Planning Commission approves site plan and conditions for accessory building, open storage at 13465 9 Mile Road

The Warren City Planning Commission voted to approve a site plan for an accessory building and open storage of materials and vehicles at 13465 9 Mile Road, subject to a set of detailed plan revisions and conditions and with several variances identified as likely required from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Lawrence Holman, who identified himself as the petitioner and owner, told the commission the site is “over 50% complete” and asked for additional time to finish fencing and survey work. “We just need a little time and I don't have any problem with any of these recommendations. We just need a little time to get it all done,” Holman said.

Planning staff presented a lengthy set of required corrections and conditions. Staff asked for revised site plans showing accurate property lines and dimensions; labeling clarifications (no platted alley on the parcel); screening and landscaping (an 8‑foot greenbelt or 6‑foot brick/embossed concrete wall along the east property line where the site abuts an R1P single‑family district); accessible parking dimensions; lighting standards; and added landscaping in front setback areas, including specific tree species recommendations.

Staff also reported a prior enforcement action: a December 29, 2023 violation letter to the property owner noting the accessory structure required a building permit under section 105.1 of the Michigan building and residential code. The staff report notes the accessory building is under construction without a permit and that the building “could be removed” or relocated to meet the 20‑foot side setback if required.

Staff calculated multiple open storage areas on the site (including storage containers, concrete bins and areas holding service vehicles and construction equipment) totaling several thousand square feet and identified variances that may be required before the building division will release permits. Those potential variances include retaining the accessory building within the 20‑foot side setback (building shown 5 feet from east property line), retaining storage containers located 7 feet from the east property line, retaining gravel surfacing in the rear rather than concrete, and allowing the two proposed parking spaces in the front setback.

The commission added a condition (noted by staff as item 1N) clarifying the site history and the existence of the unpermitted accessory building; commissioners told the petitioner that any variances ultimately granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals must be added to the revised site plan. Planning staff also recommended a performance bond of $2,400 based on an estimated project cost of $80,000.

Commissioner Holloway made the motion to approve the site plan with the planning department conditions and the additional staff clarification; Commissioner Hock supported the motion. A roll‑call vote recorded “yes” from Commissioners Holloway, Hogg, Ansar, Doosey, Benicki and Smith and the motion carried. Staff noted the petitioner will need to pursue the listed variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals and secure the required bond before building division release.

The petitioner told commissioners he expects to finish outstanding work “in 6 to 8 months” because of seasonal constraints and scheduling of surveyors and contractors. Planning staff and commissioners emphasized that the unpermitted structure and storage in required setback areas must be resolved either by moving structures or by obtaining variances.

The commission’s action was limited to approval of the site plan with conditions; final permits and occupancy remain contingent on the zoning variance process, plan revisions and building division review.