Planning commission delays House of Barbecue smoker amendment, seeks exact model and fire‑marshal sign‑off

The Clawson Planning Commission on May 27 postponed consideration of a site‑plan amendment for House of Barbecue at 202 South Main Street after commissioners said the submittal did not include enough technical detail about the proposed outdoor smoker and exhaust stack.

Planning staff described the request as a narrowed proposal to replace previous trailer‑style smokers with a smaller, propane‑fired boxed smoker placed inside an existing dining patio and fitted with chimney stacks and a ventilation fan. Staff noted the packet now includes NFPA 701 (fire code for tents and similar structures) documentation and recommended that any approval be conditioned on the fire marshal’s written sign‑off.

The applicant, speaking for the restaurant, said the proposed unit is substantially smaller than the previous mobile smoker and that a chimney stack and ventilation fan would be incorporated. “If we get rid of the giant grill, they’re gonna be really happy,” the applicant said, describing intent to confine the unit behind a privacy fence and operate it during normal business hours rather than overnight.

Commissioners pressed for technical specifics before any approval. They asked for the exact make and model of the grill, precise stack diameter and height, engineering plans showing how the stack would be affixed and documentation that the chimney and installation meet the fire marshal’s requirements. One commissioner said the conversation felt “rather vague” and that the commission did not have capacity to adjudicate technical smoke‑control or anchoring details without that information. Another commissioner said the accepted industry standard is to have a smoker integrated inside the building and tied into the suppression system, and that an external workaround could create new safety or nuisance problems if not done to a clearly specified standard.

Staff and several commissioners indicated they were open to a narrowly scoped approval if the outstanding items were provided: the exact model, mounting method, the stack’s final height (with brackets if it extends above the roof line) and a written approval from the fire marshal that the proposed installation is within code. The applicant said she would pursue a specific unit, have the fire marshal review the mounting and venting, and return to the commission with photographs and manufacturer specifications.

The commission voted to postpone the amendment until those materials are provided; the motion passed on roll call. Commissioners said they favored a prompt return rather than prolonged delay so the restaurant could test the smaller smoker and allow staff and the fire marshal to confirm the installation would address the neighborhood nuisance concerns.

What happens next: The applicant is expected to submit firm equipment specifications, mounting details and written fire‑marshal approval before the commission will again consider the amendment. Commissioners said they would consider a conditional approval (restricted to business hours and to a specific unit and mounting method) only after reviewing the specified materials and the fire marshal’s sign‑off.

Votes and procedural note: Commissioners moved to postpone the site‑plan amendment; roll call confirmed the motion carried. The commission emphasized that the unresolved public‑safety and nuisance concerns — not opposition to the restaurant per se — motivated the request for more detail.