Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Fee Schedule topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Inkster planning commission recommends holding 2025–26 planning fees steady, highlights redevelopment-ready progress
Summary
Planning staff recommended no increase to Inkster's 2025–26 planning and zoning fee schedule; the Planning Commission voted to recommend the schedule to city council and commissioners highlighted progress toward Redevelopment Ready Communities certification with MEDC.
Get email alerts on the Planning Fee Schedule topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Inkster Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council keep the 2025–26 planning and zoning fee schedule unchanged after a staff review comparing Inkster’s rates with neighboring cities.
Planning department staffer Mr. Dowdell told the commission that, based on a comparison with Taylor, Dearborn Heights, Garden City and Westland, Inkster’s fees fall in the middle of the range and that his recommendation was to “remain the same.” The packet presented to commissioners lists fees for site-plan review, special land use reviews, variances, rezoning, sign review and other common planning actions.
Commissioner Macy Williams delivered an update on the city’s Redevelopment Ready Communities (RRC) efforts with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation. Williams said the city has adopted a new master plan and completed a comprehensive zoning ordinance revision intended to streamline reviews, encourage adaptive reuse and market priority redevelopment sites to attract investment. She said the next 6–12 months will focus on moving from planning to implementation, advancing permit-ready plans, and marketing target corridors to potential developers.
The Planning Commission formally moved to recommend the fee schedule to the City Council; the motion was made by Commissioner Tanya Williams and seconded by Commissioner Cheryl Hayes Bradford. The commission voted in favor and the recommendation will be considered by the council at a future meeting.
There was no council action required at the joint meeting; planning staff emphasized that keeping fees stable is intended to balance competitiveness with predictability for developers and residents while the city advances RRC certification efforts. The packet with the fee-comparison and the RRC progress report is posted with the meeting materials.

