Waterford Planning Commission approves landscaping modification for 5100 Hudson site amid resident opposition

The Charter Township of Waterford Planning Commission on March 24 approved a modification to the landscaping and screening requirements for a proposed bulk soil resource supply at 5100 Hudson (PSP 26-1534), while several nearby residents voiced opposition during public comment.

Zoning Administrator Justin Daymon told commissioners that "the landscaping and screening plans are the only item being considered at tonight’s meeting, not the use," and that the commission’s authority is limited to the screening modification. The applicant described plans to use roughly 9.1 acres for material storage and 1.1 acres for parking and administrative space; the Zoning Ordinance allows the commission to grant waivers if full screening would provide little benefit or impose substantial non-economic hardship.

Commissioner Scott Sintkowski moved, supported by Grant Smith, to approve the requested modification to the landscaping and screening shown on the proposed site plan, subject to addressing staff, engineering and DPW comments before final site plan approval. The motion recorded three explicit findings: that meeting full landscaping requirements would impose substantial non‑economic hardship relative to screening benefits; that proposed outdoor storage would be effectively screened from rights‑of‑way and adjoining properties by a mix of existing and proposed landscaping, buildings and distance; and that the modification is conditional on the physical conditions remaining as shown on the plan. The motion carried unanimously by roll call (Ray, Sintkowski, Smith, Wall, Frasca, Lawson, Paulan — 7 yes).

Staff and the applicant noted constraints along the southern property line where regulated wetlands run the full length of the site. The retention/drainage basin on the submitted plan differs from earlier submittals and has not been constructed; staff said engineering calculations for the basin require clarification. Director Jeffrey Polkowski emphasized that the drive from Hudson Road is not owned by the applicant and that a recorded easement must be provided to staff before final site plan approval; Polkowski also reiterated that no construction or operation may begin until permits and a certificate of occupancy are obtained.

Public comment drew several residents who opposed the project and raised concerns including past alleged violations by the applicant, dead trees on the perimeter, unanswered questions about storage heights, and doubt that the applicant would comply with commission decisions. Resident Luanne Swain said she "doesn't believe that the applicant will abide by the decisions." Joseph Williams referenced a history of violations; no commissioner response that reversed or substantiated those claims occurred during the meeting.

Commissioners also met in a pre-meeting closed session to consult with township attorneys about trial or settlement strategy in pending litigation referenced as Bell Site Development, Inc. v. Charter Township of Waterford and the Charter Township of Waterford Planning Commission under MCL 15.268(e); that motion was moved by Matt Ray, supported by Art Frasca, and carried by roll call during the pre-meeting.

What happens next: the approval is expressly conditional. Final site plan approval will require the applicant to submit a recorded easement for the Hudson Road driveway if applicable, resolve engineering and DPW comments (including clarified drainage/retention basin calculations), and obtain all required permits and a certificate of occupancy before any operation may commence.