and wellness, you know, right to the employees right here in city hall. And um I just I couldn't help but think how nice we would be if there was a my doctor was in the basement of my workplace. Like that would be so convenient and so wonderful. So I just want to say uh I want to commend the city manager um for the work on this and I'm pleased to be able to support it.

Any other comments? Your honor. Yes. Um I too think it's a fantastic idea and I love that it's based here in Madison Heights uh in our basement. That's what we want and we still get the partnership. Um my only ask to staff would be in the future if we could find a way to not immediately not write into the budget now but find a way to mirror some type of program for the residents of Madison Heights as well. Um I might if we can do it that's why I say it's a dream casting not today but something that we could potentially do for some of our residents for our seniors or for our uh families with young children potentially. Keep saying potentially. I'm going say potentially one more time. There you go. You got it on the record. All right. Any other comments,

Councilman Sultas? So, does that include uh retired uh council people? [laughter]

No, but it does include retired employees if you're on the the city's retirement plan. So, just if I could take one minute to talk about why this is really a great idea and why it's saved the city $325,000 because the city is self-insured. So, if we go to the doctor now and have a cholesterol screening, you're paying well, at the time, 10 years ago, it was about $825. I can only imagine it's more than that now. And through the center downstairs, that same cost, that same test cost around seven. So, the city is actually paying those costs either way. So, that's how come we have a direct cost, but it's open to um part-time employees. It's open to all of the employees and their dependents if they're on the medical insurance plan. And it's open to our retirees that are on the insurance plan because we're self-insured.

Yes. And uh fun fact, city council, we are kind of special part-time employees. So, we are neither of those things. [laughter] Yeah. No healthare. Um, yeah, that is a uh actually I saw a Facebook post that implied that uh city council had healthc care and full benefits and I'm like

that would be it would have been cool but no [laughter] no not at all. Um I will say um Councilman Sult and I I think we were like two two years or maybe a little bit less than two years into our entire tenur when we first started discussing this issue. And part of it was, as city manager Marsh noted, to handle and have control over some of those costs, but part of it was also we have a lot of public safety employees who really have to be on the job. And so if there are minor ailments, if there are issues that they're dealing with, making sure that their doctor is as close in proximity to where they are is hugely important. And so this was such a groundbreaking thing uh when we put it in back in 2015. I think it opened January 2015. Uh and so I don't know of many others that even have it today, this type of setup. And so it's incredibly unique. Uh I love the fact that other communities and organizations are wanting to come in and participate which further lowers our cost. Uh, and that was an area of city hall in the basement that wasn't being used. Uh, that was directly after the great flood cleared everything out unfortunately and my basement at home included. Um, and so we had an a wide open area and putting in this healthcare clinic really helped. So, uh, any final comments from council? All right. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. I. Oppose say no. Motion carries. All right. So now we go to ordinance 2208, the precinct boundary and polling location changes. And this is second and final reading. Ordinance 2208 adjusts the city's election precinct boundary descriptions, polling locations, and precinct numbers. This action is critical for us to comply with state law, accommodating new voting practices, and realizing significant long-term savings. The need for adjustments stems directly from state level reaportionment following the 2020 dissentennial census. Since 2022, the boundaries for several elected offices, including US House, state senate, state house, and county commissioner districts have shifted. Specifically, Madison Heights has been impacted by legal challenges to the state maps resulting in new legislative boundaries. The revised Michigan House district took effect in 2024 and our new Michigan Senate District 10 took effect in 2026. Because every voting precinct in Madison Heights has been impacted by these changes, the clerk's office is required to mail updated voter registration cards to all registered voters. In addition to these mandatory mandated boundary changes, recent updates to Michigan election law now allows us the flexibility to restructure. Due to the expansion of early voting and no reason absentee voting, the allowable size of active register voting precinct has increased significantly from 2,999 to 4,999. This presents the opportunity for long-term fiscal planning. The state of Michigan will require local governments to replace our current election equipment in fiscal year 2028 as the equipment reaches the end of its service life. Local governments have been advised to budget approximately $15,000 for each piece of new equipment per precinct. Therefore, consolidating our precincts will directly result in substantial long-term savings to the city. Based on changes in voting patterns, updated legislation, and

fiscal considerations, the city council and the election commission recommended reducing the number of precincts from 9 to 7 as requested at the October 27th city council meeting. The ordinance was amended to um consolidate voting locations for precinct 7, the McCann administration building, and precinct 5, the library, which is now both which will now both be located at the active adult center. The city charter requires that precinct boundary changes be adopted via ordinance. The deadline for making these updates must be submitted to the state no later than January the 6th to be effective for the August 2026 election. Therefore, staff recommends that city council adopt ordinance 2208 amending precinct boundary descriptions, polling locations, and precinct numbers on this second reading.

All right. What's the wish council? Your honor, thank you. I move that uh council adopt ordinance number 22088 amending precinct boundary descriptions, polling locations, and precinct numbers on second reading. Awesome. Uh, any support, your honor? I will support. Thank you. Would have been awkward if that lingered for another 10 seconds. All right. Any discussion from council? Your honor. Yes.

So, one of the things that I think we need to make note of to address is seniors and others concerned that we're making um voting less accessible for them by consolidating the precinct. So, I just ask the staff make sure we communicate, we overcommunicate this to the public. So there's not even a thought of an impression that we're trying to take away people's ability to have access to vote in person. That's a good point. Any other comments from council?

Well, before we vote, I will say that uh I'm thankful that the clerk was able to take my suggestion to merge the voting locations for the Macan Center and the library into the active adult center. I think if we were going to do this, doing it all the way and as efficiently as possible is uh advantageous for us. Uh, and then I would also note to to those who might have concerns about the multiple precincts voting into a single location, uh, it is something we've been doing at Wilkinson for the better part of at least 20 years, but it probably goes before that where three different voting precincts would go into the Wilkinson building because it's so much more efficient to be able to service that way and we all want election results as quickly as possible. And so the more difficult that is, uh, the longer we all have to wait and the more stressed out our fabulous clerk is. Uh, to the clerk, is there anything you'd like to add on this before we vote?

Um, no. Just wanted to, uh, thank you for your support on this, but also just to remind um, anybody who wants to vote absentee, that postage is now paid by the state of Michigan due to a change in our constitution. So, if you are a senior and you do have difficulty um with mobility or getting out to your precinct, please feel free to get on our absentee voter list and you'll be automatically sent a ballot for every election that's upcoming. And then you can just simply stick it in your your um mailbox in the the mail carrier will bring it for you. Thank you so much. Unless you wait till the last day to return it like I did and then you get a drop in the dropbox.

All right. Uh all those in favor of passing ordinance 2208 the precinct boundary and polling location changes on the second and final reading signify by saying I. I oppose say no. Motion passes. All right. And with that we have come to the end of our agenda. I would like to invite closing comments and we will start as always with Councilman Mir. Thank you your honor. Uh just uh it is veterans month. So so thank you to all the veterans who are serving and have served uh for your dedication to the country. That's it. Thanks, Council Ray.

Uh just like to echo echo those sentiments. Thank you to all of our veterans for their service, all of our community members, our family, our friends. Um it does not go unnoticed or unappreciated. And uh speaking of service, just like to say thank you to uh my counterparts on council will be departing after today and uh Mayor Pro Timmblas and Councilman Sulttus um and Mayor Rosen Grafstein. Thank you. Well, you'll see us for about 10 minutes on the 19th. Okay. [laughter] Great. Uh anything from our attorney's office?

I just want to say second what was just said. It's been a privilege to uh work with our outgoing council members and um I've been working almost two years now with Councilman Bliss in multiple meetings because he's at all the plan commissions and he's always made it an issue to make sure he asked me at least one question every meeting and I appreciate that because I uh consider that sometimes a sign of respect from him and um he'll be missed specifically and I'm going to wonder who's going to take on that mantle now of being that person to always make sure they get me to talk during a meeting. So, my best wishes to everyone and uh hopefully we'll continue to see you around town.

Thank you. I'm just trying to make sure the city doesn't keep getting sued. [laughter] All right. Uh city manager Marshia, anything tonight?

Well, hopefully all will be around more than 10 minutes at the next meeting because they'll also be thank you proclamations kind of recognizing all the contributions that the three outgoing members have made. So with that though, I want to remind everybody that one of the things that kind of fast happened on this agenda before the long conversation under the consent was we canceled the meeting on November the 24th after the tree lighting and we moved the next meeting is going to be November the 19th. So that is going to consist of the swearing in of the new council and that will also be the council meeting. So both of the things there. So there will not be a meeting after the tree lining. It is Wednesday, November the 19th at 6:30 instead. And we will be communicating that um out on our website and through the public notices and that kind of thing. But just to let everybody know,

much more time with Santa. Not a bad thing. All right. To the clerk's office. Anything tonight?

Um yes, just two things actually. I just wanted to say my very first meeting that I was appointed was the meeting that you guys approved the clinic downstairs. And I thought, "Wow, that's really weird. I've never heard of that before." but it also saved my life. Um I they found a heart um problem with me and I had life-saving heart surgery. So I certainly appreciate that benefit. Um but moving on from that, um uh the Oakland County should have our Writein candidate results no later than November 18th. Um there were over 1,700 writein votes for council. And I just want to thank everybody who worked on the the election. They work hard. work very long hours, but the city could not do an election without those volunteer citizens. So, thank you, Roa.

Um, I just want to start by saying thank you to the clerk and her election workers and all of the staff in the clerk's office. It's a every election is a monumental task. So, thank you for your diligent and professionalism and all of the work that you do to make it always go off um without hitch, at least one that nobody else can see. Just you guys make it seem so easy. Um um I also want to say, you know, happy Veterans Day and thank you for your service to all who served. Um that's tomorrow is Veterans Day. I was able to walk in the Veterans Day parade um on in Detroit on Sunday and um it's a really moving thing to be able to do and to walk alongside folks who have served our country. So I just want to say thank you for your service for those who have served. Um I also want to say thank you to everybody who came out today to advocate for your community. um your voices are really important and people have been emailing and you know people showed up here. You don't always hear back from us because we're just trying to take it all in because there's a lot to take in. These petitions are super important and I cannot overemphasize how important it is for people to get engaged um and not just yell about it on Facebook, right? because um when we it's it's really it's really hard sometimes just to be like not to for me not to say I'm just deleting Facebook because it's just nothing but nastiness most of the time. People are just mean. There's never like a a positive word about anything, right? Everybody has their own opinions and yours are wrong and whatever. So it's it's really hard to to keep jumping into those forums to be like, okay, what are people saying, right? But um I I think it's important that um so I think for that reason alone, but just for the sake of like being on the public record, not just the the social media record of this is what I stand for. This is what I'm asking for my my elected representatives to do and to hear. Um I think it's very important. So I just want to say I can't

thank you enough for being here today to do that and for all of the previous um action and work that people have done before today as well. Um, I won't be present on the 19th for your last meeting. Um, so I just want to say thank you both for your work. Um, our Mayor Grafstein's not here, so I can't say it directly to her, but um, thank you for all of your many years of service. Um, you know, we uh, we we appreciate it. We have not always agreed on everything, but that's appropriate in a elected body for everybody to um you know work on our things and and present them here in the um in public. And I appreciate um the the dedication that you all have had to the city. Um and what else? Oh, the holiday season is upon us. And since I won't be here for the uh before Thanksgiving break and Thanksgiving, I just want to say also thanks happy Thanksgiving to everyone. And um you know, be safe out there, be kind, and uh let's treat each other with as much kindness as we can possibly muster. Um not just through the holiday season, but every day. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh Councilman

Fing. Yeah. So today, tomorrow is Veterans Day and uh I'm a veteran and um so I really want to say first of all, thank you to all the veterans that are watching. Um uh there was a lot of events that went on during the weekend. They had a uh 22 like a a rucks sack mar uh march that went on Royal Oak. Uh we had the Veterans Day parade and unfortunately uh at the um the Holly uh National um cemetery that's up in Holly uh for the veterans. They're not going to be having a service there. So um but I encourage everybody to say thank you to the veterans uh as you see them. I mean, you never know um what you know how they're feeling. Uh we're in now where it's dark outside and the holidays around and uh you know um just the greeting of uh thank you for your service uh means a lot to uh everybody who served. Um also I want to say um happy birthday to the Marine Corps. Today is the 250th birthday of the United States Marine Corps. Uh they um the Army had their birthday earlier in June and uh today is the Marine Corps's birthday. So December five to all the all the Marine Marine Corps um and um that's about it for today. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Sult. Yeah, thank you. I thank you for um acknowledging us. Um 12 years that uh kind of flew by. One thing I regret is that Boomer case. God, that was what a drag that was. [laughter]

That's all. Thank you. You know, I cheered one of those meetings as well. So, [laughter] always uh always seem to get the uh we'll say more controversial ones. Um so, thank everybody for coming out tonight. As Council Robach noted, a lot of times in the modern era, we complain into this void of voices where everybody is just either going to agree with you or pile on. But nothing actually gets accomplished. Uh there's not a single member of council's like, "Oh, I saw this on Facebook. Let me take immediate action now." Uh I think we take it in. We are aware of it in the same way that we're aware as emails or neighbors coming up to us to tell us what's going on. Uh but it's not the way to be able to influence policy or to you know push things through. And so I really appreciate everybody who come came out especially on such a nasty night and everybody had to clear off their cars to get here in the cold. Appreciate you to be here. uh also appreciate my peers on council not just for the kind words but also it's really tough to be in these chairs. it I don't know uh if it's visible from out there and you know for those who are watching on the live stream uh but we are all in part-time roles here um everybody has full day jobs and those same reports in the packet that you're seeing that are 300 pages long we have to digest them before coming into these meetings while also serving on all the boards and commissions to be able the surface all these positive changes that everybody comes to expect rightfully so

in in our city. And so I think it's so important in an era where there's so much political divisiveness and just anger to just simply appreciate that people are in the office and willing to do it. Uh, and I think that that goes whole true with any and all public office because if my 12 years in these chairs are any indication, I can't imagine what it's like to be in DC. And so I think having that amount of empathy is important. I know it's big to be very partisan, but if we can take and separate out the person from their positions, I think we would all have a much healthier relationship with politics. Um, I also want to thank the clerk's office and then all of the candidates for a great election. It takes a lot to put your name out there. Uh especially those writing folks because that is a challenge unto itself. But it takes a lot to put yourself out there. And you know that every time you post or you say something, you're going to have 30 people taking whatever you said out of context on an entire thread. And then you'll have another 30 people celebrating everything that you said. And so it's really tough and it's tough on families. And so for everybody who put their name in and ran, I truly appreciate you. And I also truly appreciate the clerk's office. That was no small task to be able to run that election. And they're still running it because we still don't have final results with the writins. So hats off to them

and the volunteers. Thank you. But uh I also want to thank our our veterans as was noted. Uh, thank you for your service. Thank you for your sacrifice. Without our veterans, this wouldn't exist. The ability for us to sit up here and disagree with each other and whether there, you know, whether you have mutual respect like we all do or you don't like some of the other governmental bodies. Um, I think that only happens for those who defended our freedoms and allowed us to have this opportunity. So thank each and every one of you. Uh and finally I will conclude on uh my invocation today. I talked about new voices rising and the importance of fresh ideas. And you know I'll I'll have more formal remarks at the next meeting that's officially my last. But my dad always taught me which side note my dad actually gave me this gavel when I ran the Madison J teams back in the day. And so it's so fitting I found out a half hour before the meeting that I was running it. And so this was the first thing I grabbed to be able to end my council tenure using the gavvel that my dad gave me. Really awesome. But even more important than the gavvel, my dad always taught me about the power of an idea. And an idea unsaid never has any power. And so I would encourage our, you know, my peers on council and those who are oncoming who are watching this video to speak out and share those ideas. Small ideas are what move the city forward. You know, this little the little example tonight about uh the precinct merging. You know, I think, you know, to the clerk's office, hats off for looking into the logistics and making it work, but it's up to us to make those suggestions. And sometimes I think

we believe that our job is the big things, but the big things staff takes care of. We're a part-time council. Our staff is working on the big things. Our staff is out there, you know, building, you know, these, you know, civic center complexes and doing all this really big work. It's our job to do some of the small stuff and to make those suggestions and be the voice of our residents. And so I just encourage everyone to have those ideas because if if my record is anything, it's all the little tiny ideas that turned into bigger things because volunteers got involved and turned it into something amazing. And so I just encourage my peers, toss out the ideas, make the suggestions, and the same thing to the folks in the public. If there's something coming in and there's a business proposal that you don't like, what are the alternatives? Make suggestions, share ideas. That's the only way we're all going to get better. And so with that, it is 8:45 p.m. and I will adjourn. Thank you all.