The Eastpointe Planning Commission voted to recommend that the city council rezone 17020 East 10 Mile Road from MU-1 (neighborhood mixed use) to LI (light industrial) to allow a proposed wireless communications facility to proceed to special land‑use and site‑plan review.

Commissioners said the property’s context — including existing industrial zoning to the east and the parcel’s small size and building form — supported consideration of light industrial zoning as an extension of the adjacent district. Kim Smith, the city’s zoning administrator, told the commission the parcel abuts an existing light industrial district and that the planning review letter dated Dec. 26 recommended evaluating consistency with the master plan, ordinance intent, street system, and public services. Smith said the parcel’s current building “is not a building conducive to retail” and that many potential light‑industrial uses would be limited by the lot’s small size and setback requirements.

Several commissioners acknowledged the site appears on the city’s future‑land‑use map as part of the Gratiot Corridor and as regional commercial, and some raised concern that rezoning could be inconsistent with that long‑range vision. Commissioner Sasek noted the master plan designates the corridor for enhanced streetscape and commercial uses, while another commissioner said the immediate site context and parcel size had led staff to assign MU‑1 zoning rather than regional commercial when the ordinance was drafted. Smith replied that the zoning ordinance was updated with guidance from the master plan and that the parcel’s existing context and parcel size influenced the MU‑1 designation.

Commissioners discussed technical limits on redevelopment if the parcel becomes LI: minimum lot size for LI is 10,000 square feet and a front setback of 25 feet, rear setback of 10 feet, and other standards that would constrain new construction. Smith said the parcel measures roughly 10,000 square feet and that redevelopment for many industrial uses would be difficult without reuse of the existing structure. Commissioners and staff also noted that the site previously hosted a communications facility and that a new tower would be positioned to meet setback and buffering standards and preserve on‑site parking.

A motion to recommend approval of the rezoning to city council carried on a roll call vote: Commissioners Moody, Sasek, Stokes, Naylor, Zielinski and Chairman DeHaan voted yes; Commissioner Bridal voted no. The motion’s stated findings included that the proposed wireless facility would serve nearby residential, commercial and industrial properties; that the rezoning would extend the neighboring zoning to the east; that buffering and use standards would prevent encroachment into residential areas and be further addressed at site‑plan review; and that the request did not conflict with goals and objectives identified in the city’s 2040 master plan as read at the meeting.

The commission’s recommendation does not itself authorize a tower; any wireless communication facility will be considered later as a special land use and through the site‑plan process, where setbacks, buffering and technical submittals will be reviewed. Smith said site‑plan and special‑use review would include detailed engineering, specifications, and demonstrations of compliance with the city’s wireless facility standards.