2026-10-12 - Board of Zoning Appeals

01:56Okay, Mr. Chairman.

02:03Okay.

02:04We will call to order the

02:07October 12th, 2026

02:10orders only appeals. Will you get a roll

02:12call, please?

02:14Board member Simon.

02:17Board member Watson will not be here.

02:20Board member Campbell.

02:23Board member Carr.

02:26Board member Johnson.

02:29Board member Bowman.

02:31Board member Parker.

02:33>> Present.

02:34>> Board member Osborne.

02:35>> Present.

02:36>> Chairperson Roberts.

02:37>> Here.

02:38>> You do not have a quorum.

02:39>> Agreed.

02:40>> We will recess until

02:43we achieve quorum.

03:16>> All phones disconnected.

03:20Updated the Zoom.

03:21Mic switch completely.

03:23I don't know how to do anything.

03:34>> Okay, Mr. Chairman.

03:37>> Once not on

03:40I told my friend

03:41to keep my phone on and they'll pick my

03:43phone.

03:43>> Yeah.

03:44>> They're moving around, can't find stuff.

03:59>> [clears throat]

04:01>> Sound hurts was good. It sounds like

04:02>> Okay, Mr. Chairman.

04:04>> Okay.

04:06We will resume our

04:09October 12th, 2026 meeting.

04:12I get a new rule roll call, please.

04:17Board member Sherman.

04:22Board member Watson will not be here.

04:25Board member Campbell.

04:27Board member Carr.

04:30Board member Johnson.

04:31>> Here.

04:37>> Board member Bowman.

04:39>> Present.

04:41>> Board member Parker.

04:42>> Present.

04:45>> Board member Osborn.

04:47>> Present.

04:48>> Chairperson Roberts.

04:49>> Here.

04:50>> You have a quorum.

04:51>> Okay.

04:53Are there uh any procedural matters?

04:56>> No procedural matters.

04:57>> All right. Can I get a motion to approve

05:00the minutes dated September 28th, 2026,

05:03please?

05:05>> Motion to approve the minutes.

05:07>> Second.

05:08>> Second.

05:09>> Chair.

05:09>> Yes.

05:10>> Before we approve the minutes, I believe

05:13it was

05:16the

05:20Let me go go back and find it.

05:23Case

05:252026-00055.

05:30It says that Mr. Roberts made a motion

05:32to grant dimensional variances.

05:35I believe that was myself with a second

05:37from member Bowman.

05:43You remember that, member Bowman?

05:46>> I do.

05:48>> Okay.

05:50Thank you.

05:51>> All right.

05:52>> All those in favor? Aye.

05:54>> Aye.

05:54>> Aye.

05:55>> Minutes are approved. Any

05:56communications, Director River?

06:00>> The next board training will be November

06:029th.

06:04>> They are not here.

06:09>> Okay. Any miscellaneous business?

06:11>> No miscellaneous business.

06:13>> Okay, what time do we need to be here?

06:16>> 9:09.

06:17>> Okay. We will recess until 9:15 when our

06:20first case is called.

06:24>> [laughter]

06:26>> You set expectations.

06:36>> [laughter]

06:47>> Okay, Mr. Chairman.

06:51Turn on my mic here. Board recognizes

06:54the presence of member Carr.

06:57And if Director Riveron, if you could

06:59please call the first case.

07:07>> Good morning, board members.

07:08>> Morning.

07:14>> And I think some people would say happy

07:16Indigenous Indigenous Peoples Day.

07:20>> It is that.

07:22>> Uh BZA case 2026-00054.

07:28City Council District number three.

07:31BZA petitioner is Atlas Consulting.

07:34The location is 1844

07:37East State Fair between Parker and Van

07:40Dyke in a B4 zone.

07:42General business district.

07:45Atlas Consulting appeals the decision of

07:47building safety

07:49and building safety engineering and

07:51environmental department.

07:54SLU 2026-00025

07:57decision date July 30th, 2026 effective

08:01date August 13th, 2026

08:042026 with denied establishment of a

08:08light duty service establishment in an

08:10existing 1,000

08:12546 sq ft building in a B4 zone, general

08:16business district. We will now hear from

08:19Inspector Pierrelouis. [clears throat]

08:20>> Thank you, Director. Good morning, board

08:21members.

08:22>> Morning.

08:22>> Morning.

08:23>> We are hearing this case today because

08:24the Board of Zoning Appeals shall hear

08:26and decide appeals from and review any

08:28order, requirement, decision, or

08:30determination that is made by an

08:32administrative official in the

08:33administration of the zoning ordinance,

08:35or any decision made by the Building and

08:36Safety Engineering Department involving

08:38conditional uses, regulated uses, or

08:40controlled uses, or any denial of a site

08:42plan by the Planning and Development

08:44Department. Hearing this case under

08:45Section 54-101 jurisdiction over appeals

08:48of administrative decisions and 53-281

08:51general public criteria. Hearing this

08:53case under legal description attached,

08:55our attorney will assess ownership. The

08:57BC's denial letter effective August

08:5913th, 2026 states the request is to

09:01establish a light duty vehicle service

09:03establishment in an existing 1,546

09:07sq ft building. The current legal

09:09non-conformity use of the

09:10above-referenced property is used auto

09:12sales.

09:13Under permit issued in August of 1998.

09:17Requested use to establish a light duty

09:19vehicle service establishment is

09:21permissible on a conditional basis in a

09:23B4 district. BC held a public hearing

09:25reconsidering the requested use on June

09:2716th, 2026. In addition to City of

09:30Detroit personnel appearing on behalf of

09:32BC and Planning and Development, the

09:34participants in the hearing included

09:37um the

09:39consultants Mr. Mike and Chris Seema. No

09:41one spoke in support or in opposition.

09:4313 letters

09:4513 form letters of support were

09:47submitted by email. Preliminary site

09:50plan submitted on May 7th was approved

09:52by BC on June 9th, 2026. A letter by

09:55playing development dated July 16th,

09:582026 recommending a conditional denial

10:00of the requested use. Based on the site

10:02plans and other information presented,

10:04BC's compliance with the following

10:06aspects of the requested use were

10:08addressed. Spacing under section

10:1050-12-127,

10:12retail service and commercial use is

10:14spacing. Uses of the same type shall be

10:16prevented from over concentration in a

10:18limited area to a more equitably

10:20disperse them throughout the city. Light

10:22duty vehicle service establishment shall

10:24be restricted to a minimum of 1,000

10:26radio feet from any other existing or

10:28approved vehicle service or repair

10:30establishment. Upon review, BC found the

10:33following permitted facilities within

10:351,000 feet of the subject site.

10:38One is a Citgo gas station 65 feet away

10:41at 1841 East State Fair. The other is a

10:44Marathon gas station at 1419 East Outer

10:47Drive, 130 feet away. The other is a

10:50light duty vehicle service facility at

10:521750 East State Fair, approximately 326

10:56feet away. Under section 50-14-7A,

11:00four, since the existing building is

11:02less than 3,000 square feet, the

11:04building was not and it was not erected

11:07prior to April 9th, 1998. There's no

11:12um additional parking required. Approved

11:14site plan provided 12 off-street parking

11:16spaces which meets the ordinance

11:17requirements. Due to the findings of the

11:19special land use application, the

11:21proposed use shall require a spacing

11:22variance from the BZA prior to issuance

11:25of a building permit. Upon careful

11:27consideration, BC was unable to make the

11:29required findings under section 53-281.

11:32The first being that BC was unable to

11:34make the required finding that the

11:35establishment, maintenance, location,

11:37and operation of the requested use will

11:39not be detrimental to or endanger the

11:41social, physical, environmental, or

11:43economic well-being of the surrounding

11:45neighborhoods or aggravate any

11:46pre-existing physical, social, or

11:48economic deterioration of surrounding

11:50neighborhoods. In note of making this

11:52finding, the applicant has worked to

11:53improve the site, but there is an

11:55overconcentration of all the related

11:57uses in the area. Tires were displayed

11:59outside the building at the time of the

12:00field inspection. Vehicles were also

12:02stored on site at the time of the field

12:04inspection. The proposed use does not

12:06align with the compatible mix of uses

12:09and businesses expressed in the master

12:11plan policies that are not abrasive to

12:13the surrounding residential uses.

12:15Number two, BC is unable to make the

12:17required finding that the requested use

12:19will not be injurious to the use and

12:21enjoyment of other properties in the

12:22immediate vicinity for the purposes

12:24permitted. Planning and Development

12:26stated that the land use designation of

12:28neighborhood commercial is generally

12:29consistent with the master plan. The

12:31master plan of policies and goals do not

12:33support the concentration of land uses

12:35that have the potential to create blight

12:37and impact surrounding residential land

12:39uses. BC's environmental reported that

12:42there was a site environmental

12:44contamination at the Citgo gas station

12:46located directly across the street.

12:49A phase one environmental site

12:51assessment was strongly recommended. The

12:53applicant stated that they would inform

12:54the property owner.

12:57Number three, BC is unable to make the

12:59required finding that the requested use

13:01will in all aspects

13:03conform to the applicable use

13:04regulations, dimensional requirements,

13:06general development standards, and any

13:08other applicable requirements of the

13:10Detroit zoning ordinance subject to any

13:11necessary variances or waivers as may be

13:14provided by the BZA. As previously

13:16noted, the required use is within 1,000

13:18radio feet of two gas stations and one

13:20vehicle repair facility, thus shall

13:22require a waiver from the BZA. As the

13:24requested use is not in accordance with

13:27all applicable use regulation and other

13:28zone requirements, it could create

13:30disruption for adjacent businesses and

13:32residences within the neighborhood. The

13:34site plan has deficient right-of-way and

13:36residential screening along the alley,

13:38deficient hand handicap access, aisle

13:41width, deficient fencing material, and

13:43deficient pedestrian walkway width.

13:46BCSD is unable to make the required

13:48findings that the requested use will

13:49improve will involve activities,

13:51processes, materials, equipment, or

13:53conditions of operation that will be

13:56detrimental to the physical environment

13:57or to public health and general welfare

14:00by reason of excessive production of

14:01noise, smoke, fume, glares, or odors.

14:04The requested use could create a highly

14:06intensive auto-related environment along

14:08East State Fair, which would attract a

14:10number of repair vehicles to the

14:12neighborhood. Also, at the time of

14:14inspection, there were unregistered and

14:16unlicensed vehicles parked at the site.

14:17For these reasons, the requested use

14:19could inadvertently create excessive

14:21noise, traffic congestion, and

14:23disruption to the adjoining residential

14:24neighborhood. The existing business is

14:26located directly across the street

14:29from the Citgo gas station. Again, they

14:31have some type of environmental

14:32contamination. For those reasons, the

14:35application for the SLU was denied.

14:39Again, this property is located on East

14:41State Fair at the corner of State Fair

14:43and Glenda.

14:57This is a front view of the subject

14:59property, the yellow building encased

15:01around the has fencing completely around

15:03the site.

15:10A view of

15:12opposite of the subject property, there

15:13is a carryout restaurant on the opposite

15:15side of Glenda.

15:17Block opposite, there's a gas station.

15:20Gas station noted in the BC's hearing.

15:23Front view of the subject property.

15:29View looking down East State Fair,

15:30looking to the west, there's an

15:31apartment building.

15:34Unoccupied.

15:35View looking down State Fair, looking to

15:37the east, you'll see the two gas

15:38stations.

15:40This is interior view of the frontage of

15:42the subject property.

15:47View of this frontage of the subject

15:49property looking towards Dequindre.

15:53Block opposite, the Citgo gas station.

15:59Frontage of the subject property looking

16:00to the east.

16:06On the corner of Dequindre and East

16:08State Fair.

16:12A view looking down the frontage of the

16:13property looking back to the west.

16:18Interior view of the subject property.

16:24A view looking down the um east side of

16:26the property looking to the south.

16:29Block opposite again, there's a carryout

16:31restaurant.

16:35View looking down the south the east

16:38side of the property looking to the

16:39south down Dequindre.

16:42Interior view of the subject property.

16:54The view looking down Dequindre looking

16:56towards the residential residential

16:57homes on Dequindre.

17:00View of

17:01the view of the subject property, alley

17:02behind the building looking to the west.

17:05And that concludes the vision, Mr.

17:06Chairman, again. This is an appeal

17:09that BC denied the establishment of a

17:12light duty vehicle service

17:13establishment.

17:17>> And

17:18Pierfori, are we just

17:20are we just uh

17:21uh

17:23looking at the spacing requirement or

17:24are we doing

17:25>> They had a hearing at Building and

17:26Safety. Building and Safety cited

17:28spacing in their decision, but they

17:30didn't approve it. Had they approved it,

17:32it would have had to come to us for

17:33spacing, but they didn't approve the

17:35use.

17:36>> So, we need to work on the the 15

17:37questions in 53-281.

17:40>> Yeah.

17:40>> Okay, thank you.

17:46All right, folks, if we could get your

17:49uh are you the only two speaking

17:51uh today?

17:52Okay, if

17:56>> If this give me permission.

17:58>> Okay, whoever's whoever's speaking, if

18:00you could come up to the microphone, we

18:02need everybody's name and address, and

18:05then the inspector will swear you uh all

18:07in together.

18:08>> Erma Moss-Bryant

18:1023242 Sagebrush, Novi, Michigan.

18:16>> Mike Sema

18:18Atlas Consulting

18:212093

18:23Burgundy Street, West Bloomfield.

18:28>> Omar Balwi

18:2917916 Arlington, Detroit, 48212.

18:34>> Will you all raise your right hands,

18:35please?

18:37You affirm your testimony before the

18:38board is true?

18:40Thank you.

18:50>> Okay.

18:52Uh what brings you in today?

18:55>> Standing.

18:56>> Oh, standing. Jeez, I always forget

18:58standing, and I don't know why.

19:00I'm going to I'm going to put it in my

19:01notes, I swear.

19:03So,

19:05the first thing we needed need to do is

19:06establish standing uh to make sure that

19:09you have the ability to uh represent the

19:11property, and uh Attorney Savage is

19:14going to take care of that for us.

19:16>> Good morning.

19:17>> Good morning.

19:18>> Erica Savage on behalf of the city of

19:20Detroit Law Department. These questions

19:22are designed to assess your standing

19:24under section 50-3-3 of the city of

19:27Detroit zoning ordinance. Any party who

19:29petitions the board must possess

19:32sufficient standing, which means you

19:33either have a legal interest in the

19:35property or you're authorized by the

19:37property owner to appear today on their

19:39behalf.

19:40And doing a search of the public records

19:43for the property referred to as 1844

19:47East State Fair,

19:48we obtained a warranty deed recorded on

19:51July 2nd, 2002

19:54at Liber 36505, page 250. And that deed

19:58reflects the owner as

20:01Fara-

20:03Hermiz.

20:03>> Hermiz.

20:04>> Okay. And um

20:07in the file we have a lease between Mr.

20:10Hermiz

20:12and Abdullah

20:14Fawaz.

20:16Um

20:17and that lease appears to authorize um

20:21zoning and land use activity at the

20:24city, which is satisfactory. I just have

20:27one question.

20:30Um it's just Abdullah who signed the

20:33lease. So, the other name

20:36Amar No, wait. There's two different

20:39names. One is Amar

20:41Fawaz and one is Abdullah Durum. Is that

20:43right? Yeah. They're both here today?

20:46Okay, so

20:48um you all are the two that are

20:50proposing who are representing here

20:52today with Mr. Seema. And but just one

20:55of you signed the lease.

20:58Okay. But the project moves forward and

21:00the capacity here moves forward with the

21:02full authority of both of you.

21:05Well, he's not up here, but he's here,

21:07so I can take that as he's in support of

21:10it as well.

21:11Um okay, well

21:14Let me make sure I got all my

21:17bases covered here.

21:19I do. And then other than Atlas

21:21Consulting and the people here, would

21:23anybody else be authorized to speak on

21:26your behalf, Mr. Bowlin?

21:28>> I am.

21:30Irma Moss Bryant.

21:31>> Oh.

21:32>> The consultant

21:32>> I didn't know Miss Irma. Okay. All

21:34right. Other than the people present

21:36here today, would there be anyone else

21:38authorized to speak on behalf of the

21:39project with the city?

21:41>> Yes. In case it may be my son,

21:44Christopher.

21:45>> Chris Sima.

21:46>> Yes.

21:46>> Okay.

21:47All right. So, based on the statements

21:49placed on the record, I'm satisfied with

21:51standing to proceed.

21:54Mr. Chair.

21:56>> Okay.

21:57Uh I think we need to swear Chris Sima

21:59in. He's on Zoom.

22:01>> He's on the He's on Zoom.

22:03>> Pardon me?

22:09Would you put your name and address on

22:11the record, Chris? And then the

22:12inspector will swear you in.

22:14>> Good morning. Uh Chris Sima with Atlas

22:17Consulting, 400 Monroe, Detroit,

22:20Michigan 48226.

22:23>> Do you affirm your testimony before the

22:24board today is the truth?

22:25>> Yes, ma'am.

22:26>> Thank you.

22:28>> Thank you.

22:28>> Okay.

22:29Now, what brings you in?

22:32>> Okay. Good morning.

22:34>> Morning.

22:35>> Um board members,

22:37city staff, and members of the public.

22:40Uh we're here

22:42uh

22:44We are before you today

22:46to appeal the BZA's denial of our

22:50special land use application at 1844

22:53East State Fair Avenue,

22:56uh where we seek to establish a light

22:58duty vehicle service establishment

23:01specializing in

23:03tire installation and repair.

23:06We respectfully ask the board to reverse

23:09the department's denial and grant the

23:11necessary variances and waivers and

23:14return this long vacant property to

23:17productive use.

23:19For over five years, this commercial

23:21building has said vacant

23:23in a neighborhood that already contains

23:26way too many vacant

23:28and blighted buildings including two

23:31vacant apartment buildings directly to

23:33the west and many commercial properties

23:36up and down State Fair and Dequindre.

23:39Which is sadly the true over

23:42concentration of the neighborhood.

23:45It It's existing approved legal use is

23:50auto sales.

23:51This use is a permitted

23:54uh continual outdoor vehicle storage and

23:57high number of vehicles on the lot.

24:00By converting this site to a lesser

24:03light duty service, we are replacing

24:06that used car lot with a strictly indoor

24:11less intensive use.

24:14On July Excuse me, on June 9th, BC's

24:17issued an official conditional

24:20site plan approval for this project

24:23confirming we provide enough off-street

24:26parking sites. However, the July 30th

24:30denial mentioned

24:31>> [snorts]

24:31>> site plan deficiencies,

24:34spacing restrictions, and concerns over

24:37adjacent property contamination.

24:39We are here today to directly

24:42to directly resolve each of these

24:44points.

24:47Spacing.

24:49BC's noted three

24:51auto related facilities within 1,000 ft.

24:55Two are gas stations, Sitgo across the

24:58street and Marathon a Marathon station,

25:01Kinney Corner on Outer Drive.

25:05Which serves fueling needs rather than

25:08vehicle service.

25:10The single vehicle service facility

25:12listed at 1750 East State Fair has sat

25:16vacant and boarded up for years.

25:19Our proposed use will not create a

25:22harmful overconcentration or duplicate

25:26active services.

25:28It will reactivate a dead

25:31com- uh commercial corridor.

25:35Number two, when I'm referring to the

25:37landscaping and the fencing variance.

25:41For landscaping, we have provided 60% of

25:44the required buffering

25:46on our site plan.

25:48And we request a variance for the

25:50remaining

25:52remainder because removing good asphalt

25:57uh to hit 100% imposes an unreasonable

26:01financial hardship. If the board

26:04insists on 100% compliance, though,

26:08we are fully prepared to concede

26:11that

26:13variance and install the full

26:14landscaping.

26:16However, retaining our existing

26:19perimeter security fence and walls is

26:22vitally important for site for site

26:26security uh safety as removing them

26:29would immediately invite theft,

26:33tres- trespassing,

26:35and illegal dumping.

26:37And therefore, we request fencing

26:39variance to maintain the existing fence

26:43and wall screening as is presently as it

26:46presently is.

26:48Number three,

26:51phase one environmental review.

26:54The environmental concerns raised in the

26:57record stems from

26:59off-site historical contamination at the

27:02Citgo station across the street, not

27:05from our parcel.

27:08While we

27:10While we should not be unfairly burdened

27:13by a neighbor's site history,

27:16we commit on the record today to provide

27:19a phase one environmental site

27:21assessment to BC's environmental

27:24department as a condition of our

27:26building's permit

27:28should you

27:30reverse

27:31this unfair denial today.

27:35And number four,

27:37site operations and clean- cleanliness.

27:41Regarding notes taken during the initial

27:45field visit,

27:46any unlicensed vehicles or staged items

27:50on the site have been removed.

27:52>> It's a lot of parking.

27:53>> You can see that from the pictures. All

27:55future tire services and operations will

27:59occur 100% in the enclosed building.

28:04There are no outdoor

28:07scrap tire storage, no outdoor displays,

28:10and no external overnight vehicle

28:14storage with this use.

28:17Furthermore,

28:19I just want to add that tires

28:22to vehicles

28:27Tires are to vehicles

28:29what shoes are to feet.

28:32Not every resident in our neighborhood

28:35can afford brand new tires off the rack.

28:39In Detroit, the automotive capital of

28:42the world and the Motor City,

28:44where we're dep-

28:46pend- uh we're dependable uh public

28:49transit is limited

28:54reliable and affordable personal

28:56vehicles are essential

28:59to keep our residents in our community

29:03connected to their jobs, schools and

29:06families.

29:09The denial suggests

29:11that establishing this business could be

29:13injurious to the neighborhood.

29:16We submit that allowing 1844 East Stay

29:20Fair to remain closed

29:23vacant

29:25blighted and unproductive

29:27is what truly injures this corridor.

29:33Reversing this denial brings investment,

29:36creates local jobs, restores a vacant

29:39storefront by opening a new

29:43business and delivering an essential

29:46affordable service to Detroit drivers.

29:50Especially in today's

29:53expensive economy.

29:56We respectfully ask for your support of

30:00a small business to reverse the denial

30:04and grant the requested waivers and

30:06variances.

30:07Thank you, board.

30:10>> All right, any questions from the board?

30:13And uh

30:15the board chair recognizes member

30:17Sherman.

30:21Any questions? Um

30:24what was what was the building

30:25originally used for?

30:27>> Used car auto. That's the legal use.

30:29>> Okay, and how long has it been closed?

30:32>> Over 5 years.

30:35>> Member Rossmann.

30:37You said the building's been closed over

30:395 years. Who

30:41Who painted it? I drove by yesterday and

30:45it looks nice. Looks like it's in

30:47operation right now.

30:49And

30:50when I used the app to guide me to the

30:54building, there were pictures of

30:57people working in front of the building.

31:00>> All these are

31:02Excuse me, I'm sorry for interrupting.

31:05Um all they've done is clean up the

31:07place so that, you know, they can

31:09operate once they get their approval.

31:14>> Who was there?

31:15>> It was

31:16you know, items there, tire, all kind of

31:19stuff was there. They cleaned up the

31:21place.

31:22>> No, it wasn't.

31:23>> And they painted.

31:24>> It wasn't like there were

31:27unused tires.

31:29It looks the when I so

31:32to get to these places, I use Google

31:35to look them up.

31:36And the site picture

31:38that I guess the uh

31:42Google

31:43driver took of the front of the

31:45building, it looked like it showed

31:47people working

31:50in front of the building with a stack of

31:52tires, rims,

31:55possibly a vehicle on

31:56>> It was all part of their clean up, I

31:58assume. You know, cuz I'm not I wasn't

32:01there, but I assume it was part of their

32:02clean up. They had to get things cleaned

32:05up and move things out and you know, as

32:07they worked they had to get things out

32:09the way so they could paint and you

32:10know, clean the inside and things of

32:12that nature, but that is probably what

32:14you saw,

32:15them working on getting the building

32:17prepared.

32:19>> Oh, okay.

32:20>> And they are aware they're well aware

32:23that they're not going to be

32:25doing that outside. Their activity they

32:28are very aware and have committed to

32:31saying that they will work inside.

32:36>> Are they building a new building?

32:38>> What did you say, sir?

32:40>> Are they uh constructing a new building?

32:42>> No.

32:43>> No. Okay, so it's just the

32:46the existing 1546

32:49>> Yes.

32:49>> Riverside building.

32:51You think that

32:52which is old?

32:58>> I'm looking at it now.

33:01And I guess maybe I should have taken a

33:03picture of it when I drove past, but I

33:05swear it was the same yellow building,

33:07New Brothers Tire Shop, and there is a

33:09guy

33:11with a Cadillac on a jack.

33:16>> What day was this?

33:18>> I went past No, I'm saying the the

33:19Google picture.

33:21>> What day was the Google picture taken?

33:23>> This Oh, I don't know, but

33:25This the Google picture is what I used

33:27to get to the tire shop. When I got to

33:30the tire shop yesterday,

33:32nobody was there. Site was clean.

33:35It says 7-day operation, but it looked

33:37like it was closed, and there was It

33:39looked totally

33:40There was no business in front, but I'm

33:41saying the Google picture shows

33:44business, and you're saying it has been

33:45closed for 5 years.

33:47>> The Yes, that site has been closed for 5

33:50years. What happened is when they had

33:52the DC hearing,

33:55um

33:56that's Is that when they

33:58realized that they couldn't operate.

34:00So, they've been closed all that time.

34:02>> Look at the lease agreement

34:044 months ago.

34:05>> What did you want to say?

34:07>> They have a lease agreement now.

34:12>> I'm saying 5 years.

34:15>> And here, your your reference and

34:16pictures that will take you 4 or 5

34:18months.

34:19>> Okay.

34:20>> Okay, and if you're saying that they're

34:22All right.

34:24Be careful.

34:25>> Okay.

34:25>> Okay, anything.

34:26>> Okay.

34:29Oh, okay. How long have you owned this

34:31property, till the game?

34:32>> Excuse me,

34:33or remember he was clarifying that when

34:37he was working on fixing up the place,

34:40people would come say they needed help

34:42thinking that they were open. So, there

34:44were people that was there that you

34:47know, that didn't work there that came

34:49to through thinking they were open.

34:53>> How long have you owned the property?

34:56>> 30

34:57>> How long

34:58have you owned the property?

35:00>> Oh, the owner

35:02the owner I think uh

35:04It was uh

35:06>> I can I can look at the lease. How long

35:09When did you sign the lease?

35:11>> That he owned the

35:14>> November of 2025.

35:17>> November 2025.

35:20>> That was when the lease was signed.

35:23>> November 24th, 2025.

35:27>> He said almost a year.

35:29>> That sounds about right.

35:31>> So, you're not doing any operations

35:33currently, right? You're closed.

35:34>> No, they're closed.

35:38>> Well, I think we'll have to

35:40probably take it take it at their your

35:42word for it. There's a

35:51>> Yes.

35:51>> Go ahead.

35:55>> It's um All right, good morning. Hi,

35:57good morning. My uh member Clark.

35:59Is there any any work happening at the

36:02site right now because when I looked at

36:04the website, just the website for the

36:06address, the 7 days

36:10and um open now.

36:147:00 to 7:00 p.m. 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

36:17>> a website?

36:23>> He said he's got a website, but he said

36:25he's waiting for the license.

36:27>> Say it again.

36:28>> He said he has a website, but he's

36:30waiting for the license. He's setting

36:31that up so that once he is open, he will

36:34be able to

36:35bring business in, but he says they're

36:37not open now.

36:38>> Okay, thank you.

36:39>> You're welcome.

36:41>> Any other questions for the petitioner?

36:42Remember Bowman?

36:45>> First I want to thank you for speaking

36:47very clearly into the mic. I often have

36:49trouble hearing people.

36:51>> You're welcome.

36:52>> But yeah, you've been very clear. Um

36:55>> [clears throat]

36:55>> Yeah, I just wanted to first of all just

36:56comment that I'm looking also and I

36:59looked at maps. I have mine it says it's

37:01from October 2011 and I'm looking at a

37:03used car lot full of cars. So which

37:06seems to fit the facts, but I think we

37:09just we get different images when we

37:11look at these apps and I don't know if

37:12we can really count on them as being

37:16um timely or accurate as far as the time

37:19goes.

37:20Um

37:22So I guess I'm just want to be clear. So

37:24the things you were telling us today

37:26um

37:28not actually I don't know if you were

37:29representing the client at the hearing

37:32where the client was denied or not.

37:34>> No, I wasn't there. Mr. Seaman was

37:36there.

37:36>> Okay, do you know if unless Mr. Seaman

37:39wants to comment, were the facts that

37:41you were presenting to us today, were

37:43those presented at the hearing?

37:46>> No.

37:47No, they weren't.

37:49>> Okay, I get I'm interested in knowing

37:51specifically which of the facts then

37:54were presented at the hearing to

37:56distinguish that from anything new

37:58because we're really going on that with

38:00an appeal.

38:02>> Okay, basically basically

38:04when

38:05they went to the hearing

38:08those the information that they had on

38:10the on site

38:12visuals at that time was accurate at

38:14that time.

38:16So when they made that decision, it was

38:18based on the facts and what was

38:19happening at that time.

38:21The client realized that they could not

38:25operate.

38:26They need to clean up and that's what

38:29they've worked on.

38:33Yeah, and so basically we're asking for,

38:36you know, the variances that he's going

38:38to need so he can operate. There were

38:40certain variances that were necessary

38:42such as the fencing.

38:44We were asking for a very a waiver for

38:46the landscaping, but at the time of the

38:50BC's hearing, that information was

38:53accurate what they put in.

38:56You know.

38:57The what they saw at that time. It was

39:00not cleaned up at that time.

39:02>> And at the time was it suggested that

39:05this is purely a business for tire

39:08service that there is not

39:10for instance oil changes and

39:12>> Nothing else. Tire service.

39:14worked on.

39:16>> Tire service only.

39:17>> Tire service only.

39:19>> Okay, thank you.

39:20>> Thank you.

39:22>> Uh,

39:23any other question?

39:24Remember Parker.

39:28John from

39:29>> John.

39:31There was a

39:39There was a phase one environmental site

39:41assessment recommended. Has that been

39:43started?

39:46>> Repeat please. I didn't hear you.

39:48>> It says there was a phase one

39:50environmental site assessment that was

39:51strongly recommended. Has that been

39:53started?

39:54>> No. We We asked

39:57We asked that uh

40:02>> If If I may.

40:03>> Yes.

40:05>> Uh, yes. Thank you.

40:08We did reach out to an environmental

40:09company. They did provide a proposal for

40:13it. The

40:15Uh, are prepared to execute that

40:17proposal right away, uh, should a

40:19reversal happen today. Uh, and so we are

40:23ready to do that ASAP.

40:25Even though it's, uh, regarding this

40:27contamination at the gas station on the

40:31other side of State Fair.

40:34>> Thank you.

40:37>> So,

40:38uh, we can

40:41if

40:42at some point the board decides to

40:44reverse the decision, we can make that a

40:46condition

40:47uh, of the approval.

40:50Um, okay. Any other questions for the

40:53petitioner?

40:54All right. Seeing none, if you want to

40:56go ahead and step back, we're going to

40:57hear from the law department now and,

40:59uh,

41:00other, uh, city departments.

41:07>> Good morning.

41:08>> Attorney Greenwood, how are you today?

41:09>> I'm well, how are you?

41:11>> Good, thanks.

41:11>> I'm, uh, Sky Greenwood. I'm appearing on

41:13behalf of B Seed. Uh, before I start, I

41:16just want to

41:17apologize to this body and to the folks

41:20here. I was I was a little bit late and,

41:22uh, that reflects poorly and it is

41:24disrespectful of your time. So, I do

41:25want to say that I apologize for that

41:27and,

41:28um, despite my long commute, I'm going

41:29to make every effort to be here on time.

41:31So, um, I just want to get that out of

41:33the way.

41:33>> Okay.

41:34>> Um,

41:36so, uh, we're here on, uh, defending

41:38the, um, the decision that was made by B

41:41Seed.

41:42Um, BZA case 2026-00-054.

41:46Um, this is for light duty vehicle

41:47service establishment, uh, proposed to

41:50be located at, uh, 1844 East State Fair

41:53Avenue.

41:54Um,

41:56you guys have already heard from, um,

41:58the applicants and their

42:00representatives. Um,

42:02I I think I want to start out by just

42:04making note again of reminding, uh, you

42:06guys of the standard of appeal. And

42:08that's whether or not B Seed made a

42:11reasonable decision uh, when they

42:13decided to deny the special land use

42:16application. It's not

42:18what you would do yourself if you were

42:20in their shoes at that time, but the

42:23decision before you is whether or not

42:24their decision at the time was

42:26reasonable.

42:27So, I would ask you to try to keep that

42:29in mind when we get into the weeds here

42:31cuz

42:33what we have is a

42:35a proposed use of the property that is

42:38what boils down to is it's within 1,000

42:40ft of three different

42:43intensive auto use

42:45uses in the area.

42:47If the

42:48applicant's

42:50appeal was granted today, what you would

42:52wind up with is

42:54a corner with three of the four edges of

42:57that corner being taken up by

43:00an automotive related

43:02use. You've got two two gas stations,

43:05one across the street, the other kitty

43:06corner,

43:07and you've got another light duty

43:08vehicle service establishment that is

43:11326 ft away. That's a lot

43:14of automotive uses in a pretty small

43:17area that that you've already heard is

43:20is suffering from vacant properties and

43:23blighted properties. And it sounds like

43:26the applicant's argument is boiled down

43:28boiling down to

43:30it's better than nothing.

43:32And I would argue to you that this

43:35neighborhood deserves better. You know,

43:38just adding yet another

43:41vehicle use, you know, to this area is

43:43not going to help that area. The city's

43:45master plan talks about bringing in and

43:48trying to attract

43:50small businesses, you know, that will

43:52actually serve the community.

43:54This is a step in the wrong direction.

43:57And

43:58and there's a reason why there's a

44:00moratorium on

44:02and an effort to space these things out

44:04is because they they have deleterious

44:06effect on the area. Um, so

44:09you you if you do wind up with granting

44:11the appeal here, you are going to have

44:13to come back and and hear the request

44:15for locational variance. And that is a

44:17steep hill to climb again because these

44:20are not compatible with the areas. It

44:22will set the neighborhood back. Um, and

44:25you know, so that was what BC just made

44:27its decision based on

44:29um

44:30because of that one issue, they were

44:32they failed to make four out of the 13

44:34required findings. Um, and just for your

44:37record, I'll read that out to you now

44:38just you guys have it before you and we

44:40can circle back if you'd like to discuss

44:41any of them.

44:42But, um

44:45uh

44:46based on mostly on the the the spacing

44:49issue, but I think you've also heard

44:51that the property's not in great shape

44:52and um, there were some spacing and uh

44:56screening issues that that also would

44:57need to be resolved, but mostly based on

44:59the the spacing requirements, BC um

45:03reasonably determined that the property

45:05would fail to meet uh decision criteria

45:081, 2, 10, and 13. Uh, number one is that

45:12the property would not be

45:14detrimental to or endanger the social,

45:17physical, environmental, or economic

45:18well-being of the surrounding

45:20neighborhoods or aggravate any existing

45:22physical, social, or economic

45:24deterioration of the neighborhood.

45:26Uh, decision criteria two that BC was

45:29unable to make is that the proposed use

45:31would not be injurious to use and

45:33enjoyment of other property in the

45:35immediate vicinity.

45:37Decision criteria 10, which BC was also

45:39unable to make, was that the proposed

45:41use would conform to the applicable use

45:44regulations, dimensional requirements,

45:46and general development standards. You

45:48know, that's again the the need for a

45:49locational variance, which um, is pretty

45:52good evidence that this is a an

45:53incompatible use for the area.

45:56Um, and lastly, BC was unable to make

45:59decision criteria 13,

46:01which is that the proposed use will not

46:02be detrimental to the physical

46:04environment or public health and

46:06welfare.

46:07Um so let me pause there and

46:09see if you have any questions.

46:10>> Yeah, can you put a little bit more meat

46:12to the bone on those four

46:14>> Sure.

46:14>> items, please.

46:15>> Absolutely. So,

46:17decision criteria one is that the

46:19proposed use will not be detrimental to

46:21or endanger the social, physical,

46:23environmental, or economic well-being of

46:25the area or aggravate any existing

46:28physical, social, or economic

46:30deterioration.

46:31Um

46:32you know, we do this is this is a

46:34troubled area, you know,

46:35we heard the applicants

46:38representatives, you know, acknowledging

46:39that they're vacant and blighted

46:41properties.

46:42Um we've got a gas station across the

46:44street and another one at

46:46kitty corner from the from this

46:48location. Um

46:51adding another intensive automotive use

46:54to the area is going to push the

46:58neighborhood, you know, in the same in

47:00the direction that it already is. I know

47:01it's vacant. I know that, um you know,

47:04the the property itself, you know, could

47:06use something happening there,

47:08um but because

47:10because it's so close to all these other

47:12automotive uses,

47:14um they reasonably decided that this

47:16would be would be detrimental to the

47:17area

47:19by adding it

47:20you know, by just

47:22adding yet another car-related use to

47:23the space.

47:25Um

47:26you know, they've talked about how the

47:28work will get done inside, but that's

47:30still a lot of traffic to the area.

47:33Um and so if you're a resident in the

47:34area, I mean, you go out to that corner,

47:36you look all around you, all you're

47:38going to see is car stuff.

47:40Um you know, that's not an attractive

47:41use, that's not a a family-friendly use,

47:44um and it's it it goes in the opposite

47:48direction of what city council is

47:50envisioning for the city of Detroit. I

47:52mean, there's a reason why there are

47:54these spacing requirements in the code,

47:57Um, and

47:58uh to just you know, to ignore that and

48:00set it aside and continue to, you know,

48:03load up these areas that are already

48:05suffering with the same kind of use is

48:06just not uh

48:08it's not good for the neighborhood.

48:10Um

48:11decision criteria number two was that

48:13the proposed use will not be injurious

48:14to the use and enjoyment of other

48:16property in the immediate vicinity. Um,

48:19it's it's essentially the same argument,

48:21but these are people who live in the

48:22area, who work in the area, um you know,

48:25who the master plan envisions

48:28um eventually getting to see different

48:30types of businesses that will diversify

48:33and enrich their experience of living in

48:35the city here, um and just adding, you

48:38know, just yet another automotive

48:40related use, um you know, to this area

48:43that already has a lot of them um

48:45is is going to be injurious to their

48:48enjoyment of their property.

48:50Um decision criteria number 10

48:52um is that the proposed use will uh

48:55conform to the applicable use

48:56regulations. Um you know, in addition to

48:59the screening requirements where which

49:01were noted as conditions in the site

49:02plan, um I do come back to the spacing

49:05requirements um because those are really

49:07important. You would need one locational

49:09variance to um

49:12you need a locational variance if you

49:14were within a thousand feet of just one

49:15of these uses. In this case, there's

49:17three other uses in the area, so that's

49:19three so that's essentially uh three

49:22times the need for locational variance

49:24that you'd be looking at. Um so it was

49:26reasonable for BC to decide that that

49:29was too steep of a hill to climb.

49:31Um and decision criteria 13 is that the

49:34will not be detrimental to the physical

49:36environment or public health and

49:37welfare.

49:38Um

49:40you're just going to be attracting a lot

49:41more cars and business, you know,

49:43automotive type uh uses to this area.

49:46The area will um you know, it's

49:48saturated with them, and so it's it's

49:51not going to be good for the uh

49:52for the surrounding area and and it was

49:55reasonable for BC to to decide that it

49:57would be detrimental to the to the

49:58surrounding area.

50:00>> Okay. Um

50:01so, a lot of what you talked about uh

50:05you know, your reference to neighborhood

50:06and whatnot.

50:08Um

50:09just so you know, this board's received

50:1127 letters in support and zero uh

50:14letters that I'm aware of uh in

50:16opposition

50:17uh to the project. So, I just want to

50:19just want to throw that out there that

50:21there's at least a portion of the the

50:23neighborhood that wants to see this

50:24business uh business there.

50:27>> Uh

50:27um we acknowledge that there were uh a

50:30lot of letters received. Um they were uh

50:33at least the ones that were submitted

50:35with our letter, they appeared all be

50:36form letters saying that they preferred

50:39something to nothing. Um

50:41and I I understand that sentiment. I

50:43think that that the neighborhood

50:45deserves something. Um but we but BC

50:49um essentially believe that they could

50:51do better than than what's been proposed

50:53here.

50:55>> Okay.

50:56Any uh

50:58any other um Member Bowman?

51:01>> Hi. Um and I had a couple questions. Um

51:05so, the the first um thing I'm wondering

51:08is I keep hearing the words another

51:10another another.

51:12Um how many um tire repair shops are or

51:16where is the nearest

51:17tire repair shop to this intersection?

51:20How far away is it?

51:21>> I [clears throat] I think you're asking

51:22specifically about used tires. There's

51:24uh there's one other light-duty vehicle

51:26service establishment that's 326 ft

51:29away. The other two

51:31um

51:32locations within 1,000 ft are both gas

51:34stations. And according to the city

51:37code, there's an appendix that defines

51:39the more general use categories. Gas

51:41stations are uh do qualify as um

51:46vehicle Let me just find the exact

51:50But gas stations do qualify as a vehicle

51:52repair and service use. So, if you're

51:54within 1,000 ft of that and you propose

51:56to put a light if you're within 1,000 ft

51:58of a gas station and you propose to put

52:00in a light duty vehicle service

52:01establishment, you do need a variance.

52:04>> Is that light duty vehicle establishment

52:08that's 300 ft away, do they service

52:11tires?

52:13>> I'm

52:14going to turn to the BC zoning inspector

52:16to see if he has that information.

52:24>> Hi there, inspector Connor Pierce here,

52:25BC zoning.

52:27I'm not aware of the specific services

52:29that are provided by that

52:31facility that the that we're referring

52:33to.

52:34Per the ordinance,

52:36an oil change facility, a tire change

52:38facility, all those are categorized into

52:40that same use, light duty vehicle

52:41service establishment. So, we we don't

52:44distinguish between those for with

52:47regards to permitting purposes.

52:52>> Yes.

52:58Okay, so

52:59where is the nearest facility that you

53:02know does tires?

53:07>> Off the top of my head, I I don't think

53:09that that information is in there.

53:11>> Also, at the be at the hearing where the

53:13denial took place, was there community

53:16pushback and if so, was it significant

53:20relative to the number of people

53:22supporting this project?

53:24>> I watched the video and the only people

53:26that were spoke were speaking on behalf

53:28of the applicant.

53:31The

53:32letters were received at the morning of

53:34the hearing, so BC did have the those

53:37form letters available to them.

53:39Um,

53:42Let me just verify that, though.

53:53>> Yeah, I think I believe that's accurate

53:54that no members of the public actually

53:56spoke. It was just those form letters

53:57that they all signed and and submitted

53:59uh beforehand.

54:01>> Thank you.

54:05>> There's questions for the attorney.

54:06Member Asberg.

54:07>> Question about those form letters.

54:09Can you speak to when the public hearing

54:11was held and what date those form

54:13letters were dated?

54:16>> The hearing was on July

54:191st.

54:20Um and I believe those letters were

54:23received the morning of

54:25um because they were I remember seeing

54:27that they were acknowledged that

54:28morning. Um so I believe they came in

54:30the same day.

54:32>> They're

54:33all from my dating.

54:35Dated uh towards the end of June.

54:37Looking at them right now.

54:39They uh

54:41Most of them are June 30th of 2026.

54:47>> All right, my mic wasn't on. Uh looking

54:49at the form letters, uh it looks like

54:51most of them were signed

54:53uh

54:55around June 30th of 2026.

54:58The day before.

55:00>> [snorts]

55:01>> Yep.

55:02>> Yes.

55:06>> Yeah, I tend to look at those letters

55:09and think that they were choosing

55:11between a lot that was vacant for 5

55:13years and anything else.

55:18>> Also,

55:21attorney, can you speak to

55:24why is it relevant that the Sitgo across

55:27the street has an environmental issue

55:30when that's not this property?

55:34>> That means that the area more generally

55:37is suffering from contamination.

55:39Um that tends to migrate. It's certainly

55:41not the fault of the tenant who's only

55:44been there for about a year. Um but

55:47depending on the operations,

55:49um you know, that's an area that's

55:51contaminated and it could be further

55:53contaminated. Um so it's absolutely a

55:56data point, but I wouldn't say it's it

55:58was the dispositive factor in this case.

56:02>> Directly across the street is a

56:06And I don't know that this is I guess if

56:09you're able to maybe we need to ask for

56:12that planning body approval. Can you Do

56:15you know what other list what other uses

56:17are approved in a B4?

56:22So

56:22>> What other general types of uses?

56:24>> Yes.

56:25>> Like I as in by right?

56:27>> Just saying so one of your like remember

56:30Bowman was saying kept referring to

56:32another another another what other

56:34possibilities could we have at this

56:37location?

56:39>> Well, without

56:41in order to put anything that is

56:44automobile repair or service any of

56:46those kinds of uses, you need the

56:47locational variant.

56:49Um so, you know, that's what triggers

56:51the the requirement for uh the variants.

56:54Um there are other types of commercial

56:56uses that you could put in a B4 district

56:58and I'd have to you know, pause to take

57:01a look at some of those, but you know,

57:03right now we are concerned mo- you know,

57:05specifically with an overconcentration

57:07of auto-related uses and that um you

57:10know, includes gas stations and service

57:12stations like this.

57:14So is your question more specifically

57:15about by right for B4?

57:18>> Sounds like it.

57:19>> By right.

57:26If the the inspector might have that off

57:28the top of his head more quickly than I

57:30do.

57:34>> Sure, I can list the number of uses that

57:36are permitted by right in the B-4. You

57:37can stop me as

57:39as you need.

57:41Um animal grooming shop, art gallery,

57:43assembly hall, bake shop, bank without

57:46drive-up or drive-up facilities,

57:48uh barber beauty shop, business college

57:51or commercial trade school, commissary,

57:55uh customer service center without

57:56drive-up or drive-thru facilities,

57:59dry cleaning laundry or laundromat,

58:01uh

58:02medical or dental clinic, mortuary or

58:05funeral home,

58:06motor vehicles new sales room or sales

58:09lot, and uh lot accessory to that,

58:12uh

58:13nail salon, office business or

58:15professional,

58:17pet shop,

58:19um private club, lodge, or similar use,

58:21radio or television station, recreation

58:24indoor commercial or health club,

58:26recording studio or photo studio or

58:28video studio,

58:30um various restaurant uses, school or

58:33studio of dance, gymnastics, music, art,

58:35or cooking, shoe repair shop, smoking

58:37lounge for cigars, veterinary clinic for

58:40small animals, uh retail stores, etc.

58:45>> Thank you, sir.

58:48>> Okay.

58:48Any other questions for

58:51>> I have another one.

58:52>> Member Bowman?

58:53>> Yeah, hi. I'm just noticing um on this

58:56um document from the seed,

58:59um where it mentions the 326 ft away

59:02from 1750 East State Fair light duty

59:06vehicle service facility.

59:08Um as far as I can tell

59:11looking things up here, um and perhaps

59:15if I thought ahead of time, I guess I

59:17could have actually looked at that site

59:19as well. Um but based upon everything

59:22I'm finding here online, it looks like

59:24that

59:25place is and has been vacant. In other

59:29words, that there is no

59:31auto repair going on there.

59:34Um

59:36are you certain and I guess more

59:38importantly at the time of the hearing

59:40was

59:41are you sure that 326

59:44I mean that 1750 East State Fair

59:47actually was open for business and

59:49operating at that time?

1:00:08>> Yeah, go for it.

1:00:09>> Um

1:00:10So, we get go based off of current legal

1:00:13land uses for what's been established

1:00:15via building permit, not whether they're

1:00:18currently in operation. So, it still

1:00:19could count against the applicant for

1:00:22locational variance purposes,

1:00:25whether or not they're operating.

1:00:27That's not a a relevant point for how we

1:00:29calculate that.

1:00:32>> Okay, thank you.

1:00:34>> It which

1:00:36I think it's probably a reasonable

1:00:37approach to take. I mean, just because

1:00:39somebody might be temporarily closed

1:00:41down for business when the Google car

1:00:42drives by whenever that is.

1:00:45You know, it's that doesn't stop the

1:00:48owner from just finding a new operator

1:00:49and starting right back up. You know, so

1:00:51we are I think it's reasonable for BC to

1:00:53take the the long view, what's active,

1:00:56and make our decisions based on that

1:00:58whether or not a specific business

1:01:00happens to have its doors open when the

1:01:02Google car drives by.

1:01:05>> I'm sorry. I I

1:01:06Mr. Chair.

1:01:07>> I thought I had it.

1:01:08>> Cuz yeah, um

1:01:10So, you're you're talking about if the

1:01:13place had closed down, has the same

1:01:16owner, and reopens. If a new owner

1:01:19buys that location, I'm talking again

1:01:23about um 1750 State Fair because it's

1:01:27for sale or it was for sale. So, it's

1:01:29taken up by a new owner. Is that new

1:01:32owner also grandfathered in or is that

1:01:35person then

1:01:36um in a similar situation to our um

1:01:39current petitioner?

1:01:46>> Certainly glad that we have our experts

1:01:47here.

1:01:50>> So, um

1:01:51the new owner, if it's already been

1:01:53legally established and the use has not

1:01:54been abandoned, they would just be

1:01:56getting a new certificate of compliance

1:01:58um to make sure that they're uh

1:02:01in line with with compliance standards

1:02:03for that use. But, no, they would not

1:02:05have to worry unless they're trying to

1:02:07expand their use or do any sort of um

1:02:10extra operations beyond what already

1:02:11exists there. No, they would not have to

1:02:13worry about uh locational suitability

1:02:15purposes.

1:02:16>> Okay, thank you.

1:02:21>> And so, what's what's triggered this uh

1:02:24is the change of use.

1:02:27Uh is what has triggered this uh

1:02:32dimensional 100 or 1,000 ft is because

1:02:35they changed the use from

1:02:38you know, from auto sales to light duty

1:02:40or they're they're proposing to change

1:02:42the use from auto sales to light uh

1:02:44light duty.

1:02:46>> If they had remained a used

1:02:47>> have remained their auto sales and never

1:02:49had a problem.

1:02:50>> Say again.

1:02:51>> If they had remained a used car lot,

1:02:54which is also an automotive type

1:02:55business, that that they wouldn't have

1:02:58problems because they changed to a

1:02:59different kind of automotive base

1:03:01business.

1:03:02>> And it was existing, so.

1:03:03>> Thank you.

1:03:04>> Yeah, so they could uh obviously go back

1:03:06to that if they wanted to, so.

1:03:08>> Any other questions for Attorney

1:03:10Greenwood?

1:03:12Seeing none, thank you.

1:03:14Did Did have something?

1:03:17No. Okay. Okay. Uh if you want to go

1:03:19ahead and step back, uh

1:03:21do we need to hear from the departments,

1:03:23too?

1:03:25>> No, we can go to Unless No.

1:03:27>> Okay.

1:03:27>> P- P&D didn't have anything on this.

1:03:30>> All right. So, then we're going to go to

1:03:32the approval criteria that I have.

1:03:38>> May I add anything

1:03:40at this time?

1:03:42>> We're going to go to the uh

1:03:44approval criteria that Director Rubottom

1:03:47handed out to us.

1:03:49And

1:03:52obviously, keep in mind that

1:03:55when we make a motion, we're going to

1:03:56have to reference I think there's 15.

1:04:01Yeah, we're going to have to reference

1:04:02uh all 15 of these questions, so.

1:04:05Um

1:04:06>> For the criteria, yeah.

1:04:08>> Member uh uh

1:04:09>> I said may

1:04:10>> can use your questions one and two,

1:04:13please.

1:04:16Oh.

1:04:17Yeah, we better do Johnson. Keep my Keep

1:04:19myself in order.

1:04:21>> Excuse me, board Chairman Roberts.

1:04:25>> Yeah.

1:04:26>> a question. May I add something before I

1:04:27start the criteria answering?

1:04:29>> Sure.

1:04:30>> I just wanted to add a couple of

1:04:32points. First of all,

1:04:35our

1:04:36business is

1:04:38the only

1:04:40business

1:04:41in that area that would help service

1:04:44them.

1:04:45Uh with an open

1:04:47uh uh

1:04:48uh use that can service the community

1:04:51with the entire youth. I was over there

1:04:54and I had a nail in my tire.

1:04:58And as I was driving in that area, it

1:05:00was very blighted.

1:05:03And I went to the gas station that was

1:05:05across the street because

1:05:08the tire use isn't open.

1:05:10And the only thing they could us was

1:05:12direct me to pay $2 to put air in my

1:05:14tire, but nothing to correct it

1:05:18uh or to service me. I experienced that

1:05:22as just a visitor in that area. This is

1:05:24something that the residents in those

1:05:26areas have to deal with every day. They

1:05:28can't even get service. And the other

1:05:30place that's 300 ft away is has been

1:05:33closed for years.

1:05:35And

1:05:36also I just wanted to add that we're

1:05:37asking for a lesser intensive use than

1:05:42what is already established. It is a

1:05:45used car dealership with which would

1:05:48have cars outside all the time.

1:05:52It would be a more

1:05:54enduring, excuse me, interest

1:05:57um service. And someone can come there

1:06:00and open it up today as a used car

1:06:03sales. We're talking about something

1:06:05that is going to be less intensive,

1:06:08better for the community, and a service

1:06:10that's needed cuz I've experienced it.

1:06:14That's all I wanted to add before I do

1:06:15the criteria.

1:06:16>> All right, thank you.

1:06:17>> Thank you.

1:06:17>> All right, member Johnson, one and two,

1:06:19please.

1:06:20>> Okay, I think you answered number one.

1:06:26Okay, uh

1:06:31establishment maintenance,

1:06:34location and operation of the proposed

1:06:36conditional use will not be detrimental

1:06:38to or endanger the social, physical,

1:06:41environmental, or economic

1:06:45Mhm.

1:06:46>> Yes, before one moment, I just wanted to

1:06:47get my criteria

1:06:49out.

1:06:50>> To make sure I'm following along with

1:06:51you.

1:06:52>> The one you gave me.

1:06:53>> Oh, I know. It's on the inside.

1:06:56Thank you.

1:07:03>> I'll reread. The establishment

1:07:05maintenance, location, and operation of

1:07:07the proposed conditional use will not be

1:07:09detrimental to or endanger the social,

1:07:12physical, environmental, or economic

1:07:14well-being of surrounding neighborhoods

1:07:17or aggravate any pre-existing physical,

1:07:20social, or economic deterioration of

1:07:23surrounding neighborhoods.

1:07:26>> The conditional use will not be

1:07:28detrimental to or endanger the social,

1:07:30physical,

1:07:31environmental, or economical well-being

1:07:34to the surrounding neighborhoods, nor

1:07:36will it uh

1:07:38uh aggravate pre-existing

1:07:40deterioration. The commercial property

1:07:42has set shed uh

1:07:46has set shed up um and vacant for more

1:07:50than 5 years. The prior legal use, as I

1:07:53mentioned earlier, it was used auto

1:07:55sales, which permits outdoor vehicle

1:07:58parking and staging.

1:08:01In contrast, the proposed light-duty

1:08:04tire service use is strictly

1:08:07enclosed within the building. All

1:08:10vehicles and items uh observed during

1:08:13the initial BC's field uh inspections

1:08:16have been fully cleared, and there are

1:08:19zero outdoor scraps and storage or

1:08:24outside work. And I just want to add

1:08:27that these this place has been cleaned

1:08:29up because they got the lease in the

1:08:32winter.

1:08:33They are working on cleaning the place

1:08:35up, and by the time they had the BC's

1:08:38hearing, they had not gotten to all the

1:08:40cleanup that they had to do.

1:08:42So, basically, the place is clean now,

1:08:46and it is a will not uh be injurious to

1:08:49the community, and uh

1:08:52that's the answer for number one.

1:08:57>> That was number one and two.

1:08:58>> Yep.

1:08:59>> So, uh

1:09:00three and four, please.

1:09:06>> The conditional [clears throat] use will

1:09:07not substantially diminish or impair

1:09:10property values within the neighborhood.

1:09:13Want to respond to that one?

1:09:15>> Excuse me. She said she read one and two

1:09:18cuz I heard her read one, I didn't hear

1:09:19her read two.

1:09:20>> Did you read two?

1:09:21>> No, I didn't.

1:09:22>> Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

1:09:24>> I didn't read two, but she answered two.

1:09:26Do I Do I need to read it?

1:09:28Basically, they answered to

1:09:30>> Number two, uh

1:09:31did you read it? You want to read it?

1:09:34>> The conditional use will not be

1:09:35injurious to

1:09:37the use and enjoyment of other property

1:09:39in the immediate vicinity for the

1:09:41purposes permitted.

1:09:43>> And the conditional use will not be

1:09:45injurious to the use

1:09:46uh and the enjoyment of of other

1:09:48properties in the immediate facility

1:09:50vicinity for permitted purposes. All

1:09:53tire mounting, balancing, and light-duty

1:09:55main uh

1:09:56mechanical repairs take place entirely

1:09:58inside of the masonry building. Noise

1:10:01levels will confirm strictly to

1:10:04commercial district standards, and

1:10:07overhead doors remain closed during

1:10:10active equipment operation.

1:10:13Reactivating this long

1:10:16abandoned building establishes an

1:10:19attractive

1:10:21nuisance

1:10:22Excuse me.

1:10:24Reactivating this long abandoned

1:10:25building eliminates an

1:10:28attractive nuisance. Uh it prevails

1:10:32uh it prevents legal dumping and it

1:10:34deters trespassing.

1:10:41>> Okay, let's take a look at number three.

1:10:43The conditional use will not

1:10:45substantially diminish or impair

1:10:48property values within the neighborhood.

1:10:51>> The conditional use will

1:10:53substantially

1:10:55will not substantially diminish the or

1:10:58impair property values within the

1:11:00neighborhood. Establishing an active

1:11:03business directly enhances the

1:11:05corridor's value compared to an

1:11:08abandoned boarded-up structure. Uh we

1:11:11secured um

1:11:13What is it? 20

1:11:15eight letters of community support. And

1:11:19I just want to address that.

1:11:21The letters of support were signed by

1:11:23the members of the community.

1:11:26It didn't make a difference that it was

1:11:28a form letter or whatever. They said

1:11:30they wanted this. So, if you're going to

1:11:33accept anybody's letter, it doesn't make

1:11:36a difference if it's a form or if they

1:11:37wrote it out by hand. It is a letter of

1:11:39support. Isn't that so?

1:11:42So, basically, those letters should be

1:11:44counted as support because that's

1:11:46exactly what they are

1:11:48uh by the people who live there. Um

1:11:51and they are in support of reopening the

1:11:53building

1:11:54um and they're in support of what we

1:11:56told them the use would be, and that is

1:11:59tire

1:12:00servicing.

1:12:02>> Do you have any documentation about the

1:12:04effect on property values with um this

1:12:06type of business?

1:12:09>> Uh documentation such as?

1:12:19Oh, one thing I would like to say is

1:12:21that

1:12:23when you're looking at businesses when

1:12:25uh

1:12:26establishing any community

1:12:29in and if it's a legally approved

1:12:32business

1:12:34it has always shown

1:12:37that it is better than having

1:12:39the closed-up, boarded-up, locked-up

1:12:44creating dumping creating uh

1:12:47you know, trespassing and things of that

1:12:49nature.

1:12:50As established business

1:12:53statistically

1:12:54has always proven to be better than

1:12:57having a boarded up, locked up building.

1:13:00Thank you.

1:13:01>> You're welcome.

1:13:02>> For number four, the conditional use

1:13:04shall not be inconsistent with the goals

1:13:07and objectives of the Detroit Master

1:13:09Plan.

1:13:10>> Can you see

1:13:11>> use is consistent with the goals,

1:13:13objectives, and

1:13:16policies of the Detroit Master Plan. The

1:13:19uh

1:13:19property cited within a Excuse me, the

1:13:22property sits in a neighborhood that is

1:13:26neighborhood commercial.

1:13:28General commercial designation on East

1:13:31State Fair Avenue. The Master Plan

1:13:33emphasizes

1:13:35accessible commercial and neighborhood

1:13:37services along established commercial

1:13:39corridors.

1:13:40Providing affordable neighborhood

1:13:43accessible tires and vehicle maintenance

1:13:46service

1:13:47sustain working Detroiters

1:13:51who depend on personal vehicles

1:13:54for employment and daily mobility.

1:13:57It's a service they need.

1:14:00Thank you.

1:14:00>> You're welcome.

1:14:04>> Item six,

1:14:06Mr. Rasberry.

1:14:08Mr. Rasberry, good morning. Mr.

1:14:10Rasberry.

1:14:12The applicable criteria states the

1:14:15establishment of the conditional use

1:14:17will not impede the normal and orderly

1:14:18development and improvement of

1:14:21surrounding property for uses permitted

1:14:23in the district. Plans for such

1:14:25development and improvement shall be

1:14:27evidenced in a written or published

1:14:29community plan, development plan,

1:14:30cluster board plan, or similar document.

1:14:33Have you

1:14:35What can

1:14:36you uh speak to that?

1:14:38>> Thank you, board member. Um the

1:14:40conditional use will not impede the

1:14:42normal and orderly development and

1:14:45improve the surrounding properties uh

1:14:48for the permitted use.

1:14:50The development utilizes an existing

1:14:53commercial building footprint. It does

1:14:56not encroach into adjacent neighborhood

1:15:00zones bringing the site into compliance

1:15:04with designated off-street parking,

1:15:07managed ingress and egress, and physical

1:15:10maintenance sets a standard that

1:15:13encourages adjacent commercial

1:15:15stability.

1:15:20>> All right, and

1:15:23can you speak to adequate utilities,

1:15:25access to roads, drainage, and other

1:15:27necessity

1:15:28other necessary facilities have been or

1:15:31will be provided?

1:15:32>> Yes, adequate utility access road

1:15:35drainage and other necessary necessary

1:15:37facilities have been and are being

1:15:40provided. The parcel is fully serviced

1:15:44by existing municipal water, storm, and

1:15:47sanitary sewage systems, and the

1:15:49commercial electrical systems. Ingress

1:15:52and egress points connect directly to

1:15:55East Bay Fair Avenue and meet standards

1:15:58without disrupting corridor storm storm

1:16:01drainage.

1:16:04>> There's no change to the layout of the

1:16:07parking lot.

1:16:09>> Are you saying there's no change before

1:16:11the utilities? Are you saying there's

1:16:13none necessary? It's all set up already.

1:16:15>> One of the criteria was access roads.

1:16:17So, I'm asking if there's no change to

1:16:20the layout of the parking lot per site

1:16:22plan.

1:16:24>> Well, they're going to

1:16:25put, you know, like the handicap spaces

1:16:28and the walkways and all of that in

1:16:30there.

1:16:30that they request.

1:16:34So, we will

1:16:35have the plan set up with the requested

1:16:39changes for that.

1:16:40>> Mhm.

1:16:48>> But the entrance and egress remain the

1:16:50same?

1:16:52>> Yes.

1:16:55>> Okay, thank you.

1:16:56>> Okay.

1:16:57>> Uh

1:16:58Miss Parker, number seven and eight.

1:17:00>> Good morning.

1:17:01>> Good morning.

1:17:02Uh the conditional use will be

1:17:05compatible with the

1:17:07uh capacities of public services and

1:17:10public facilities that are affected by

1:17:13the proposed use.

1:17:18>> That's number seven, correct?

1:17:20>> Correct.

1:17:21>> The conditional use is compatible with

1:17:23the

1:17:23with the is compatible with the ca- cape

1:17:27uh capaticity capacity of

1:17:30existing public service and facilities.

1:17:32Operational

1:17:34uh demands on the municipal fire,

1:17:36police, and emergency medical services

1:17:39are

1:17:44are Where am I at? Sorry about that.

1:17:47Okay, are equivalent to or less than

1:17:50the previous use uh auto car use.

1:17:54So, we don't put as much on it as as

1:17:56that would have. Uh the site circle uh

1:17:59circulate

1:18:01circulation

1:18:02maintains unobstructed access to the

1:18:05municipal emergency equipment and clear

1:18:09sightlines to the public right-of-way.

1:18:16>> Okay.

1:18:18Um number

1:18:19number eight.

1:18:21The conditional use will be compatible

1:18:24with land usage on adjacent and nearby

1:18:27zoning lots in terms of location

1:18:31size and character.

1:18:34For purposes of this section, the term

1:18:37nearby zoning lots

1:18:39means those lots on the same side of the

1:18:42same block face as the subject property.

1:18:50>> The occasional

1:18:52Excuse me, the conditional use is

1:18:53compatible with the adjacent and nearby

1:18:56zoning lots in

1:18:57terms of location, size, and character

1:19:00and satisfies spaces

1:19:03uh waiver criteria section

1:19:0550 12 350.

1:19:08Granted the B- BCA authority to waive

1:19:12That's your body. To waive the space and

1:19:15requirements

1:19:16um where the use does not create an

1:19:19overconcentration

1:19:22of individual active services.

1:19:26While three automotive facilities exist

1:19:30within 1,000 ft,

1:19:321841

1:19:34East State Fair, which is the Citgo

1:19:36station,

1:19:37it is a retail fueling and

1:19:40uh convenient market,

1:19:42no vehicle repairs.

1:19:45At East Auto Drive, the Marida Bond

1:19:49station sits kitty-corner,

1:19:52and it is a retail and convenience

1:19:54station,

1:19:55no vehicle repair.

1:19:58And the third location

1:20:00is 1750

1:20:02East State Fair, approximately 360

1:20:07ft away.

1:20:08It has been abandoned

1:20:10and boarded.

1:20:12Um

1:20:14It's an abandoned and boarded vehicle

1:20:16retail facility that has been inactive

1:20:18for years.

1:20:20The proposed tire shop reactivates an

1:20:23unserved retail corridor without

1:20:26generating redundant active congestion.

1:20:35>> And thank you.

1:20:35>> You're welcome.

1:20:36>> Remember Bowman 9 and 10, please.

1:20:38>> Yes. Um okay, number nine here says

1:20:41on the conditional use will not hinder

1:20:44or have a detrimental effect upon

1:20:47vehicular turning patterns, ingress

1:20:50egress traffic flow, nearby

1:20:52intersections, traffic visibility, and

1:20:55clear vision triangle. And other

1:20:57vehicular pedestrian traffic patterns in

1:21:00the vicinity. Um can you um

1:21:03testify to the fact that it would not um

1:21:06hinder it? That mobile

1:21:08>> It would not. The conditional use is not

1:21:10hindering vehicle turning motions,

1:21:12traffic flow, sight triangles, or

1:21:14pedest- uh pedestrian movement. Under

1:21:16BC's uh

1:21:18June 9th, 2026 preliminary conditional

1:21:21review, the site laid out

1:21:24provide com- um compliant off We have

1:21:27compliant off-street park off Excuse me,

1:21:29off-street parking stalls. And the

1:21:32vehicles uh drop-off staging and parking

1:21:35remains entirely in the private uh

1:21:39the prop- the private property without

1:21:42backing into State Fair

1:21:44or uh any other street. The lot, as you

1:21:47can see from the pictures, were very

1:21:50large, so they don't have to interfere.

1:21:53>> Okay, so in other words, you're saying

1:21:54if you had multiple um you had let's say

1:21:57three customers waiting to be serviced,

1:21:59they would actually have room then in

1:22:00that lot

1:22:02>> They would be in the lot inside the

1:22:04private property. There's no uh

1:22:07congestion it would create cuz it's

1:22:09quite of a large lot.

1:22:11>> Okay, thank you. And number 10,

1:22:13um the conditional use will in all other

1:22:16respects conform to the applicable use

1:22:18regulations, dimensions, requirements,

1:22:21general development standards, and any

1:22:23other applicable requirement of this

1:22:25chapter. In the event a dimensional or

1:22:28other variances needed, the building

1:22:30safety engineering environmental

1:22:31department may approve a conditional use

1:22:34contingent on approval of needed

1:22:36variance from the board of zoning

1:22:38appeals as provided in section 50-3-269

1:22:44of this code.

1:22:46Um

1:22:48do you feel that within those

1:22:50constraints that this um

1:22:54that the dimensional in requirements

1:22:56would be met or would be reasonably

1:22:59appealable?

1:23:00>> Yes. Uh basically the conditional use

1:23:03conform

1:23:04forms to all applicable

1:23:06regulations subject to the board's

1:23:08authorized variances.

1:23:10Uh landscaping uh

1:23:13landscaping screening buffering. Uh the

1:23:16site plan that we provided has 60% of

1:23:19the required perimeter screening.

1:23:21The variance is requested for the

1:23:25remaining 40%

1:23:27to prevent the

1:23:29financial uh hardship of tearing out

1:23:31sound functional asphalt.

1:23:34Uh alternatively, should the board

1:23:38mediate 100%

1:23:39uh

1:23:40vegetation screening, we agreed

1:23:43on the record to install the complete

1:23:47buffer.

1:23:48Uh when it comes to the perimeter

1:23:50fencing,

1:23:52we request

1:23:55retention of the existing perimeter

1:23:57security fencing and masonry walls

1:24:00to protect equipment, customer um

1:24:05property and building security for

1:24:08after-hour vandalism and unauthorized

1:24:12access.

1:24:14By having that fencing, it does secure

1:24:16the place

1:24:18and it keeps vandals and it keeps, you

1:24:21know, the customer safe when they're

1:24:22there and the business safe. And and it

1:24:25prevents the looting, I mean, the uh

1:24:28uh not looting, but the uh dumping and

1:24:30things of that nature cuz that that area

1:24:32has a lot of dumping in it and right

1:24:34next door [clears throat] to it and all

1:24:36throughout that street. So, we do

1:24:38request the variance for that fencing.

1:24:42>> Okay, thank you.

1:24:43>> Thank you.

1:24:44>> Okay.

1:24:46And uh

1:24:48member Sherman, 11 and 12, please.

1:24:52>> Good morning, board member Sherman.

1:24:53>> Good morning.

1:24:58>> Do you believe the conditional use is

1:25:00consistent with any approved preliminary

1:25:03site plan?

1:25:05>> The conditional use

1:25:06conforms to the preliminary preliminary

1:25:09site reviews. BC's officially issued

1:25:12conditional approval on June 9th, 2026,

1:25:15and the proposed interior use, parking

1:25:18count, and structural uh

1:25:21in- envelope uh envel- envelopes

1:25:24align directly with those conditionals

1:25:27approved plan.

1:25:29That uh those conditionally approved

1:25:31plans.

1:25:34>> Are you under the impression that the

1:25:35conditional use is so designed, located,

1:25:38planned, and to be operated so that the

1:25:40public health, safety, and welfare will

1:25:43be protected?

1:25:44>> Yes, the conditional site is designed,

1:25:47located, planned, and will be operated

1:25:50so that so that the public health self

1:25:54safety and

1:25:56welfare are protected. The protected

1:26:00Excuse me, the project replaces a

1:26:01commercial

1:26:03vacancy

1:26:05with an active daytime establishment.

1:26:10>> Thank you.

1:26:11>> You're welcome.

1:26:13>> I'll take 13 and 14 myself. Um

1:26:19Miss Bryant, the uh

1:26:21will the conditional use or the

1:26:23conditional use shall not involve

1:26:25activities, processes, materials,

1:26:27equipment, or conditions of operation

1:26:30that will

1:26:31uh be detrimental to the physical

1:26:33environment

1:26:35or to public health and general well-

1:26:37welfare by reason of excessive

1:26:40production of noise, smoke, fumes,

1:26:42glare, odors?

1:26:44Uh

1:26:46so my I guess the question is uh

1:26:50will the operations that are going to

1:26:51take place

1:26:53produce any excessive noise, smoke,

1:26:55fumes, glare, odors?

1:26:58>> No. The conditional use will not produce

1:27:01uh detrimental smoke,

1:27:04fumes, glare, fair uh vibrations, or

1:27:07odors. Uh the light-duty tire

1:27:10installation use I enclose electric tire

1:27:14changes

1:27:15changer, excuse me, wheel balancers, and

1:27:18power tools.

1:27:20Waste tires will be stored indoors in a

1:27:24designated storage room and hauled on a

1:27:27regular schedule by a licensed scrap

1:27:30tire hauler.

1:27:33>> And the conditional use is consistent

1:27:36with and promotes

1:27:38the intent and purpose of the chapter?

1:27:42>> Yes, the conditional use promotes the

1:27:44general intent intent and purpose of the

1:27:47zoning ordinance and established the B4

1:27:50district to accommodate general retail

1:27:53and auto service businesses along a

1:27:56major transit artery. Uh granting this

1:28:00appeal brings an existing vacant

1:28:03commercial parcel into active use and

1:28:05serves a community the excuse me, and

1:28:08serves

1:28:09community transportation needs.

1:28:14>> And number 15 doesn't apply to you.

1:28:15>> Yes, not applicable.

1:28:17>> So, uh we're we're done with the uh

1:28:19criteria.

1:28:20Um

1:28:25approval criteria. So, uh if you want to

1:28:26go ahead and step back, we're going to

1:28:28uh switch over to public comment now.

1:28:30>> Thank you.

1:28:31>> And if you could please pay attention to

1:28:33uh

1:28:33any public comment that's made, you'll

1:28:35have an opportunity to come back and re-

1:28:36uh do a rebuttal

1:28:38of uh anything negative that might be

1:28:40brought up.

1:28:41All right. So, we're going to go into

1:28:42public comment. If you're in the

1:28:44auditorium today and you want to make a

1:28:45public comment that is specific to 1844

1:28:50East State Fair, please come to the

1:28:52podium.

1:28:54Anybody in the auditorium that wants to

1:28:55make a public comment specific to 1844

1:28:59East State Fair, please come to the

1:29:01podium. Seeing nobody, we'll switch over

1:29:03to our virtual participants.

1:29:05If there's anybody on

1:29:08online that would like to make a public

1:29:10comment

1:29:11for 1844 East Fair

1:29:15State Fair, please uh raise your hand.

1:29:19Virtual public comment for 1844 East

1:29:22State Fair, please raise your hand.

1:29:24Anybody, Director?

1:29:25>> No hands.

1:29:26>> Okay, no hands. So, we're going to close

1:29:28out public comment.

1:29:30Um we'll go into a board-only

1:29:31discussion.

1:29:32>> Mr. Mr. Chairman,

1:29:33>> Yes.

1:29:34>> I will acknowledge

1:29:35though they were discussed, there were

1:29:38letters of support included with the

1:29:41petitioner's submission. Uh those

1:29:43letters were referenced uh by the

1:29:45attorney, and

1:29:47I'm putting them on record. Thank you,

1:29:49Mr. Chairman.

1:29:50>> Okay, thank you.

1:29:51Um and actually, I have one question

1:29:53before we go into board-only discussion

1:29:55for Attorney Greenwood. Could you please

1:29:58uh tell me which

1:30:01which of those 15

1:30:04uh criteria that you had an objection

1:30:06to.

1:30:08>> That we had an objection to?

1:30:10Well, there were um

1:30:12four

1:30:13>> I think you mentioned four of them.

1:30:14>> There were There were four findings that

1:30:15BCED was unable to

1:30:18uh to make and that's why they denied

1:30:19the appeal. I'll I'll Can I read the

1:30:21numbers back to you?

1:30:23Um

1:30:27>> 1 2 10 and 13. Sounds right.

1:30:30>> Yes. Yeah, that that's right. 1 2 10 and

1:30:3313.

1:30:33>> All right. Thank you for the

1:30:34clarification. I appreciate that.

1:30:36>> You bet.

1:30:37>> Okay. So, now we're going to go into a

1:30:38board only discussion. Motions always in

1:30:40order.

1:30:48Go ahead.

1:30:53>> Um

1:30:56It seems that the petitioner has really

1:30:59done a lot to correct some of the issues

1:31:04that were brought out at the BCED

1:31:06hearing, but if we're to

1:31:09base our decision on

1:31:12what happened at the hearing itself, I

1:31:15guess I did not really hear um

1:31:18enough to support

1:31:21a decision that BCED's decisions were in

1:31:24error. The um

1:31:27the spacing requirement

1:31:31is there. I mean

1:31:33we got explanation of of

1:31:36you know, about how that's applied and

1:31:38even though the one gas station is not

1:31:41um not open at this time,

1:31:44uh it still stands as part of the

1:31:46policy. The small areas there, uh it's

1:31:50something that like

1:31:51the um

1:31:53use is inconsistent with the master plan

1:31:57and um with the

1:32:00review failing four of the 13 required

1:32:03findings. I I would have to support BC's

1:32:07findings.

1:32:09BC's decision.

1:32:12>> Okay.

1:32:13Member Bowman.

1:32:15>> Yeah, hi. Um

1:32:16>> [clears throat]

1:32:17>> in looking at at this and we've run into

1:32:20these situations before and you say that

1:32:23where apparently the way the ordinance

1:32:25was broadly written, it

1:32:28it

1:32:29clumps together purely based upon a

1:32:32relationship to automobiles, um some

1:32:35very distinct and different types of

1:32:37businesses.

1:32:39Um as if there's an over concentration

1:32:42um I'd say if there's an over

1:32:43concentration of anything, there would

1:32:45be gas stations um selling gas.

1:32:49Um

1:32:50but yeah, the ordinance does lump them

1:32:52together. Um but that's why we do have

1:32:56um a process where we can grant

1:32:58variances.

1:33:00And those could be brought before us if

1:33:03BC had given a conditional approval.

1:33:06Um that would have been able to then

1:33:09give us that um

1:33:11ability to make that judgment. Um now as

1:33:15far as the some of the criteria

1:33:18mentioned um by the um rep the attorneys

1:33:22from BC, um

1:33:24and representatives of deep BC.

1:33:28The site effects on the community, not

1:33:31just the um concentration of automotive

1:33:34related businesses, but effects on the

1:33:36community.

1:33:38And that we the community deserves

1:33:40better.

1:33:42And language to that effect, and I see

1:33:45absolutely I I do think they were um

1:33:47unreasonable as far as how they

1:33:50approached that aspect for the simple

1:33:52reason

1:33:53that um

1:33:56there had been only community support,

1:33:59not community opposition

1:34:02um there, and I don't think anyone's

1:34:04better to judge what's good for

1:34:06themselves than the people there. Um

1:34:08there were some interpretations that

1:34:10perhaps they didn't mean it that much

1:34:11cuz they had formal letters or maybe um

1:34:14because they had not been comparing

1:34:19um the benefits of this

1:34:21um business, which is, you know, a case

1:34:23of something actual to something

1:34:25hypothetical

1:34:26um

1:34:28that could be there instead.

1:34:32So, I I think they erred in that respect

1:34:35in not

1:34:38really properly representing the

1:34:40interests of of what the community um

1:34:43would benefit from or want.

1:34:45Um and I think yeah, as far as legally,

1:34:49they yes, they can um

1:34:53say that there was no pre-cast situation

1:34:55because of the Broadway the ordinance is

1:34:57written but then again, they

1:35:00also had the option of making a

1:35:03conditional approval if indeed um we

1:35:06determined there could be a variance in

1:35:08that area.

1:35:09Um the other site plan issues, it sounds

1:35:13like that was something that again could

1:35:15be um adapted for um

1:35:18that wouldn't require a blanket denial.

1:35:22Um

1:35:23so

1:35:25I I would be in favor of granting the

1:35:27petitioner's request for the appeal.

1:35:36>> Okay. Any other comments from the board?

1:35:40>> I do.

1:35:40>> Um go ahead.

1:35:43>> Um

1:35:44so with with the support of the

1:35:47community and

1:35:49um

1:35:51this Atlas Consulting um with them just

1:35:54selling tires, and will they be new and

1:35:57used tires or just used tires? Used

1:36:00tires?

1:36:01>> Yes.

1:36:04>> Okay.

1:36:05So, I do believe that it would it's a

1:36:08need for that in that community, and

1:36:11also it would

1:36:13um open up another business because the

1:36:16the two gas stations, they can't service

1:36:19vehicles in that way. So, I would be in

1:36:22support um

1:36:25of welcoming that business. Thank you.

1:36:28>> Yeah, I was uh

1:36:30as I read through uh everything

1:36:32initially, I was

1:36:35you know, I was against uh

1:36:38overturning BC's decision, but then the

1:36:40more that I

1:36:41the more that I look at things and you

1:36:43know,

1:36:44and I guess I understand

1:36:46you know, what the the black and white

1:36:48on the paper is, you know, in terms of

1:36:50you know, a gas station being the same

1:36:52as a

1:36:53you know, light duty repair, but

1:36:55you know, in in in my mind, I

1:36:58and I understand what the paper says,

1:36:59but you know, in my mind, they're

1:37:01they're different. You know, I don't I

1:37:03you know, I

1:37:04and I think that we need to have places

1:37:06that

1:37:07are able to service

1:37:09uh the people

1:37:10uh

1:37:12that particular neighborhood and stretch

1:37:14uh you know, is uh

1:37:17a little bit on the desolate side and

1:37:19very um

1:37:20very blighted in uh certain areas.

1:37:23And I like the fact that

1:37:25you know, there's going to be a

1:37:27a local small business uh

1:37:31providing a service that you know, we've

1:37:33got 28 letters of support, so you know,

1:37:36it's providing a service that's uh

1:37:38that's needed. Uh and and

1:37:41you know, at least

1:37:43you know, based on this you know, based

1:37:45on the information that we have before

1:37:47us,

1:37:47you know, it's needed and it and it's

1:37:49wanted

1:37:50in that particular

1:37:52neighborhood.

1:37:53You know, so I would I would be in favor

1:37:56of

1:37:57as long as we put a couple conditions

1:38:00uh

1:38:01on it, which would be a phase one

1:38:03environmental study be conducted.

1:38:06That the use be for tire service only

1:38:09and that there be no outdoor service.

1:38:12Um

1:38:14you know, I think if we

1:38:17you know, if we stuck to those uh

1:38:19to those tenants, I think that uh

1:38:22it's a worthwhile

1:38:24uh

1:38:26investment in the community to open it

1:38:28back up.

1:38:32>> Member Johnson?

1:38:34>> Yes. Um I would be in agreement with uh

1:38:40with with what you stated, um

1:38:43board member Roberts, with the broad

1:38:47understanding of

1:38:49the zoning ordinance and where we are

1:38:52with

1:38:53having now having um

1:38:56some letters of support that were

1:38:58introduced after

1:39:00the hearing took place and um

1:39:04having a site evaluation being a

1:39:06condition and then having to come back

1:39:08for

1:39:09the other variances that would be

1:39:10needed. Um that would would be a

1:39:12condition of approval.

1:39:18>> Can we get a motion from somebody?

1:39:23>> Mr. Roberts, can you re- restate you had

1:39:26you mentioned tire service only, no

1:39:29outdoor service. What was the other

1:39:31>> No, phase one environmental study.

1:39:33>> There you go.

1:39:35I think I can do this.

1:39:38Um

1:39:41Okay, let me

1:39:43kind of speak to the motion then.

1:39:47And I'm kind of turning my

1:39:50paper aside here for a moment. Okay, so

1:39:53um

1:39:54I would like to move that um okay, in

1:39:58the case of um BZA 22026-00054

1:40:07in Council District 3

1:40:10um brought up by Atlas Consulting

1:40:14um at the location of 1844 East Street

1:40:17Fair State Fair um that Atlas

1:40:22Consulting's appeal

1:40:25um of the decision of Building Safety

1:40:28Engineering and Environmental Department

1:40:31um what being SLU 2026-00

1:40:38025

1:40:39uh

1:40:40on July 30th, 2026 with the effective

1:40:43date of August 30th um 26 um that that

1:40:47denial um to establish a light duty

1:40:52vehicle service establishment in the

1:40:54existing 1,546 square foot building um

1:40:59be appeal be appeal that the appeal be

1:41:01granted

1:41:03um and that um based upon our ability to

1:41:08hear and decide appeals from the review

1:41:11um from I'm sorry and review any order

1:41:14requirement decision determination made

1:41:17by an administrative official in

1:41:19administration of the zoning ordinance

1:41:21or any decision made by Building Safety

1:41:24Engineering Department involving

1:41:26conditional uses regulated use or

1:41:28controlled uses

1:41:30with the

1:41:33um condition that the appeal be granted

1:41:36with the condition that

1:41:38this

1:41:39institution remain this this business

1:41:42remain for tire service only that they

1:41:46have no outdoor service

1:41:49and that they complete a phase one

1:41:51environmental study.

1:41:55Regarding the

1:42:00Sorry, put this over here.

1:42:02The approval criteria

1:42:06um

1:42:07I move that the establishment

1:42:10maintenance location operation of

1:42:11proposed conditional use does not or is

1:42:14not detrimental to

1:42:17or endanger the social physical

1:42:19environmental or economic well-being of

1:42:21surrounding neighborhoods or aggravate

1:42:23any pre-existing physical social or

1:42:25economic deterioration of surrounding

1:42:27neighborhoods that the conditional use

1:42:30does not and is not injurious to the use

1:42:34and enjoyment of other property in the

1:42:36immediate vicinity for the purposes

1:42:40that the conditional use

1:42:43does not substantially diminish or

1:42:45impair property values within

1:42:47neighborhood that the conditional use

1:42:49does not

1:42:51go against the

1:42:53goals and objectives of the master plan

1:42:57that the establishment

1:42:59of this conditional use will not impede

1:43:02the normal and orderly development and

1:43:05improvement of the surrounding property

1:43:07for uses permitted in the district plans

1:43:09for such development and improvement

1:43:11shall be evidenced in a written or

1:43:13published community plan development

1:43:15plan cluster board plan or similar

1:43:17document

1:43:19that adequate utilities access roads

1:43:22drainage and other necessary facilities

1:43:25will be provided that conditional use

1:43:28will be compatible with the capacities

1:43:31of public service public facilities that

1:43:33are affected by proposed use. That the

1:43:36conditional use will be compatible with

1:43:38land uses on adjacent nearby zoning lots

1:43:42in terms of size,

1:43:45um and character.

1:43:47For purposes of this section, the term

1:43:50nearby zoning lots means those lots on

1:43:52the same side block face as the subject

1:43:55property. That the conditional use will

1:43:57not hinder or have a detrimental effect

1:44:00upon vehicular turning patterns, ingress

1:44:03egress traffic flow, nearby

1:44:05intersections, traffic visibility, and

1:44:07clear vision triangle of other vehicles

1:44:10and pedestrian traffic patterns in the

1:44:12vicinity. That the conditional use will,

1:44:14in all other respects, conform to the

1:44:16applicable use regulations, dimensional

1:44:19requirements, general development

1:44:20standards, and other applicable

1:44:23requirements of this chapter. In the

1:44:25event a dimensional or other variance is

1:44:28needed, building safety, engineering,

1:44:30and environmental department may approve

1:44:32conditional use contingent on approval

1:44:34of the needed variance from the board of

1:44:36zoning appeals as provided in the

1:44:38section 50-3-269

1:44:40of this code.

1:44:42The conditional use is consistent with

1:44:44any preliminary site plan. That the

1:44:46conditional use is so designed, located,

1:44:49and planned to be operated so that the

1:44:52public health, safety, and welfare will

1:44:54be protected. That the conditional use

1:44:56shall not involve activities, processes,

1:44:58material, equipment, or conditions of

1:45:00operation that would then be detrimental

1:45:03to the physical environment of public

1:45:05health, general welfare by reason of

1:45:07excessive production of noise, smoke,

1:45:09fumes, glare, or odors. That the

1:45:11conditional use is consistent with and

1:45:14promotes the intent purpose of this

1:45:16chapter and

1:45:23um

1:45:25where a

1:45:29Okay.

1:45:31Okay, thank you.

1:45:32We're a public

1:45:34civic institutional use. This which is

1:45:37not applicable here. It's not a civic

1:45:40use. Also that this reversal of B seeds

1:45:44this this is a reversal of B seeds

1:45:46decision and the applicant must return

1:45:49for stated variances

1:45:52such as

1:45:54aspects of the site plan and the

1:45:58spacing requirements. Thank you.

1:46:01>> Okay.

1:46:02Motion Can we get a second?

1:46:04>> Second.

1:46:06>> All those in favor?

1:46:07>> Aye.

1:46:08>> Mr. Chairman.

1:46:09>> Yes.

1:46:09>> In the beginning of his motion he did

1:46:12not

1:46:13mention that this is an

1:46:15overturning of the B seeds denial. He

1:46:18said appeal.

1:46:19>> Yeah, that's why we we added it to the

1:46:20end there.

1:46:21>> I did say I just wanted to confirm that.

1:46:23>> Yep, no problem.

1:46:28>> He he did We did He he did put that part

1:46:31in there. I'll have that note also.

1:46:33I I had that one also Eric. I heard that

1:46:35one.

1:46:36>> [laughter]

1:46:37>> He said both.

1:46:38>> All right. All those in favor?

1:46:40>> Aye.

1:46:41>> Aye.

1:46:41>> Any opposed?

1:46:42>> Nay.

1:46:43>> Nay.

1:46:43>> We'll do a roll call.

1:46:45>> Favor.

1:46:46>> Board member Sherman?

1:46:47>> Nay.

1:46:49>> Board member Campbell?

1:46:53Oh, I'm sorry. Board member McCar

1:46:55>> Nay.

1:46:56>> Board member Johnson?

1:46:59>> Yes.

1:47:00>> Could you speak up, please?

1:47:02>> Yes.

1:47:03>> Board member Bowman?

1:47:04>> Yes.

1:47:05>> Board member Parker?

1:47:06>> Yes.

1:47:07>> Board member Osborne?

1:47:09>> Nay.

1:47:10>> Chairperson Roberts?

1:47:11>> Yes.

1:47:16>> We have

1:47:181 2 3 4 Four 1 2 3 4 no's. The motion

1:47:23does not have

1:47:25enough to pass. Is that

1:47:29>> There's only seven members here.

1:47:31>> That's still not enough to for the the

1:47:33motion to pass. You need five. Is that

1:47:35correct?

1:47:37Uh the motion fails due to

1:47:40uh not enough

1:47:44to support the denial.

1:47:46>> Can you uh

1:47:47Director Everhart?

1:47:48You said four and four, but there's only

1:47:49seven board members here.

1:47:51>> Four one two three four yes, one two

1:47:54three no's. Osborne no,

1:47:56Carr no, Sherman no.

1:47:59Johnson yes,

1:48:01Bowman yes, Parker yes, Roberts yes.

1:48:05You still need five. You only have four,

1:48:07Mr. Chairman. The motion fails.

1:48:09>> Okay.

1:48:11>> BZA case [clears throat]

1:48:16202600054

1:48:19Atlas Consulting appealing decision of

1:48:22building safety engineering and

1:48:24environmental department

1:48:26which denied the establishment of a

1:48:28light-duty vehicle establishment. That

1:48:31denial has been upheld due to a lack of

1:48:34votes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

1:48:36>> Thank you.

1:48:37>> Mr. Chairman, can you take a 5-minute

1:48:39recess? I need to go down and get the

1:48:41approval criteria for the next case.

1:48:43>> Absolutely.

1:48:45So uh it's uh

1:48:49We'll uh

1:48:50we'll recess until uh

1:48:5310:10.

1:48:59>> You too.

1:49:01Most hopeful when we recess.

1:56:59>> Mhm.

2:01:21>> Okay, we're going to

2:01:23call our meeting back to order.

2:01:26And

2:01:27uh

2:01:28Is our next case in, Director?

2:01:31>> Yes, uh BZA case 2026

2:01:3500057,

2:01:37City Council District

2:01:39number seven. The BZA petitioner is

2:01:41Jaron Young.

2:01:43The location is 18425

2:01:46Weber

2:01:47between [snorts] Fausse and Rosemont in

2:01:50an M2 zone

2:01:52restricted industrial district.

2:01:55Jaron Young appeals a decision of

2:01:57Building Safety and Engineering

2:01:59Environmental Department SLU

2:02:022026-00052

2:02:05third review

2:02:07which denied the site plan

2:02:09to change of use occupancy of an

2:02:12existing 3,920

2:02:15square foot building

2:02:17for use as motor vehicles used sales

2:02:20room or sales lot in an M2 zone resi-

2:02:24restricted industrial district. We will

2:02:27now hear from Inspector Pierrelouis.

2:02:30>> Thank you, Director. We're hearing this

2:02:31case because the Board of Zoning Appeals

2:02:33shall hear and decide appeals from and

2:02:35review any order, requirement, decision,

2:02:37or determination that is made by the

2:02:39administrative official in the

2:02:40administration of the zoning ordinance.

2:02:42or any decision made by the building and

2:02:44safety engineering department involving

2:02:45conditional uses, regulated uses, or

2:02:48controlled uses, or any denial of a site

2:02:50plan by the planning and development

2:02:51department.

2:02:53Here in this case, under section 54-101,

2:02:55jurisdiction over appeals

2:02:57of administrative decisions and the site

2:03:00plan review sections. We're here in this

2:03:02case under the legal description

2:03:03attached, our attorney will assess

2:03:05ownership.

2:03:06The BC site plan denial letter dated

2:03:08August 20th, 2026, states, "BC has

2:03:11completed the review of the application

2:03:13and site plans resubmitted on July 17th,

2:03:152026. The current legal conforming land

2:03:18use of the subject site is a factory

2:03:21under building permit 37327 issued in

2:03:23April of 1963.

2:03:26The 8,233

2:03:28square foot site is located within an M2

2:03:30zoning district. The applicant proposes

2:03:33change of use occupancy of the existing

2:03:353,920 square foot building for use as

2:03:39motor vehicle post use sales room or

2:03:41sales lot. The proposed development

2:03:43shall be permitted conditionally under

2:03:45section 50-10-52-12.

2:03:47This shall require special land use

2:03:49public hearing prior to issuance of a

2:03:51building permit. The applicant proposes

2:03:53to provide incidental and accessory uses

2:03:55of the facilities as light duty vehicle

2:03:57service establishment. However, under

2:04:00section 50-12-517-3,

2:04:02the proposed use shall be subject to

2:04:04permit restrictions within the

2:04:06underlying zoning district as a second

2:04:08principal land use. The proposed use

2:04:10shall both be subject to spacing

2:04:12restrictions for the same use types

2:04:15under section 50-12-127.

2:04:17Upon review, BC found the following

2:04:19permitted facilities

2:04:21of any other vehicle service or repair

2:04:23uses within up to 2,000 feet of the

2:04:25subject site.

2:04:27One is located 18700 Fitzpatrick, 275

2:04:31feet away. It's a motor vehicle use

2:04:34sales room or sales lot. 18541 Weaver,

2:04:37450 ft away, light duty vehicle service

2:04:41establishment. 18633 Weaver, 800 ft

2:04:44away, light duty vehicle service

2:04:46establishment. 18321 Plymouth Road, 920

2:04:50ft, light duty service establishment.

2:04:531866

2:04:553 Weaver, 945 ft away, motor vehicle

2:04:58used sales room or sales lot with light

2:05:00duty vehicle service establishment. And

2:05:0318174 West Chicago, 1,665

2:05:07ft away, motor vehicles used sales room

2:05:09or sales lot with light duty vehicle

2:05:11service establishment. Thus, the

2:05:13proposed use would require spacing

2:05:14variance granted by the BZA due to

2:05:17over-concentration.

2:05:19Under section 50-14-23,

2:05:21change of use off-street parking is

2:05:23required for the proposed development.

2:05:25Three spaces shall be provided for the

2:05:27light duty vehicle services operations.

2:05:29In addition, adequate display space for

2:05:31used motor vehicle sales shall be

2:05:33required.

2:05:3512 display spaces shall meet parking

2:05:36standards for operable private passenger

2:05:38vehicles, including dimensional

2:05:40standards for off-street parking spaces

2:05:42and drive aisle adjoining. The applicant

2:05:44proposes a structure with 11 off-street

2:05:47parking spaces for display of vehicles,

2:05:49eight spaces within the dealership, and

2:05:51three off-street spaces at the rear of

2:05:52the property. Under section 50-14-23,

2:05:56additional off-street parking spaces for

2:05:58patients should not be required as the

2:06:00previous use of factory use was more

2:06:02intensive than the change that the

2:06:05change of use.

2:06:06However, off-street parking spaces

2:06:07adjacent to the building served shall

2:06:10require a pedestrian walkway of 5 ft

2:06:12wide. Under section 50-14-234,

2:06:15as the applicant is unable to provide a

2:06:175-ft walkway, they will need a variance

2:06:19from the BZA. After reviewing the

2:06:21revised site plans, BC finds that the

2:06:23proposed plans do not meet the site plan

2:06:25requirements under section 53-171 of the

2:06:28ordinance, and the site plan has been

2:06:30denied for the following reasons. The

2:06:32site is not large enough to accommodate

2:06:34these land uses. Space and requirements

2:06:36are intended to prevent the over

2:06:38concentration of those uses

2:06:41and to more equitably disperse them

2:06:43throughout the city. Restrictions are

2:06:44required for the proposed use under

2:06:46Section 50-12-131 to prevent over

2:06:49concentration of same type uses. BC

2:06:51found four

2:06:53light duty vehicle service or repair

2:06:55establishments within 1,000 ft and two

2:06:57used auto sales establishments permitted

2:06:59within 2,000 sq ft. Again, the petition

2:07:02is before the board because they were

2:07:03denied their site plan. They didn't get

2:07:05the site plan approved, so they didn't

2:07:07get to go to the next step, which was

2:07:08the SLU hearing. So, they are approved

2:07:11they are appealing that site plan

2:07:12denial. If that site plan denial is

2:07:15reversed here, they still would have to

2:07:17go back to BC to have an SLU hearing.

2:07:27Here, the subject property is in an M2

2:07:29uh

2:07:30restricted industrial district. This

2:07:31light brown building is the building in

2:07:33question on Weaver Street.

2:07:36This is an adjacent building um going

2:07:38down Weaver Street going to the south.

2:07:43You're looking down Weaver Street

2:07:44looking to the south.

2:07:48Again, front view of the subject

2:07:49property in question.

2:07:54You're looking down the front of the

2:07:55other subject property looking to the

2:07:57north looking towards uh Plymouth Road.

2:08:01Block opposite.

2:08:06Again, block opposite is all vacant land

2:08:08or brush.

2:08:12A view looking down this um subject

2:08:15property looking towards Plymouth.

2:08:18Um this is ingress and egress to the

2:08:20rear of the building.

2:08:25Um this is one of the buildings on

2:08:26Weaver that bring the case. Well, it's

2:08:28not coming to us for over constant, but

2:08:29had it came for over concentration, this

2:08:32is another one. I believe it's two or

2:08:33three on Weaver Street, one on Chicago,

2:08:35and one on Fitzpatrick. This is the one

2:08:38that's on Plymouth Road close to

2:08:39Southfield Freeway.

2:08:43And that should complete the visuals.

2:08:45Again, the subject site is in an in this

2:08:47restricted industrial district, but they

2:08:49were denied their site plan,

2:08:51um which would have gotten them to the

2:08:52SLU hearing. And that completes the

2:08:54visuals, Mr. Chairman.

2:08:56>> Thanks, Inspector Pierford.

2:08:59How you doing today?

2:09:00>> Hello, how you doing?

2:09:01>> Good, thank you.

2:09:02>> Correct the mic.

2:09:03>> Keep doing.

2:09:05Good. We can get your name and uh

2:09:07address, and then the inspector will

2:09:09swear you in. Are you the only person

2:09:10speaking today?

2:09:11>> Yes, sir.

2:09:12>> Okay.

2:09:13>> My name is Jaron Young. My address is

2:09:1629739

2:09:18Sugar Spring Road, Farmington Hills,

2:09:22Michigan 48334.

2:09:24>> Would you raise your right hand for me?

2:09:26>> Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am.

2:09:27>> And you affirm your testimony for the

2:09:28board today is truth?

2:09:29>> Yes, ma'am.

2:09:29>> Thank you.

2:09:30>> Okay. The first thing that we do is uh

2:09:33we establish standing, which is uh

2:09:35just means that you have the right to

2:09:37represent the property, and Attorney

2:09:39Savage is going to make that

2:09:40determination.

2:09:43>> Morning.

2:09:44>> Good morning.

2:09:46>> Erica Savage on behalf of the city of

2:09:48Detroit Law Department. These questions

2:09:50are designed to assess your standing.

2:09:52Pursuant to section 50-3-3 of the city

2:09:55of Detroit Zoning Ordinance, any party

2:09:57who petitions the Board of Zoning

2:09:59Appeals must have sufficient standing,

2:10:01which means you either have a

2:10:04legal

2:10:04>> [clears throat]

2:10:04>> interest in the property, or the

2:10:05property owner, or you're authorized by

2:10:08the property owner to appear here today

2:10:10on their behalf.

2:10:12Um after a search of the public records

2:10:15for the property at 18425

2:10:17Weaver, we obtained a quick claim deed

2:10:20recorded on October 19th, 2017

2:10:24at Liber 54015,

2:10:26page 224.

2:10:28And the owner is

2:10:30Majed F. Dabish,

2:10:32Weaver Property LLC.

2:10:34Um

2:10:36with the file, I sent

2:10:38um

2:10:39there was an affidavit of proof of

2:10:41interest

2:10:43um that was initiated with

2:10:46um

2:10:49um Weaver Property LLC with

2:10:53Garen Is it Garen Young? Garen Young.

2:10:55Garen Young.

2:10:56>> And that's dated February 13th, 2026.

2:11:00And it does include um the change of use

2:11:03and building permit process, which is

2:11:04good.

2:11:05So, but could you still explain for the

2:11:08board your your relationship with Weaver

2:11:11Property LLC?

2:11:13>> Um I I've just uh signed a

2:11:17uh 3 to 5-year lease um with

2:11:22Dabish.

2:11:23And um that was in October 2025.

2:11:28>> Okay.

2:11:30And so, subsequent to the lease, was

2:11:32this affidavit of proof of interest? Cuz

2:11:34that was February of 2026.

2:11:36>> Yes, ma'am.

2:11:37>> Okay.

2:11:38Um and throughout this project, are you

2:11:40the only person

2:11:42who um is associated with being

2:11:46authorized to appear before the board?

2:11:48>> Yes, ma'am.

2:11:49>> Okay. Um

2:11:53All right. Well, based off of uh the

2:11:55statements placed on the record, I'm

2:11:58satisfied with the document that was um

2:12:01provided to the board regarding the

2:12:03proof of interest. Um I did look

2:12:06[clears throat] up the the LLC, and um

2:12:10the individual who signed the um who

2:12:14entered into the affidavit,

2:12:16Mr. [clears throat]

2:12:17um

2:12:19Young is the resident agent of the LLC.

2:12:22So, I'm satisfied with standing to

2:12:25proceed.

2:12:26>> Thank you.

2:12:27Thank you, Attorney Savage. All right,

2:12:29Mr. Young, what brings you before the

2:12:31Board of Zoning Appeals today?

2:12:33>> Yes, um so

2:12:36I did a site plan um

2:12:38uh my uh counsel uh is not able to be

2:12:41here right now. Uh

2:12:43Mr. Tony Michael, who was the

2:12:46uh architect for the drawings. Um

2:12:50So,

2:12:52I was denied the site plan and

2:12:55instead of me change Well, I actually

2:12:58wanted to make some adjustments to the

2:13:00site plan because yet I knew that

2:13:03the light uh duty

2:13:06uh repair

2:13:08um I was not aware that the light duty

2:13:11repair

2:13:13uh consisted of

2:13:15uh I believe it's four additional

2:13:17spaces. Now, um I'm not a mechanic. I

2:13:21just was

2:13:22um

2:13:23I wanted to add a

2:13:25small repairs, you know,

2:13:28just because you know, I was

2:13:31uh getting the site plan together.

2:13:34Uh so, I added it then.

2:13:36But,

2:13:37um

2:13:37I wasn't able to to resubmit my drawing.

2:13:41They was asking me to basically I would

2:13:44have to do another uh special land use

2:13:46application in order to

2:13:48uh get another site plan review.

2:13:51So,

2:13:53um

2:13:55So, my next thing was to do was to come

2:13:58to the Appeal Board

2:14:00and it's just to inform you of the

2:14:03changes that

2:14:05I wanted to make on my drawings, which

2:14:07is

2:14:08to remove the light repair facility uh

2:14:12part

2:14:13out of there and just to just have the

2:14:15sales room

2:14:17which which will open me up adequate

2:14:20will

2:14:21according to the ordinances maybe I

2:14:23should have enough space

2:14:25to just to have a sales room because I

2:14:27also

2:14:29um

2:14:31I also talked to a few of those

2:14:33addresses

2:14:35from the over compass

2:14:37uh

2:14:38the over concentration

2:14:41and to

2:14:42>> [clears throat]

2:14:43>> basically my plan is to

2:14:46contract out my repair work which most

2:14:50of the vehicles that I intend to

2:14:52purchase

2:14:53it they they really don't need repair

2:14:57like really much repair but whatever

2:14:59repairs that they did need I was

2:15:02planning on

2:15:04contracting that out to a

2:15:07already established light pair facility

2:15:10within 10 miles from

2:15:13Weaver.

2:15:14um

2:15:17so

2:15:19I basically

2:15:22and also I don't know if you want to get

2:15:24into everything right now but

2:15:27a few things that

2:15:30that didn't pass the ordinances

2:15:34was

2:15:35the pedestrian

2:15:38safety

2:15:40and

2:15:41I do have enough room for two-way

2:15:43driveway between the two structures.

2:15:46um

2:15:48which is approximately 19 ft which

2:15:52I understand

2:15:54ordinances should be 20.

2:15:57um

2:15:59I also wanted to add to my drawings that

2:16:03um

2:16:05instead of

2:16:07to

2:16:10place a

2:16:11a entrance

2:16:13in the rear of the building, which is

2:16:15the west side of the building

2:16:17where

2:16:19I wanted

2:16:21my customer parking.

2:16:23Now, technically

2:16:25um

2:16:27being a car seller I'm a car seller

2:16:29right now, not quite a dealer.

2:16:32Uh but I'm but in order to become a

2:16:35dealer within the state of Michigan I

2:16:38need a

2:16:40structure.

2:16:42Uh so

2:16:44my um

2:16:46means of um

2:16:50uh

2:16:52my

2:16:54the way I make money is selling cars.

2:16:57Um I buy and sell cars, and that's how

2:17:00that was been my means of you know,

2:17:02receiving funds, you know, for me and my

2:17:04family. But, unfortunately

2:17:08I reached the max according to the

2:17:10secretary of state

2:17:13of how many vehicles I could sell

2:17:14without being having a dealer's license.

2:17:17Okay.

2:17:18Um

2:17:21So, really uh how I've been selling

2:17:23vehicles is uh truly has been online

2:17:25only.

2:17:27I would um

2:17:29post my cars on my website

2:17:32or Facebook Marketplace

2:17:34Craigslist, OfferUp.

2:17:37And once I

2:17:39get a

2:17:40potential sale I would then deliver that

2:17:43car to them.

2:17:45And that's how that's how I want to

2:17:46continue

2:17:48my

2:17:49dealership

2:17:51if I'm granted ultimately granted

2:17:53special land use.

2:17:55So,

2:17:56but in order to operate for business, I

2:17:58understand that

2:18:00um I need to be open to the public.

2:18:03So,

2:18:04with that being said,

2:18:07um,

2:18:08I can be open to the public

2:18:10and I would, uh, was

2:18:13thinking that

2:18:14if

2:18:16if I, uh,

2:18:20if I put a a entrance in the rear of the

2:18:22building where I do have parking,

2:18:26um, according to the state of Michigan,

2:18:29uh,

2:18:31I need 800 sq ft

2:18:35of customer parking

2:18:37and 1,100 sq ft

2:18:40for a sales room. That's I know that's

2:18:42don't got nothing to do with y'all.

2:18:43That's just the state requirement of

2:18:45being a dealer. At least that's the

2:18:47smallest structure that I can have,

2:18:49which

2:18:50it it goes it's it's it's it's just it's

2:18:53enough to get for me to get started

2:18:56with, you know, with

2:18:59with what I got going on.

2:19:01So, if I was to put a entrance, which

2:19:04I'm my architect is prepared to make

2:19:06these corrections on the drawings, but

2:19:08I'm not I know I'm not here today to to

2:19:10be to submit it to y'all.

2:19:13You know, I, you know, I was told that,

2:19:16you know, whatever submitted is going to

2:19:18be what it is, but

2:19:20um,

2:19:21whatever was in the original site plan,

2:19:23I'm just trying to because,

2:19:25you know, um,

2:19:27I've been funding this everything, you

2:19:29know,

2:19:30and it's really it's been it's been a

2:19:32long time coming and, you know, right

2:19:36now I'm not really able to make a lot of

2:19:38money because first of all,

2:19:41I'm at my max on, uh, the legitimate

2:19:44amount of car that I can sell.

2:19:46And then,

2:19:48I I thought that I could propose to the

2:19:50board

2:19:51of my new

2:19:53the change of my site plans

2:19:55versus going through the going through

2:19:58the uh, a new application and special

2:20:00name use which

2:20:02I've done it I I started the application

2:20:04in January

2:20:05or February.

2:20:07So, you know,

2:20:09is

2:20:10I figured hopefully

2:20:12that I could um

2:20:16present my my changes here

2:20:19and

2:20:20um

2:20:24and go along. So,

2:20:25if

2:20:27my thing was basically

2:20:29all I want to propose is to

2:20:33take the light duty repair out

2:20:36of my drawings

2:20:38and then also add a rear entrance which

2:20:40would allow the pedestrians is is enough

2:20:43is just short of 20 ft down the

2:20:46driveway.

2:20:48It's 19 ft.

2:20:50Um

2:20:52I'm ask for exception with that so that

2:20:55the traffic in and out be there and I do

2:20:58have adequate enough space in the back

2:21:01for at least uh

2:21:03more than what the state asks.

2:21:05Uh I have more than enough space in the

2:21:07back

2:21:09for a customer parking in

2:21:11in a way where they can get in and get

2:21:14out

2:21:15um

2:21:17with

2:21:18uh

2:21:19a area

2:21:21for a walkway into the rear entrance.

2:21:24And um

2:21:26I was just hoping that if I took the

2:21:28repair facility out added the entrance

2:21:29to the back, also since I'm not doing a

2:21:32repair facility,

2:21:34I don't I'm not going to have any waste.

2:21:36I'm contracting that most of the waste

2:21:38no parts. I don't need

2:21:40I don't need areas for parts or fluids

2:21:44or nothing like that. I don't I don't

2:21:45need no extra storage but the vehicles.

2:21:49Um

2:21:51So, uh

2:21:54I wouldn't need no extra storage.

2:21:57I wouldn't need no uh

2:22:00no uh concreted wall dumpster.

2:22:03You know, the only waste and the

2:22:07uh trash that I would have and what

2:22:09whatever comes out of my office,

2:22:11shredded papers, toilet paper,

2:22:15food boxes, you know, from lunch and

2:22:17stuff like that. It's I wouldn't really

2:22:19deal with

2:22:21no

2:22:22I I wouldn't necessarily

2:22:24need a

2:22:26concreted wall dumpster.

2:22:28Um

2:22:31and

2:22:33and those are the things that I'm trying

2:22:35to do today.

2:22:36>> Okay.

2:22:37Um

2:22:38So,

2:22:40let me uh

2:22:43You probably said and I didn't hear it.

2:22:44You already went through a SLU special

2:22:47land use hearing?

2:22:48>> No.

2:22:49>> You never made it

2:22:49>> No, I was denied my site plan.

2:22:51>> All right. So, basically where we're at

2:22:53is that you've been selling cars out of

2:22:56your house or you know, wherever.

2:22:58You've reached the maximum, so you can't

2:23:00sell any more cars, make any more money.

2:23:02So, you decided that you're going to do

2:23:04a

2:23:05a uh

2:23:07a facility

2:23:08where you you know, sell,

2:23:10showcase, and sell cars, but also if

2:23:13those cars needed a repair, you wanted

2:23:15to repair them originally on your site.

2:23:18But now because of city code, you can't

2:23:20do that.

2:23:22Now you want to change from being a a

2:23:24light uh duty repair facility to being a

2:23:28uh

2:23:28>> Just a sales car dealership.

2:23:31>> Just a sales from yes.

2:23:32>> auto auto car dealership where you're

2:23:34not going to do any repairs on on site.

2:23:37You're going to offload those to uh

2:23:39to one of your neighbors or uh you know,

2:23:42somebody within 10 miles you said.

2:23:44Um

2:23:46Uh and you submitted a site plan to the

2:23:49city.

2:23:50>> Yes.

2:23:51>> And they denied it.

2:23:52And they won't allow you to resubmit?

2:23:56>> They wouldn't allow me to change my

2:23:57drawings. They said I would have to

2:23:59start all over.

2:24:02Because

2:24:04I guess the the site plan has already

2:24:06been denied. I mean

2:24:07>> Okay.

2:24:09>> [sighs]

2:24:09>> They were almost maybe considering it.

2:24:13But then from from whatever technicality

2:24:16they said, you know what, you know, you

2:24:18just you either do this appeal as soon

2:24:20as possible, I mean before this date, or

2:24:23you know, but but can I add one thing?

2:24:26I'm not like I said, I'm not a mechanic.

2:24:28Uh when I got with my architect, he just

2:24:31suggested some things

2:24:33cuz I already planned on

2:24:36um

2:24:38I already planned on contracting these

2:24:40services out.

2:24:42I guess he felt like it was enough.

2:24:45I could have added that.

2:24:47So that's what I just you know, that's

2:24:49what I said, okay, well, just you know,

2:24:51add it in there just in case cuz I do

2:24:54plan on, you know, growing.

2:24:57Um

2:24:59and

2:25:00you know, so maybe why not add it? If he

2:25:03suggested it, why not add it? But

2:25:04originally

2:25:06until I got to that point, I did just

2:25:09just wanted a sales room.

2:25:11>> Sure. Okay. Got you. Any other questions

2:25:14for the petitioner?

2:25:17Member Sherman.

2:25:19>> So why was it or why couldn't you modify

2:25:23the original site plan?

2:25:25>> I tried. They wouldn't let

2:25:28the the zoning didn't let me. I even

2:25:29came down here, talked to them.

2:25:32Um

2:25:36What they said basically was

2:25:40uh

2:25:47If if I did submit some new drawings,

2:25:50and you know, once the denial hits, they

2:25:52automatically

2:25:54you got a certain amount of time to

2:25:55appeal.

2:25:56So, I I didn't, you know, I couldn't

2:25:58risk not appealing it

2:26:01and then, uh on time. And and I and I

2:26:05constantly was very adamant to, you

2:26:07know, every day calling, you know,

2:26:09coming down here, and I'm like, "Okay,

2:26:11well, you know, can I submit these new

2:26:13drawings?" And at first, they said,

2:26:15"Yeah."

2:26:16They said I could. But then, after they

2:26:19talked to whatever higher-up they needed

2:26:21to talk to, they came back and said,

2:26:23"You know, it's best for you to just do

2:26:24it like this."

2:26:25Or start over. So, that this is where

2:26:28I'm at with it.

2:26:29>> And what's the process How long is the

2:26:31process to start over?

2:26:33>> Like I said, I put my application in, uh

2:26:36with zoning, in

2:26:38January.

2:26:39And here we are in October.

2:26:42And I just got denied last Well, no, no,

2:26:45no.

2:26:46I got denied at the end of July. So, it

2:26:48really And and

2:26:51to be, uh

2:26:53honest with you,

2:26:55it was just my persistence the reason

2:26:57why I got put, you know, to July because

2:27:00they kept, you know, I don't, you know,

2:27:03they just kept delaying.

2:27:06Cuz if they had problems with the

2:27:08ordinances, like, they never for months

2:27:10they never said, "Okay, Of of course,

2:27:14they're not going to give me no denial

2:27:15letter and tell me little bits and

2:27:16pieces of why the ordinances don't

2:27:18match. Of course, they're not going to

2:27:19do it like that. But they took

2:27:22like months to

2:27:25Say, for example,

2:27:29uh the case they looked for, it was

2:27:3200052.

2:27:34I'm 00057.

2:27:37I'm just came after them probably and

2:27:40they have already had a hearing and

2:27:42everything. So, for what reason why my

2:27:45case didn't get

2:27:47you know, I I I call I'm I'm I came down

2:27:50here called

2:27:52for months trying to expedite the

2:27:53process which the best I can without

2:27:56being disrespectful or anything.

2:27:59So, that's just what I was left with uh

2:28:02to start over

2:28:03which when I started

2:28:06they did tell me that

2:28:09if I was to put it uh

2:28:12if I was to put an application in

2:28:14January, I should be having a hearing by

2:28:16February, March. That's what I was told

2:28:19before I put in a application.

2:28:23>> Okay, thank you.

2:28:25>> Any other questions from the board?

2:28:27>> Yes.

2:28:29>> Good morning, Mr. Young.

2:28:30>> Good morning.

2:28:31>> Um so,

2:28:33now you're going to resubmit the plans

2:28:37and remove the light duty

2:28:39piece out of it?

2:28:41Because initially you were um you needed

2:28:45uh I think it was

2:28:47uh so many spaces, three additional

2:28:50spaces for uh the light duty vehicle

2:28:53service operations.

2:28:55>> Uh yeah, it was four.

2:28:57It was four that what I read through one

2:29:00of the ordinances, I believe.

2:29:03>> Put it back on.

2:29:04>> I believe it's when you have you have at

2:29:06the least

2:29:09correct me if I'm wrong or, you know,

2:29:12from my recollection recollection

2:29:15uh

2:29:17I read that it is

2:29:21for light duty mechanic repair, you at

2:29:24least need four parking spaces for the

2:29:28the cars that you're working on. At

2:29:30least four.

2:29:32So

2:29:32>> Okay.

2:29:34>> So if I was to take that out, I'll be

2:29:37four spaces less, which

2:29:40I I do have uh

2:29:43if I was to take that part out of my

2:29:44drawings,

2:29:47that will open up even more sales room

2:29:50space for me, which is which is better

2:29:52for me anyway.

2:29:53>> Okay. It says eight spaces within the

2:29:55dealership.

2:29:57Um

2:29:57>> That was with that was including

2:30:00I mean, that was not including

2:30:04that was not including the the light

2:30:06repair that was

2:30:09adjacent to the sales room.

2:30:11>> Okay.

2:30:12>> So if I was to just open that up and

2:30:14make it a bigger sales room,

2:30:17then I probably get I can have I can

2:30:19have 12 spaces in the inside.

2:30:21>> So that would be

2:30:23Okay, so it was 14 spaces all together.

2:30:27Eight spaces for the inside dealership

2:30:29and three spaces for off um off the

2:30:34street space in the rear of the

2:30:35property.

2:30:35>> There's no off the street space. Um

2:30:39The parking is in the rear of the

2:30:40building, which is east uh I'm sorry,

2:30:43west of the building. The the customer

2:30:46parking will will be in the rear of the

2:30:48building, which

2:30:51um

2:30:53There

2:30:54Although the state require to have 800

2:30:57square feet for customer parking, I

2:31:00probably have

2:31:02uh

2:31:041,500 square feet in the back.

2:31:07>> Okay.

2:31:08>> almost double what the state require.

2:31:10>> Right.

2:31:11>> And then they only require 11 uh

2:31:14100 square feet for the sales room,

2:31:16which if I took the light duty repair

2:31:18out, I'll almost double that.

2:31:20>> Mhm.

2:31:22Okay.

2:31:24All right.

2:31:24>> Hey, any other questions for the

2:31:26petitioner? Member Osborn.

2:31:28>> Good morning, Mr. Young.

2:31:29>> Good morning.

2:31:30>> Member Osborn.

2:31:31>> Yes, sir.

2:31:32>> You spoke about the sound like the

2:31:34extended timeline of reviewing or or or

2:31:38engaging with the city BC zoning.

2:31:42I'm looking at one of your letters dated

2:31:44August a letter to you

2:31:46from BC dated August 20th

2:31:51and it says this is your third review

2:31:54of your

2:31:57conditional use.

2:32:00Do you

2:32:02Do you have any record of what happened

2:32:03with the previous two and how long that

2:32:06process took?

2:32:08>> How can it be a third review? Um

2:32:12So what you think they saying that they

2:32:14looked at my site plan three times? They

2:32:16reviewed it three times? Oh, no, well

2:32:20No, cuz that's that's the part of the

2:32:23uh

2:32:24That's the part of the process. They

2:32:26They look at my first site plan and then

2:32:28they ask me about a few things like they

2:32:30ask okay, what you going

2:32:32What about a trash can and what about

2:32:34this? But see

2:32:36that's what I'm saying.

2:32:38I If If I did have three reviews, that's

2:32:41because

2:32:43I constantly made them get back to it

2:32:46because

2:32:47they they wasn't giving me a decision.

2:32:50Or like okay, say for example, I'm not

2:32:53hearing nothing for two months. Hey,

2:32:55what's going on with this case? Okay, oh

2:32:56yeah. Then the same day I get some

2:32:58questions.

2:32:59Like you asking me questions because I'm

2:33:02asking you know, basically they

2:33:05basically

2:33:08It's like it was sitting on their desk

2:33:10until I asked them and then now they

2:33:11want to ask me some questions, you know?

2:33:14Um

2:33:15to

2:33:17maybe

2:33:20have a reason for the delay.

2:33:23So, it sounds like you were submitting

2:33:25information, weren't hearing anything,

2:33:28and then when you reached out to ask,

2:33:31"Am I moving forward?" then they brought

2:33:33up something else.

2:33:34>> Yeah.

2:33:35>> And then you addressed that, and that

2:33:37was

2:33:38>> immediately. I would address it

2:33:39immediately. Yes.

2:33:41>> Okay, so that's maybe maybe that's how

2:33:43we got to a third [clears throat]

2:33:45review with this third review.

2:33:46>> So, now I had no reviews after they

2:33:48denied me. I never

2:33:50Out of them three three reviews, they

2:33:52never pointed out, like say for example,

2:33:56the main the main

2:33:58violation with the ordinances is

2:34:00probably overconcentration in the

2:34:01parking spaces. They asking about

2:34:05trash,

2:34:07um

2:34:09I mean, it you know,

2:34:11what else did they ask about? Um

2:34:14landscaping.

2:34:15Yes, stuff like that. Really, the main

2:34:19violations of the ordinances is the

2:34:21overconcentration or the parking spaces

2:34:25not being enough room.

2:34:27You know, I wish I'd have known that at

2:34:30the beginning to address that problem. I

2:34:31would have changed my drawings.

2:34:33I would have changed them right there.

2:34:36I would have resubmitted them before

2:34:37before I got a denial.

2:34:39>> You use a virtual model to sell

2:34:41vehicles.

2:34:43>> Yes. I have a online uh

2:34:44>> So, that was one of my concerns was

2:34:47driving down Waverly.

2:34:50I mean, it's not the

2:34:53most

2:34:54uh appealing to come down that street to

2:34:56look for a used car. So, that being

2:34:59said, the overconcentration piece,

2:35:021 2 3

2:35:04Looks like there's five

2:35:07light duty vehicle service

2:35:08establishments.

2:35:10No, four. No, three

2:35:13light duty

2:35:15service establishments, and then two

2:35:16motor vehicles use sales room sales

2:35:19lots.

2:35:22You had that property for a while. I

2:35:23drove down there

2:35:26on a Sunday, which I'm assuming all of

2:35:27the businesses were closed, but it just

2:35:29doesn't look like there's a lot going

2:35:31on.

2:35:32>> It's It's not

2:35:33>> So, can you speak to the traffic the the

2:35:36hours

2:35:38of operation of other existing vehicle,

2:35:40I mean,

2:35:41businesses?

2:35:42>> Yeah, it's like from 9:00

2:35:43>> understand what that looks like.

2:35:45>> Yeah, day like [clears throat] today.

2:35:46But see, 9:00 to 5:00 it it it looks

2:35:49like people is operating on Everybody

2:35:53like all my neighbors

2:35:55uh like at 5:00 all the cars are gone,

2:35:58but from 9:00 to 5:00 it's a good amount

2:36:01of people. Everybody out taking doing

2:36:04their business, you know, and stuff like

2:36:06that. Um and and to add, I looked at

2:36:11I I looked through them properties is

2:36:13when I got the denial.

2:36:15A couple of them addresses on the over

2:36:17concentration are abandoned, and it look

2:36:20like they might have been abandoned for

2:36:21a long time. And also, a couple of us

2:36:26One or two of them is getting double

2:36:28counted because

2:36:30they are light duty and sales room.

2:36:33But it adds to the addresses like it's a

2:36:36whole another address, so it's like

2:36:38some of the addresses is twice as far as

2:36:42the over concentration.

2:36:50>> I have a question.

2:36:51>> Yes, sir.

2:36:52Go ahead.

2:36:54>> So,

2:36:55is this something that

2:36:58this board can do to help him modify his

2:37:00plans or just eliminate the light duty?

2:37:03>> I mean, that's that's what we're here

2:37:05for. So, we'll we'll vote on it.

2:37:08But yeah, you're exactly correct.

2:37:11>> Pardon me?

2:37:13>> I I won't.

2:37:14Member Clark.

2:37:16>> Can Can I address that?

2:37:19I will

2:37:20Can I speak? Um

2:37:24I don't know how true it is,

2:37:26but

2:37:28uh I I was told that

2:37:34Right, I couldn't resubmit the drawings,

2:37:35but

2:37:37you know, it might have been a

2:37:38possibility that

2:37:42um

2:37:44it it could have been it might have been

2:37:46a possibility that

2:37:48whatever change that I'm proposing

2:37:53that I might could

2:37:57uh

2:38:00Whatever you Whatever I'm proposing,

2:38:01whatever you tell me to show you that

2:38:04I'm able to maybe just to show the board

2:38:06that those things. I don't know. I'm not

2:38:08I'm I'm not really all the way like

2:38:10sure, but

2:38:12I tried my best just to resubmit them

2:38:14drawings, and they just wouldn't let me.

2:38:18Member Clark.

2:38:21>> Um good morning, Mr. Young.

2:38:24>> [clears throat]

2:38:24>> Is it your understanding that with the

2:38:26proposed changes that you've talked

2:38:28about, that you've shared with us,

2:38:31which if I understand it correctly, will

2:38:33just be

2:38:34um

2:38:35used auto sales, no light duty service,

2:38:38correct?

2:38:39>> Absolutely not. No.

2:38:40>> With that change,

2:38:43your location will

2:38:46qualify as being uh as and not be

2:38:50considered over concentration for that

2:38:53for um

2:38:54motor vehicle sales. Because I'm looking

2:38:57at the denial information, and uh as

2:39:02Member [clears throat] Parker mentioned,

2:39:04there were five reasons five addresses

2:39:07included in that information. For Three

2:39:10of them had to do with the light duty

2:39:12sales, light duty vehicle

2:39:14>> them were sales.

2:39:15>> service.

2:39:15>> And two of them were sales. Yes.

2:39:17>> And then

2:39:18there is one listed um that

2:39:22refers to motor vehicle sale motor

2:39:25vehicle used sales sales room or sales

2:39:28lot. And that's only 275 ft from your

2:39:31address.

2:39:32>> Can I Can I

2:39:33>> Uh so

2:39:35do you have some

2:39:36information that makes you think

2:39:39if your

2:39:41um new application is only for used car

2:39:44sales, you will

2:39:47be able to um get that approved?

2:39:52>> Um

2:39:55I guess somewhere in there that's where

2:39:56I'll be asking for an exception there,

2:39:58right? But uh I know what sales room

2:40:01you're talking about.

2:40:03Uh and that's the Fitz Patrick one.

2:40:06Which is it's it do seem like it's only

2:40:09200 some feet away, but that's because

2:40:12it's separated by a whole train track.

2:40:14Like behind my building

2:40:16is a railroad track. There's no traffic.

2:40:20There's nobody

2:40:23right there.

2:40:24Uh

2:40:26people on other side of train track

2:40:28probably will never see my side.

2:40:31You know what I mean?

2:40:33And it's not like it's just divided by a

2:40:36street, it's divided by a whole

2:40:38uh railroad track that's

2:40:41not accessible for

2:40:43travel you know, for travel.

2:40:45And And to get to there

2:40:47I would probably have to drive

2:40:50about a mile to go all the way around.

2:40:55>> Okay, thank you.

2:40:56>> Thank you.

2:40:57>> Any other questions for the petitioner?

2:41:00Member Bowman.

2:41:02>> Yeah, um

2:41:03you mentioned a lot of um

2:41:05changes you're willing to make.

2:41:08But at the time of your denial, when

2:41:10they denied it,

2:41:12what were you presenting at that last

2:41:14hearing?

2:41:16>> The same uh information that

2:41:18>> Oh.

2:41:19>> I asked them the same the same thing I'm

2:41:21saying now. Like, "Hold on, can I change

2:41:23it? Can I resubmit?"

2:41:26But

2:41:28I was in between, okay, resubmit and

2:41:31hopefully they'll

2:41:33maybe consider it, but then miss out on

2:41:35my appeal date, which I

2:41:38So, I I was in a dilemma and

2:41:41didn't really

2:41:43and you know, didn't really know the

2:41:45best the best thing to do, you know,

2:41:48considering, you know,

2:41:51you know, it's been real time sensitive

2:41:53for me for me and, you know, I'm

2:41:56you know, been been investing a lot, you

2:41:59know, what I mean? I'm just one person

2:42:03um trying to build, you know, for my

2:42:06family. So,

2:42:08>> [clears throat]

2:42:08>> you know, I'm I'm fully invested.

2:42:11So, uh another 6 months will, you know,

2:42:14it'll tear me down. You I mean, you

2:42:16know, it'll it'll it'll be hard for me.

2:42:19It'll be a hardship, another 6 months.

2:42:23>> Okay. Um the other thing I'm I'm looking

2:42:24at here is

2:42:26I I saw the plan and it just kind of

2:42:29looks small, the surface area for a used

2:42:32car

2:42:33place.

2:42:35Um didn't seem like you'd be able to

2:42:36have that many cars for sale at a time.

2:42:39So, I'm just kind of wondering how

2:42:40that's practical.

2:42:42>> Well, I understand that um

2:42:45Well, well, the plan, the original plan,

2:42:47the original drawings, it was really on

2:42:51online sales only.

2:42:54But

2:42:57what my counsel did, when I say console,

2:43:00I mean my my architect who drew it up

2:43:03for me, he had me submit to building

2:43:06first, which I didn't understand

2:43:10that process and I felt like

2:43:14um

2:43:17uh

2:43:18that was kind of unnecessary.

2:43:21But

2:43:22uh what I was saying uh

2:43:30But it's in the drawings.

2:43:33You know, once I went through building

2:43:35that

2:43:35then I know that I you know, cuz I have

2:43:37to operate, although I'm

2:43:40predominantly online sales, I still have

2:43:43to be open for business. So,

2:43:45even though I'm open for business now,

2:43:47you know, if God's willing be open for

2:43:49business from 9:00 to 5:00, right?

2:43:52I'm predominantly online and delivering

2:43:55my vehicles and I do have

2:44:00I do have uh uh

2:44:04lots that's contracted out for if I did

2:44:06have a

2:44:08uh

2:44:09more cars, it's just

2:44:11whatever cars is in this building is

2:44:14that's the ones that's up for sale right

2:44:16now and

2:44:17whenever new cars get as they go, more

2:44:20cars will come.

2:44:22You know, it it that small bi- building

2:44:25it just don't define is you know,

2:44:28exactly what

2:44:30um

2:44:31how how much

2:44:33that I'll be able to to do. So,

2:44:36so

2:44:37>> Originally, you were selling online, but

2:44:39you exceeded what you're How many cars

2:44:42are you allowed to sell in in Michigan?

2:44:45>> It's only like 10.

2:44:47>> Okay. And so, you exceeded the 10, so

2:44:50now you need to form a a you know, a new

2:44:53business and have a

2:44:55you know, have a building in a location

2:44:57and stuff like that so you can sell more

2:44:59than 10.

2:45:00>> Yes, to abide by the law and not break

2:45:02no rules.

2:45:03This is what I got to do to

2:45:06provide.

2:45:07>> Okay. Any other questions?

2:45:10Okay, if you want to go ahead and step

2:45:11back, we're going to hear from uh the

2:45:13law department now. And just kind of pay

2:45:15attention to what they have to say cuz

2:45:17uh you'll have an opportunity to uh

2:45:19speak to the board

2:45:20uh about the comments that are made.

2:45:23Thank you.

2:45:24>> [clears throat]

2:45:26>> Attorney Arkin,

2:45:28how are you?

2:45:30>> Good morning, sir. I hope you can

2:45:32hear me and good morning to the board.

2:45:34>> Absolutely. [clears throat]

2:45:34>> Apologies for a bit of a cough I have

2:45:36this morning.

2:45:37>> Yeah, no problem. Give me 1 second. So,

2:45:38for the board members, uh

2:45:41set aside the approval criteria for now

2:45:43and if you want to uh pick up

2:45:45uh attorney's uh Arkin's uh letter, uh

2:45:48that would be great. And I'm going to in

2:45:50particular on the second page, there's

2:45:52four items uh that I think he's going to

2:45:54detail to us uh

2:45:56with his remarks today.

2:45:58Go ahead, Attorney Arkin.

2:46:00>> [clears throat]

2:46:01>> Um

2:46:02thank you, sir. Through the chair,

2:46:04as as you mentioned, I've

2:46:06have submitted a a letter for your

2:46:09review that was dated October 5th. Um

2:46:13and um also have submitted a short slide

2:46:17deck, a short presentation.

2:46:19If uh Director Reardon wants to put that

2:46:23up or I can share at his

2:46:25preference.

2:46:27Um

2:46:28won't take more than just a few minutes

2:46:29to go through this and after that would

2:46:33welcome the opportunity to address some

2:46:35of the

2:46:36um appellant's

2:46:38comments directly.

2:46:39Um

2:46:41so

2:46:41>> [clears throat]

2:46:43>> Sure, this is just as a PDF, so

2:46:46um but to go to the next to the first

2:46:49slide

2:46:56Again, to just provide a

2:46:58brief introduction,

2:47:00um, to the property in question,

2:47:03um,

2:47:04and

2:47:04>> [clears throat]

2:47:05>> Inspector Perifoy provided a much more

2:47:07detailed, um, photo journal,

2:47:10um,

2:47:11um, of the subject property, but this is

2:47:13to again just provide a quick

2:47:15introduction and to emphasize

2:47:17that the site is bound on both sides by

2:47:21other commercial structures and is

2:47:24fairly site limited, um, on all sides

2:47:27without opportunity to expand. It's a

2:47:30single-story commercial building. The

2:47:33driveway up along the east

2:47:35side, uh, to a small parking area in the

2:47:39back.

2:47:40Um, not a particularly complicated site,

2:47:42but also not a particularly large site.

2:47:46Um, on the next slide

2:47:50just shows [clears throat] an excerpt of

2:47:51the site plan, which I think by now you

2:47:53are familiar

2:47:56um, but again, just to highlight the

2:47:58different uses on the on the next slide

2:48:01um, for your convenience, provided

2:48:05>> [clears throat]

2:48:05>> um, just a little bit of color coding

2:48:08using the artistic the extent of

2:48:11artistic skills I picked up in law

2:48:13school, um, just to show the different

2:48:15areas,

2:48:17um, within the building. Office and

2:48:19administrative area to the front in

2:48:21yellow, and then the sales room area in

2:48:25blue,

2:48:26the white duty vehicle service area

2:48:29proposed in green behind it. That's the

2:48:32entirety of the building envelope and

2:48:35then in red is, uh, an outdoor parking

2:48:37space,

2:48:39um, behind that. So, the yellow, blue,

2:48:42and green uh collectively are the

2:48:44structure itself and then the

2:48:47um limited parking space to the rear and

2:48:50the driveway down the side.

2:48:53Um again, on the next slide

2:48:56>> [clears throat]

2:48:57>> just provide a fairly straightforward

2:48:59summary of BC's position, which is

2:49:02simply that

2:49:03because the site plan that was submitted

2:49:08and was considered failed to satisfy

2:49:11some of the applicable approval criteria

2:49:14set forth

2:49:15in the zoning ordinance.

2:49:17Um and through them other applicable

2:49:20zoning requirements, BC's decision to

2:49:23deny the site plan was correct and for

2:49:27purposes of this appeal, again in which

2:49:30you are evaluating

2:49:31the reasonableness or correctness of

2:49:33that decision at that time,

2:49:36that the appeal

2:49:38sh- um

2:49:40should not be affirmed. That That BC's

2:49:43denial should be affirmed and the appeal

2:49:45should be overturned.

2:49:48So, on the next slide,

2:49:50>> [clears throat]

2:49:50>> actually the next two slides just

2:49:53quickly summarizes the six points that

2:49:55BC made as the basis for its denial.

2:49:59Again, to quickly summarize, I tried to

2:50:01provide some highlighting for your

2:50:04convenience.

2:50:05The site plan is simply just not large

2:50:07enough to accommodate the combination of

2:50:10planned uses desired. That's again the

2:50:13um

2:50:14used car sales display area as well as

2:50:17the light duty vehicle service area that

2:50:19was proposed on the site plan submitted.

2:50:23Um BC noted

2:50:25the other competing uses that were, you

2:50:28know, too close, not in compliance with

2:50:30applicable spacing requirements.

2:50:33Um and given, you you the concentration

2:50:36of uses on on the limited site

2:50:39um in that third bullet BCD noted that,

2:50:42you know, the congestion of the site

2:50:44could

2:50:44>> [clears throat]

2:50:45>> excuse me interfere

2:50:46with vehicle and pedestrian circulation.

2:50:49Basically, the ability of people and

2:50:51vehicles to to safely move

2:50:54around the site ingress and egress

2:50:57um etc.

2:50:59On the next slide just again continues

2:51:02BCD's findings.

2:51:04Um it noted the lack of

2:51:06the concrete walkway between the

2:51:09building and the outdoor parking area.

2:51:11Again, that's to provide pedestrians a a

2:51:14safe way to move around the site.

2:51:18Um around the parking area specifically.

2:51:21Um and that [clears throat]

2:51:24you know, again for the stated purpose

2:51:27uses the the site as proposed did not

2:51:30provide

2:51:31sufficient, you know, waste storage

2:51:34facilities um or

2:51:37um interior facilities for the proposed

2:51:41vehicle services. Typically,

2:51:44BCD would and I would say reasonably

2:51:46expect some sort of storage area for um

2:51:51auto parts, fluids, etc. as well as

2:51:54proper waste receptacles

2:51:57um for any, you know, waste materials,

2:52:00used oils, etc.

2:52:02Those

2:52:03um

2:52:04facilities that BCD would expect any

2:52:06vehicle service establishment to have

2:52:10were omitted and missing from the site

2:52:13plan that were submitted.

2:52:17And on the [clears throat] next slide I

2:52:19really just try and synthesize this into

2:52:21three points.

2:52:23Um just three general concerns sort of

2:52:26providing a through line or general

2:52:28motivation behind BCD's findings.

2:52:31First, that the site plan just simply

2:52:33couldn't comply with multiple applicable

2:52:37zoning requirements for these uses.

2:52:40That the site plan was simply missing

2:52:43multiple necessary features that BC

2:52:46would have expected for these uses.

2:52:49And

2:52:51third,

2:52:52again this the spacing issue that the

2:52:54property was simply too close to too

2:52:56many other

2:52:57auto-related uses. You know, it's not

2:53:00uncommon for a proposed establishment

2:53:04such as this to perhaps be too close to

2:53:07maybe one or two and for

2:53:11other competing uses, but I believe BC

2:53:14counted five in this case,

2:53:18which was quite notable.

2:53:20So again, to quickly just go through

2:53:21these

2:53:22general observations.

2:53:25Um

2:53:26>> [clears throat]

2:53:26>> of the the zoning requirements that BC

2:53:30found the the site plan couldn't could

2:53:33not comply

2:53:34included, you know, these four specific

2:53:37requirements at the least. One,

2:53:40that the display area

2:53:43be sufficient in size to provide space

2:53:46for 12 motor vehicles and notably

2:53:49including driveways and aisle ways to

2:53:51allow for cars to move in and out of

2:53:55those spaces.

2:53:56Um

2:53:59that the vehicle services must be

2:54:01conducted entirely within the enclosed

2:54:04building.

2:54:05Um BC was suspicious of that given the

2:54:08lack of again any storage or, you know,

2:54:12waste fluid facilities or space in this

2:54:16vehicle service area.

2:54:18Um again, the missing pedestrian walkway

2:54:22what is a requirement um,

2:54:26called out in the code and it also the

2:54:28missing

2:54:30refuse area and and waste removal areas.

2:54:33Um, no waste facilities were visibly

2:54:36proposed on the site plan.

2:54:39And, you know, again, these are not just

2:54:41BCA's arbitrary expectations. These are

2:54:45requirements expressly put in the letter

2:54:48of the zoning ordinance that do need to

2:54:50be complied with for the proposed uses.

2:54:56On the next slide,

2:54:58again,

2:54:59>> [clears throat]

2:54:59>> touching on some of the same

2:55:01issues of how some of these were, uh,

2:55:05features were simply missing

2:55:08from the site.

2:55:10Um, notably, the lack of driveways and

2:55:15drive aisles to access the, um, display

2:55:19spaces.

2:55:21Um, the only access way for vehicle to

2:55:24enter

2:55:25the building or exit the building seems

2:55:27to be in the rear through the service

2:55:29area. It seems very tight, if not

2:55:32completely unmanageable, to

2:55:35maneuver the necessary number of cars

2:55:37into the forward display area through

2:55:40that tight turn.

2:55:42The the screened waste receptacle area,

2:55:45the 5-ft pedestrian walkway,

2:55:48um, and again, the the parts storage and

2:55:51waste fluid containers, these are not

2:55:53just required, but they're, you know,

2:55:56completely missing. Not just It's not

2:55:59just that these features are not

2:56:00complying with the letter of the code to

2:56:03a T, but they are completely omitted

2:56:05from the site plan.

2:56:07And on the next slide, again,

2:56:09trying to use

2:56:10the best of my artistic abilities to

2:56:13just highlight, you know, exactly where

2:56:16I would you would expect those missing

2:56:20features to be located. Um

2:56:24I thought, you know, not just the tight

2:56:25turning area for vehicles inside the

2:56:28building, but the site plan is

2:56:30apparently proposing double parking the

2:56:33cars in the rear, which seemed to raise

2:56:36alarms for BC as to, you know, access.

2:56:39Again, if the requirement is to keep,

2:56:42you know, driveways and aisle ways clear

2:56:44for each space, um double parking the

2:56:47cars in the rear as proposed seems

2:56:50inherently problematic.

2:56:53Um again, in the green, the waste

2:56:55receptacle area, a dumpster of some

2:56:58sort, the pedestrian walkway, again,

2:57:01it's between the parking area in the

2:57:03rear of the building is where that would

2:57:04be expected and is required.

2:57:08And the part storage and waste fluid

2:57:11area uh containers inside the vehicle

2:57:14service area. So, these are things that

2:57:16were entirely missing.

2:57:20Um and then on the next slide,

2:57:23just as a visual aid, you know, we've

2:57:26discussed some of these locations

2:57:29already that are uh to which the

2:57:32property is is too close under the

2:57:35spacing requirements of the zoning

2:57:37ordinance, but just wanted to provide a

2:57:40uh general

2:57:42imperfect, but general uh scale map to

2:57:45show where those five locations

2:57:48are. Um again, three of them are

2:57:52just along [clears throat] Weaver

2:57:53Street. Um

2:57:56uh in this map, numbers two, three, and

2:57:58five. And so, questions of concentration

2:58:02um really are present. It's not um

2:58:05just that they happen to be so, you

2:58:07know, so close, but some of them are

2:58:10directly along Weaver Street, direct

2:58:12neighbors to this

2:58:14property.

2:58:18And so, to conclude the presentation

2:58:20with the last slide,

2:58:24again, just to reiterate, you know, for

2:58:26all of these

2:58:28um issues that have just discussed, BCED

2:58:31was reasonable in coming up with those

2:58:34six points that it made in determining

2:58:37that the proposed development on the

2:58:39site plan at least failed to satisfy

2:58:42multiple of the required approval

2:58:45criteria. And so, you know, with the

2:58:47plans that were presented to it, BCED

2:58:51was correct to deny those site plans for

2:58:54all those deficiencies that we just

2:58:56discussed.

2:58:57And because of that, um

2:59:00we feel that it is incumbent on this

2:59:03body to affirm BCED's decision and

2:59:06dismiss

2:59:07the appellant's appeal.

2:59:09And

2:59:09>> [clears throat]

2:59:10>> that concludes the prepared

2:59:11presentation. If I could just quickly

2:59:13take 1 minute or 2 perhaps to address

2:59:16some of the concerns that the appellant

2:59:20um

2:59:21made in his presentation.

2:59:24And first, just note

2:59:26>> [clears throat]

2:59:26>> um I think some board members have

2:59:29picked up on this, but would note that

2:59:32um

2:59:33although he mentioned he starting or

2:59:36initiating the process back in January

2:59:38or February,

2:59:40you know, the

2:59:41um there appears to have been multiple

2:59:43submissions or resubmissions of plans

2:59:46over an extended

2:59:48period of time in the first half of this

2:59:51year. And I would just point out

2:59:54that the plans that BCED finally

2:59:57considered in coming to its decision

3:00:00were, according to its letter dated July

3:00:0317th,

3:00:05uh 2026.

3:00:08Um and its uh decision based on those

3:00:11plans, where the letter is dated August

3:00:1320th. So, understanding though the

3:00:17extended process may have gone on for

3:00:19many months, BC actually sat with the

3:00:22documents for

3:00:24you know, just 1 month plus or minus a

3:00:27few days in coming to its decision.

3:00:31Um, I think also hidden in that process

3:00:34is the fact that BC did allow multiple

3:00:36revisions and resubmissions,

3:00:39um, you know, leading up to its

3:00:42decision. And that is an ordinary part

3:00:44of the process to provide some

3:00:46flexibility for applicants to get

3:00:49feedback, to revise or tweak or modify

3:00:52their plans before being subject to a

3:00:55formal administrative decision

3:00:58by BC.

3:00:59Now, that said,

3:01:01when BC makes a decision,

3:01:05um, on a case and issues a formal

3:01:07decision letter as it did on August 20th

3:01:10in this case,

3:01:11it's kind of like ringing a bell. It's

3:01:14it can't be un-rung.

3:01:17Um,

3:01:18and so,

3:01:19you know, that is I think to explain why

3:01:23BC

3:01:24couldn't then at that time, having

3:01:27issued the decision, then basically

3:01:30un-decide

3:01:32the case and reopen it for even more

3:01:36decisions.

3:01:37Um, at that course, once the decision on

3:01:40the the site plans had been made, the

3:01:42course of action were either to appeal

3:01:45that decision or to restart the the

3:01:49process, the site plan review process,

3:01:52with new new plans.

3:01:54Now, that said,

3:01:56if the um, appellant has indicated he

3:02:00does have new site plans, um, that

3:02:04>> [clears throat]

3:02:04>> um, seem as he says, would remove the

3:02:09um,

3:02:10the the light vehicle service portion,

3:02:14um, and just have a display.

3:02:17You know, I can't say at this particular

3:02:19time that a new plan along those lines

3:02:23would absolutely be approved or

3:02:25absolutely be denied, but I can say two

3:02:29things. One, that the appropriate

3:02:31pathway for that new site plan is not

3:02:35before this board. It is back at BCED,

3:02:39um,

3:02:40to per- you know, to in- re-initiate

3:02:43that review. And two, that with a new

3:02:47site plan submitted, there would be no

3:02:49need for the, you know, typical one-year

3:02:53delay that is often imposed, um, on

3:02:57resubmissions, because it would be a new

3:02:59site plan. There's no need to worry

3:03:01about that. So, again, BCED issued its

3:03:05decision on the site plans once they

3:03:07were finally submitted for decision

3:03:10within a month, and I think it's fair to

3:03:13expect that if presented with new site

3:03:16plans, BCED would act, uh, on those new

3:03:20site plans with uh, similar timing, um,

3:03:26if possible. But again,

3:03:28the this board is considering this case

3:03:30as an appeal. The the question before

3:03:33you is whether BCED's decision was

3:03:36correct based on those

3:03:38July 17th plan uh, July 17th

3:03:42uh, plans at the time.

3:03:45Um, it is just simply not within your

3:03:49jurisdiction in this case to accept or

3:03:53evaluate completely new site plans.

3:03:56Um, so, um, just hopefully to stay

3:03:59focused on the decision

3:04:01at hand. I'll stop there um and and

3:04:05would welcome any questions from the

3:04:07board members.

3:04:09>> Yeah, we've got a couple questions. Um

3:04:13is there a maximum number of

3:04:14resubmittals that can take place?

3:04:19>> There is no hard cap.

3:04:22Um I think again throughout the site

3:04:25plan review process BC does try to be

3:04:29flexible to allow

3:04:31modified [clears throat]

3:04:32or revised plans before making a final

3:04:35decision. I think eventually a decision

3:04:38does need to be made.

3:04:40But for purposes of resubmission,

3:04:43it would look

3:04:44to make sure that the

3:04:46uh

3:04:47new plans are are different,

3:04:49meaningfully different than what was

3:04:52decided upon, but there's no hard cap on

3:04:54how many new bites at the apple an

3:04:57applicant could take.

3:05:02>> Okay.

3:05:03Um

3:05:05So all the items that are

3:05:07uh listed in the August 20th, 2026

3:05:11letter to Mr. Young,

3:05:14was he made aware of these items before

3:05:17the 20th?

3:05:20>> I can't speak to exactly what

3:05:23conversations

3:05:25he might have had with various city

3:05:27staff members in BC over the course of

3:05:33that I'll say approximately 4-month

3:05:34period. He says he submitted originally

3:05:37in January or February. So between that

3:05:40original submission

3:05:42and July 17th, when the final plans were

3:05:45submitted,

3:05:47um but I think it

3:05:49I unfortunately

3:05:51don't have

3:05:52a complete summary of all those

3:05:54conversations,

3:05:56but the fact that this

3:05:59the plans that were ultimately decided

3:06:01upon were the third review suggests that

3:06:03there there was some extensive back and

3:06:06forth and multiple rounds of new plans

3:06:10that were allowed to be resubmitted.

3:06:13>> Okay, so then he did resubmit plans. So

3:06:20I guess

3:06:21>> Yes, according to the letter this the

3:06:23the the the plans that were submitted on

3:06:26July

3:06:2717th were again, according to the

3:06:29decision letter, the third review

3:06:32as part of the application. I'm sorry, I

3:06:35don't have details on the exact dates of

3:06:39previous plans might have been submitted

3:06:42or exactly how they changed, but

3:06:44it is it does appear that

3:06:46DC had allowed some modification and

3:06:48some back and forth

3:06:50over the months leading up to July 17th.

3:06:55>> Okay.

3:06:57>> All right, any other questions for

3:06:59member Sherman?

3:07:01>> Good afternoon, board member Sherman.

3:07:04Um according to

3:07:06your document

3:07:09he has a spacing requirement to meet.

3:07:12He's within

3:07:14uh

3:07:15>> [clears throat]

3:07:16>> that spacing required men of three

3:07:19I believe light duty auto

3:07:21repairs and two

3:07:24auto sales.

3:07:26So he's saying that

3:07:29he will remove the light duty repair.

3:07:31So that would eliminate three of those

3:07:33options, correct? And then he'll have to

3:07:35deal with spacing requirements for the

3:07:38for the other two, which I believe in

3:07:40that document was labeled number one and

3:07:42number five.

3:07:44Number one was 245

3:07:46ft away.

3:07:48Is that the one that the applicant

3:07:50applicant is saying is in between his

3:07:53building and the railroad tracks.

3:07:57>> I believe so. I believe you're referring

3:07:59to the motor vehicle sales room or sales

3:08:03lot at 18700 Fitzpatrick and I Yes, I I

3:08:07believe that

3:08:09that is

3:08:10you know, measured radially

3:08:13um the closest at 275 ft away, but is

3:08:17across the railroad tracks that are to

3:08:19the rear of the property.

3:08:21>> So, there's no

3:08:23there's no direct way that he can get to

3:08:26that facility

3:08:28um behind his building. Is it true that

3:08:31he would have to

3:08:32uh that our customer would have to drive

3:08:33all the way around to reach either one

3:08:36of those facilities?

3:08:38>> I I believe that those the subject

3:08:41property and that um motor vehicle sales

3:08:44room

3:08:45um at 18700 Fitzpatrick are separated by

3:08:49a railroad corridor. I'm not sure

3:08:51exactly how long the drive or the walk

3:08:55would be, but um I'm not aware of a

3:08:58direct pathway

3:09:00between them. Again, spacing is

3:09:03as specified in the zoning ordinance

3:09:05measured radially. So, it's sort of you

3:09:08know, as the crow flies in a straight

3:09:10direction between the two properties.

3:09:13Um so, sometimes that matches the street

3:09:17network and sometimes

3:09:19it doesn't.

3:09:20>> Okay. And pertaining to number five, I

3:09:23believe it was 945

3:09:26ft away. So, hypothetically speaking, if

3:09:28the applicant was to address all of your

3:09:31concerns, he still would have to come

3:09:32get a variance

3:09:34because he is 55 ft

3:09:37away from number five, correct?

3:09:41>> Uh presumably, yes.

3:09:43You know, again, without

3:09:46guaranteeing or promising on BC's behalf

3:09:49whether a new site plan that omits the

3:09:53light duty vehicle establishment use,

3:09:56if that were removed, I can't promise on

3:09:59behalf of BC whether that would

3:10:01definitely be approved or definitely be

3:10:03denied, but I do agree with your

3:10:06uh expectation that at least some of

3:10:09these other uses in the neighborhood

3:10:13would no longer prevent, you know,

3:10:15create spacing issues without that light

3:10:18duty vehicle service use.

3:10:21>> Thank you.

3:10:22>> So, it would be a different analysis,

3:10:24and that's why

3:10:25if if the applicant does want to have

3:10:29you know, submit a new site plan,

3:10:31the proper avenue for that is back to BC

3:10:35so that it can,

3:10:36you know,

3:10:37evaluate what the new spacing

3:10:39requirements might be.

3:10:42>> Thank you.

3:10:44>> [clears throat]

3:10:44>> Remember to unmute.

3:10:45>> Okay.

3:10:47Thank Thank you.

3:10:49Um Attorney Erkin, can you speak to

3:10:51whether or not the zoning ordinance

3:10:54accommodates for online auto sales in

3:10:57terms of the spacing?

3:11:01>> I am not aware of any distinction in the

3:11:04zoning ordinance between online auto

3:11:07sales versus

3:11:10um

3:11:11solely in-person sales of a, you know,

3:11:15what we might think of as, you know, a

3:11:17traditional dealer. I think today

3:11:20I I

3:11:21I'm

3:11:22admittedly speculating here, but I

3:11:24believe that, you know, many dealers

3:11:27probably do some combination of

3:11:29in-person and online sales, um but to

3:11:32your point, um the zoning ordinance does

3:11:36not accommodate

3:11:38a purely online sales business model as

3:11:42a distinct use.

3:11:44And and and so again,

3:11:47BC it was required to apply the

3:11:50regulations as they exist for

3:11:53the the used sales

3:11:56uh use

3:11:58um with that understanding.

3:12:01>> Thank you.

3:12:02Mr. Arkin,

3:12:04is there a distinction

3:12:07so [clears throat]

3:12:09in speaking with the appellant today,

3:12:11uh you know, he's really just looking

3:12:13for a place to store these vehicles

3:12:16because he's going to sell them online.

3:12:18He's looking for a place to store them

3:12:21uh

3:12:22to give himself either

3:12:24A an opportunity for somebody to come

3:12:26pick it up or B as he also uh testified

3:12:29today, he um delivers most of the

3:12:32vehicles himself.

3:12:34>> Mhm.

3:12:35>> Uh so is there a

3:12:37is there a path forward for him if he if

3:12:39he didn't want to be a dealership but

3:12:41only wanted to store the vehicles?

3:12:46>> I'm not

3:12:47I'm not sure off the top of my head

3:12:49whether purely auto storage could

3:12:53qualify for a different

3:12:55warehousing type of use. Again, that

3:12:58would be a question for BC

3:13:01as part of a new site plan review

3:13:04process whether it should be evaluated

3:13:08as a pure motor vehicle you know, used

3:13:12motor vehicle sales room

3:13:14or some sort of warehousing depending on

3:13:18what you know, that is something through

3:13:20the the plan review process, BC can

3:13:23evaluate with the applicant.

3:13:26>> Okay. And then the um

3:13:29Sorry, [clears throat] I had another

3:13:30question. Now I forgot what it was. Does

3:13:32anybody else have a question?

3:13:34Uh member Osborne.

3:13:38>> Good morning, Ms. Arkey. It's member

3:13:40Osborne.

3:13:42Quick question.

3:13:43Quick question is

3:13:45the

3:13:47the petitioner, I believe the petitioner

3:13:49stated that if there were to be any

3:13:53repairs

3:13:54or service work, it will be contracted.

3:14:00Would that put the onus on those who are

3:14:04contracted to come to the site and do

3:14:07those repairs?

3:14:09Would that put the onus for fluid

3:14:11storage or part storage on them and he

3:14:15does not have to provide an area for

3:14:18that on his site plan?

3:14:21>> Um,

3:14:22if the appellant were to rem-

3:14:26prepare a new site plan that does not

3:14:28include any light duty vehicle services

3:14:32and as he said, he would be contracting

3:14:35that out,

3:14:36as I understand his description,

3:14:40by contracting that out, he would mean

3:14:42that the work itself would be physically

3:14:44done

3:14:45at another entity's establishment. It

3:14:48would not be physically done

3:14:50on this particular property. So,

3:14:53after the the vehicle services were

3:14:56completed, then the finished uh, vehicle

3:15:00would be delivered to this property. And

3:15:02if that's the case, then I would agree

3:15:05with you, the auto parts storage you

3:15:09know, the the waste fluid receptacles,

3:15:11the things that BC was looking for,

3:15:14would not indeed need to be included on

3:15:17that new site plan.

3:15:19Um, but to that end, I would just point

3:15:22out that that's my speculation on a new

3:15:25site plan that the applicant has

3:15:27discussed but not

3:15:29prepared yet.

3:15:31BC was limited in this case to

3:15:35evaluating the site plan that was

3:15:37actually submitted

3:15:39and that included a request for

3:15:42both the motor vehicle sales room and

3:15:45the light duty vehicle services and and

3:15:49those are the criteria that BC seed had

3:15:52to apply to the site plan at this time.

3:15:56>> So, all that BC seed could go off of was

3:15:58the site plan that did not have that

3:16:00storage.

3:16:02And regardless of what the

3:16:04what the petitioner may or may not have

3:16:07worked out with the contracting

3:16:09mechanic,

3:16:11we can't wait not we can't but

3:16:13it's not appropriate to weigh that in

3:16:15today.

3:16:17>> I I would agree and submit that it is

3:16:20not

3:16:22appropriate or not before you

3:16:24at this time. That could be a question

3:16:28that would be

3:16:30appropriately before BC seed upon

3:16:32submission of a new site plan.

3:16:35Again,

3:16:37BC seed imposed the requirements of both

3:16:40the motor vehicle sales room and the

3:16:42light duty vehicle services

3:16:45because those were the two uses that

3:16:47were specified on the site plan that it

3:16:50was presented with.

3:16:52If the light duty vehicle services were

3:16:55not included in a future site plan,

3:16:58it would not impose

3:17:00the associated requirements

3:17:03in the future.

3:17:05And and BC seed would be open to

3:17:07evaluating a new site plan.

3:17:11To that end, it just hasn't done you

3:17:14know, that hasn't happened yet because

3:17:16of this appeal.

3:17:19>> Thank you.

3:17:20I thought if I I remembered the question

3:17:22I was going to ask. Um

3:17:24do you know how much

3:17:27the appellant has spent so far on plan

3:17:29reviews.

3:17:32>> I do not.

3:17:33>> Okay, I'll ask the appellant in a

3:17:35minute.

3:17:36Any other questions for Attorney Arc?

3:17:41Okay.

3:17:44Member Bowman.

3:17:46>> Yeah, um I'm just wondering how many of

3:17:48the um businesses that were cited as

3:17:51being similar

3:17:53um or automotive related along or on

3:17:57Weaver and are open as opposed to the

3:18:01property could be used that way.

3:18:06>> I will admit I'm

3:18:08not

3:18:10um sure off the top of my head as um or

3:18:14from first-hand experience about which

3:18:16of those properties

3:18:18are currently in operation. Again, as I

3:18:22think was described in the previous

3:18:24case, BC makes these facing

3:18:26determinations based off of

3:18:28its existing land use records and its

3:18:32spatial measurements

3:18:34um between them. So, it is sort of an

3:18:38evaluation on on paper is what's

3:18:41controlling. And and that is in

3:18:43compliance with the requirements of how

3:18:46spacing is to be evaluated by you know

3:18:49in this in the zoning ordinance.

3:18:52>> Okay, and also in regard to um the

3:18:55artistic work that you were um directing

3:18:58our attention to

3:19:00um earlier, I noticed the blue um strip

3:19:03was I supposed to be the pedestrian

3:19:06walkway. It looked like it went from

3:19:08effectively a fence

3:19:11to the driveway along a wall of the

3:19:14building that I didn't notice any

3:19:16doorways on. Um

3:19:20I'm just wondering how that satisfy

3:19:24would satisfy that

3:19:27um requirement and what the benefit of

3:19:30having the walkway there would be.

3:19:34>> Um I believe the purpose of that 5-ft

3:19:38walkway area between a parking area and

3:19:41a building

3:19:43>> [clears throat]

3:19:43>> is to allow pedestrians who are, you

3:19:47know, walking to or from the parked

3:19:49vehicle to have a safe way to maneuver

3:19:53around the building without necessarily

3:19:56having to walk in the active driveway or

3:20:00in the active aisle way. So, even though

3:20:04the walkway is not um

3:20:08um leading directly to a door, you would

3:20:12pedestrians in this case would have to

3:20:14turn the corner and go in through the

3:20:16garage door or another access point down

3:20:19the driveway.

3:20:20That 5-ft walking area is is intended to

3:20:24at least let the pedestrians get in and

3:20:27out of the exterior parking area safely.

3:20:35>> Okay. Oh, and one other

3:20:37Also, you mentioned I believe that

3:20:41there's a

3:20:42Maybe you mentioned it or someone else

3:20:45did, but there's like a 12-vehicle

3:20:47minimum

3:20:48of I guess sellable vehicles required to

3:20:52have a dealership. Is

3:20:54Do I understand that correctly?

3:20:56>> Yes, and that is

3:20:59um a requirement. 12 is the number that

3:21:01is expressly specified

3:21:05in the um in the zoning ordinance

3:21:07itself.

3:21:09Um just looking for the [clears throat]

3:21:12set the citation is included in

3:21:16the slides. Here it is. I believe it's

3:21:19section 50-12-293

3:21:23subsection 1.

3:21:25Um the zoning ordinance is very clear.

3:21:27Says that the

3:21:30Excuse [clears throat] me, the

3:21:31development or the establishment must be

3:21:33{quote} adequate in size for the display

3:21:35and sale of not fewer than 12 used motor

3:21:38vehicles. It goes on to

3:21:41specify that spaces must be at least 9

3:21:44by 20 ft um and have

3:21:47um aisle ways

3:21:50um that comply with applicable

3:21:53dimensional standards. So,

3:21:56um why the ordinance specifies 12 spaces

3:22:00and not 10 spaces or 14 spaces,

3:22:03I I can't speculate as to how that was

3:22:07that standard was originally arrived at.

3:22:10I I think it's generally intended to

3:22:13ensure that any used motor vehicle lot

3:22:17sufficient in size

3:22:19um

3:22:20to be a free standing establishment and

3:22:23not just, you know, sales of individual

3:22:25cars.

3:22:27Um

3:22:29but be that as it may, BC had to apply

3:22:33that standard to this site plan.

3:22:36Um and so was obligated by that section

3:22:39of the zoning ordinance to look for 12

3:22:42spaces

3:22:44of 9 by 20 ft each with uh sufficient

3:22:49driveways and and and aisle ways.

3:22:53>> Thank you.

3:22:55Okay.

3:22:57Yeah.

3:22:58>> Uh good afternoon.

3:23:00Um so, with the revision with the

3:23:03resubmission of the revision

3:23:06site plans, uh removing the light duty

3:23:09operation by Mr. Young,

3:23:12uh would he have to go uh from the

3:23:14beginning with BC's or would they just

3:23:16kind of expedite it or do you know?

3:23:20>> I don't I don't know.

3:23:24On paper he would have to begin the site

3:23:26plan review process again. Again, BC has

3:23:30made its administrative decision after

3:23:33you know

3:23:34three rounds

3:23:37informal revisions. So the decision on

3:23:39the current site plan has been made and

3:23:41he would have to start the site plan

3:23:43review process over again.

3:23:47Now that said in the scheme of things,

3:23:50you know, the site plan review is the

3:23:52first step before proceeding to the

3:23:56special land use hearing. So

3:24:00while it it may sound inconvenient to

3:24:03say that the applicant needs to start

3:24:04over

3:24:06quite frankly he hadn't gotten that far

3:24:08in the overall process anyway.

3:24:11As to whether BC would expedite

3:24:15this application, I can't speak to BC's

3:24:20timing

3:24:21um

3:24:23with any promises at this time but I can

3:24:25say that again once it got the plans

3:24:29finalized fit for decision it did make a

3:24:32decision within a month and I can

3:24:36represent that I would recommend

3:24:39to BC that it look out for new plans

3:24:42from the applicant and give them you

3:24:44know all expeditious consideration.

3:24:47I'm happy to make that recommendation to

3:24:50my client after this hearing.

3:24:53>> Okay. [clears throat and snorts] Thank

3:24:54you.

3:24:57>> Any other questions for attorney Arkin?

3:25:00All right. Thank you attorney Arkin, we

3:25:02appreciate it.

3:25:03>> Thank you sir. Thank you to the board.

3:25:06>> Yeah.

3:25:13>> Hi there. Uh

3:25:15Inspector Connor Pierce here with BC

3:25:17Zoning. Uh thank you so much I to the

3:25:19board. I just want to clarify a few

3:25:20things to Um so as you know, these cases

3:25:24don't normally come before you where we

3:25:26have outright denied a site plan before

3:25:28going to hearing. Um this is sort of a

3:25:30last resort option that we uh that we

3:25:32do. We we don't do these very often.

3:25:36Um for cases where there are particular

3:25:38deficiencies um to the point where we

3:25:41think it would be

3:25:43uh a rejection all right. Um so for this

3:25:46one, you know, we have the size

3:25:48constraints of the site in particular.

3:25:51Um Director do you want to pull up the

3:25:52site plan for me? Um

3:25:55And the rear of the lot, we have those

3:25:57six parking spaces or the six spaces for

3:26:00the vehicles, excuse me.

3:26:02Um

3:26:03behind the building without having

3:26:05direct aisle access to all of the

3:26:07vehicles here, we can only consider

3:26:09three of them to be

3:26:11uh considered in our count, which is why

3:26:13you see in the site plan letter um that

3:26:16there are 11 spaces mentioned. Um with

3:26:20uh eight of them being interior to the

3:26:21building and three being to the rear. Uh

3:26:24and even that is being charitable to

3:26:26seeing as uh one of those parking spaces

3:26:28inside the building is blocking off

3:26:30access to two of those vehicles on the

3:26:32inside. Additionally, we aren't counting

3:26:34the removal of a vehicle in the rear for

3:26:37making way for the required pedestrian

3:26:40walkway there to the rear of the

3:26:41building. So functionally, even though

3:26:43we say 11 vehicles here, we're really

3:26:45looking more at nine. Um so that's quite

3:26:48the deficiency from the 12 that's

3:26:49required per the ordinance. I also

3:26:52wanted to note that um the petitioner

3:26:54had mentioned that the aisle width for

3:26:57vehicular access to the rear from the

3:26:59street is 19 ft wide. It's actually 14

3:27:02ft wide on the site plan. We require 20

3:27:05for having 90° angle right turns. And so

3:27:08right now

3:27:09with the site plan the way that it's

3:27:11designed as it is, it's sort of

3:27:12functioning like those free games that

3:27:14you have on your phone where you have to

3:27:15move eight cars to get the one out. Um

3:27:19so there's not really vehicular

3:27:21maneuverability on the site to get the

3:27:23vehicles in and out. And that's sort of

3:27:25the the crux of the argument here um

3:27:28that we have a major issue with. In

3:27:30addition, the um we had mentioned the uh

3:27:34similar uses that are nearby within

3:27:361,000 radial ft. Um there are actually

3:27:38six properties in total. One of them was

3:27:40on the other page. Um in in total,

3:27:43there's three of the light duty uh

3:27:45service facilities, one used car lot on

3:27:48its own, and then two that are used lots

3:27:50in combination with light duty vehicle

3:27:52service. Um

3:27:55all that being said, I I do believe that

3:27:59the proposed uh

3:28:01business operations that the petitioner

3:28:03has put forward sort of fall in this

3:28:05fall between the cracks of a couple

3:28:08different uh

3:28:10used car uh sales uses. So there's the

3:28:12personal vehicle sales that he's been

3:28:14operating up until this point. Um the

3:28:17used dealer which he's put forward here,

3:28:18which is a class B according to the

3:28:20state of Michigan, and then a wholesaler

3:28:22dealer, which is a class W. And a

3:28:24wholesaler vehicle um

3:28:27dealer would be uh operating without

3:28:30having any storage of vehicles on site.

3:28:33In particular, it would be strictly uh

3:28:35it's performs as an office as far as the

3:28:38um the city of Detroit is concerned. Um

3:28:41so

3:28:42like I said, since he's performing

3:28:44mostly online but is storing vehicles on

3:28:46site, it's kind of falling between the

3:28:48cracks between a class W and a class B.

3:28:51Um I also wanted to note that um

3:28:54one of the board members had asked about

3:28:56using this as strictly storage lot um

3:28:59for his online sales. So, if the

3:29:02vehicles are in operable condition, we

3:29:04have to consider that to be a used lot

3:29:05as he applied for it today. If they are

3:29:07not in operable condition, then it would

3:29:09be considered a junkyard, which would

3:29:10not be permitted here. Um so, this is

3:29:13kind of the issue here. I would

3:29:15recommend to the petitioner, if you guys

3:29:17were to uphold our decision, to um look

3:29:21into the requirements from the state of

3:29:22Michigan for the class B and the class W

3:29:24and see if there's one that he wants to

3:29:26move more in the direction with before

3:29:28he moves forward with either reapplying

3:29:30for a used lot or potentially moving

3:29:32forward as a more office oriented use

3:29:34for a wholesaler. Um I'm not sure all

3:29:37the requirements for his business

3:29:38operations, but that's just something I

3:29:39would like to put forward here.

3:29:42Um

3:29:43I was a little concerned when there was

3:29:44the mention of having uh

3:29:47storing vehicles here that weren't in

3:29:49operable condition and moving them off

3:29:51site for repair. Um as I stated, if it's

3:29:53if they're inoperable, then that's sort

3:29:55of functioning as an illegal junkyard.

3:29:56So, I just want to note that to the

3:29:57petitioner as well.

3:29:59Um but those are all my comments for

3:30:00now. Thank you.

3:30:01>> Thank you.

3:30:06Step back up, Mr. Young.

3:30:08Uh Director Bruner, we going through

3:30:10that approval criteria?

3:30:13>> I would I just highlighted uh

3:30:16if you look at the

3:30:19approval criteria 53-173,

3:30:2353-176,

3:30:2653-178,

3:30:29and 53-180

3:30:31uh what was identified as the reason for

3:30:34the site plan denial by Attorney

3:30:37Arkwright.

3:30:39So, I I would address just those four

3:30:43because the these are the reason for the

3:30:46denial.

3:30:47>> Okay.

3:30:50Yeah, please.

3:30:51>> 53 and in the report also. 53 173

3:30:5853 173

3:31:01The second one 53 176

3:31:05Again, 53 176

3:31:08The third one, 53 178

3:31:1253 178 and the last one, 53 180

3:31:17>> 171

3:31:17>> 53

3:31:1850-3

3:31:21-180

3:31:22>> Then 171 was the first one.

3:31:25>> The first one?

3:31:26>> What about

3:31:27>> 173

3:31:2850-3-173

3:31:32>> Got it.

3:31:35>> Okay, um member Parker, can you do uh

3:31:3750-3-173?

3:31:40And if you notice these have suggested

3:31:42questions, so that might be a little bit

3:31:44easier for

3:31:46the appellant to understand the

3:31:47question.

3:31:48>> Yes, sir.

3:31:50Um

3:31:52Please explain how the proposed uses and

3:31:55structures conform to the use

3:31:57regulations, dimensional requirements,

3:32:01general development standards.

3:32:09>> [clears throat]

3:32:09>> Um

3:32:19Well

3:32:22We need this.

3:32:27>> Uh

3:32:27uh at this I wasn't really planning Do

3:32:30you want me to repeat the question?

3:32:32>> Just answer the question.

3:32:33>> Okay.

3:32:35Okay.

3:32:42Um

3:32:43>> [clears throat]

3:32:43>> so, uh what I wanted to do was

3:32:47um

3:32:49basically like a a

3:32:52a Carvana like

3:32:55you know, even you can buy cars from

3:32:57Carvana, you can sell them.

3:32:59You can sell them and buy like well

3:33:02you can sell your car to them

3:33:05or you can buy it.

3:33:07Um

3:33:09So

3:33:12really I just needed a sales room so

3:33:17um

3:33:21there's really no new development need

3:33:23to be made.

3:33:24Um

3:33:26or or not really the only upgrades or

3:33:29additives I will probably need to make

3:33:31to the property will just be a handicap

3:33:34accessible restroom. And I hope I'm

3:33:36answering that right.

3:33:39Um

3:33:48um

3:33:51>> So

3:33:52so basically what you're saying is that

3:33:53it's an existing structure

3:33:55and the only thing interior that you

3:33:57plan on doing is putting in an

3:33:59a

3:33:59>> a a handicap accessible restroom.

3:34:02>> Okay. And then what do you what do you

3:34:03plan for the outside?

3:34:05>> The outside

3:34:07um

3:34:08as far as the

3:34:09it's not much

3:34:11uh grass in the front or for landscaping

3:34:13but I know or

3:34:16I know it's still

3:34:18uh I know it's M2 zoning but

3:34:21um

3:34:23a c-

3:34:24maybe almost 500 ft there are

3:34:27residential. Um

3:34:30so I wasn't planning on having it

3:34:33illuminated or

3:34:35uh

3:34:37you know

3:34:38it don't need to be lit up just

3:34:41you know, better

3:34:43uh just just upholding the the outside

3:34:47look of the property.

3:34:49And

3:34:50um

3:34:52and and that's really about it.

3:34:55I wasn't really planning on changing

3:34:57anything in the front. It would look it

3:34:59would look

3:35:01uh

3:35:02just like the building next to it with

3:35:03all the other businesses that's there.

3:35:06It would still look like an M2 zone and

3:35:08I'm not trying to make it stand out as

3:35:11as a dealership. I just just need the um

3:35:16the special land use. Um

3:35:19and I understand yeah, I I may grow

3:35:22want to grow, but

3:35:24I'm already don't have a space to start,

3:35:26so I wouldn't be growing there.

3:35:28>> Right.

3:35:28>> Um

3:35:29not expanding there. Not That's That

3:35:32wouldn't be the goal. The goal be

3:35:35to, you know,

3:35:36when when I get to that point to to

3:35:40of new development uh

3:35:42to expand that way.

3:35:44>> Okay.

3:35:45And how much have you invested so far?

3:35:48You're sure?

3:35:51>> Um

3:35:54I think I am like

3:35:56um

3:35:59I am like

3:36:01anywhere from 75 to $100,000 in not with

3:36:05just special land use.

3:36:07Uh

3:36:08not with just zoning.

3:36:10You know,

3:36:11uh

3:36:12uh just

3:36:15like I said, I went through building.

3:36:18Uh

3:36:19we went through building first, so that

3:36:21kind of let me know

3:36:23what what things need to be done. Well,

3:36:26I guess that was the sense of him doing

3:36:28that to know

3:36:30what things need to be done I'm

3:36:32[clears throat] sorry. To know what what

3:36:34things need to be done to the structure

3:36:37to be able to open for business.

3:36:40So, I've been

3:36:42basically

3:36:44um

3:36:47remodeling but not changing those

3:36:49structures.

3:36:51Updating but not changing anything.

3:36:55>> So, you you've already had a building

3:36:56inspector out there, somebody from the

3:36:58city?

3:36:58>> No, no. I can't get that I can't do that

3:37:00without a special land use.

3:37:02>> Got you. Okay.

3:37:04Um do you remember how much your plan

3:37:06review cost?

3:37:08>> For the site plan review?

3:37:09>> Mhm.

3:37:11>> Um

3:37:14it was almost about the same much as the

3:37:16appeal. I think it was like 1,500 to

3:37:18like 2,000 20 anywhere from like 1,500

3:37:20to

3:37:24>> He paid for SLU hearing, but he hasn't

3:37:26gotten it yet. An SLU hearing is $1,500.

3:37:30>> Okay.

3:37:30>> Um site plan review is a separate cost,

3:37:32right?

3:37:33>> Right.

3:37:38>> The special land use hearing fee is

3:37:40$1,071

3:37:41and the site plan review fee is separate

3:37:43210.

3:37:45Um

3:37:46yeah.

3:37:46>> 1,500

3:37:47>> 210?

3:37:48>> No, right. Right.

3:37:50So, it's 1,071.

3:37:52>> And then he had this appeal cost as

3:37:54well.

3:37:55All right.

3:37:57Um member Asbury, can you do uh

3:38:0050-3-176,

3:38:03please?

3:38:08Mr. Young

3:38:09>> Yes, sir.

3:38:11>> Please explain how the system is

3:38:13designed to protect pedestrians

3:38:15>> The hearing hasn't

3:38:15>> as much as possible from the vehicular

3:38:17circulation system. Internal circulation

3:38:20shall promote safe

3:38:23and

3:38:24efficient traffic flow. Access points

3:38:27shall be located to minimize disruption

3:38:30of through traffic flow and reduce

3:38:33potential hazards in driveways.

3:38:36>> Okay.

3:38:37>> [clears throat]

3:38:39>> Um

3:38:41>> [cough]

3:38:41>> Like I was saying uh

3:38:44earlier that

3:38:47um

3:38:49the the customer parking should be in

3:38:51the back and I wanted to

3:38:54change my drawings to place the entrance

3:38:57right in the back where he had the uh

3:39:00the blue walkway at.

3:39:02That now

3:39:04that almost went with

3:39:06with my vision of having an entrance in

3:39:09the back and maybe a walkway back there

3:39:11if there was an entrance back there.

3:39:13You know

3:39:14um

3:39:16so as far as coming up the driveway

3:39:19and there is a back door right there.

3:39:21Uh

3:39:25um

3:39:27uh in in the structure now

3:39:32I have like

3:39:35like

3:39:37uh

3:39:38non-slip rugs that like show you where

3:39:41to walk

3:39:43inside the property as far as you know

3:39:46and I have it so if if they was to enter

3:39:50uh at the rear entrance

3:39:53it you know it could basically be an

3:39:55indication

3:39:57where would they walk in the inside to

3:39:59view the vehicles.

3:40:02They really not not necessarily should

3:40:04be walking south side of the building.

3:40:08Um which for that is

3:40:11um

3:40:13that that is where vehicles would be.

3:40:15Now also I was thinking

3:40:18just so you won't pass

3:40:21the rear entrance and walk into the

3:40:23driveway maybe

3:40:25um

3:40:27a sign.

3:40:30to let them know, "Hey, once you pass

3:40:32once you cross the threshold of the

3:40:34building,

3:40:35you in traffic at that point."

3:40:38You know, just an indication of maybe a

3:40:41you know,

3:40:43a a some sort of sign right there just

3:40:46to let you know, "Hey, don't walk past

3:40:48the entrance and you know, well, at

3:40:50least

3:40:51be careful." Also,

3:40:55um

3:40:57I do what my plan

3:40:59and what I've been doing is to

3:41:02deliver.

3:41:04Now, most of my deliveries

3:41:07to me most of my deliveries would be

3:41:11uh

3:41:13be

3:41:14between like 8:00 and 10:00.

3:41:18Uh and also

3:41:21to

3:41:23keep the traffic circulated,

3:41:27I also stated in the in the original

3:41:30drawings,

3:41:31almost like appointment only, you know,

3:41:34by appointment because okay, so

3:41:38say just say for example, Carvana there,

3:41:43you know, you go and they'll drop a car

3:41:46off to you before, but see,

3:41:49as long you know, I would have adequate

3:41:52enough detailed pictures and description

3:41:54of the vehicle to where

3:41:57nine times out of 10, they can go off

3:41:59the description and the pictures and

3:42:00never have to even come there.

3:42:03But if they did come there,

3:42:06it it

3:42:06it should most likely be appointment

3:42:09only.

3:42:10And also, if I am

3:42:13transporting vehicles, those will be

3:42:15scheduled on another time other than my

3:42:18business hours for my walk-in traffic.

3:42:22Okay.

3:42:24>> And

3:42:29I lost track.

3:42:3278

3:42:3878, yeah. Uh Mr. Carr, can you please do

3:42:42uh 50-3-178?

3:42:45>> Okay.

3:42:48Mr. Young

3:42:49>> Yes, ma'am.

3:42:50>> Please explain how the type

3:42:53dimensions, and character of open spaces

3:42:56landscaping screening

3:42:59and buffering enhance the design

3:43:02character, use, and value of the

3:43:05property and abutting lands.

3:43:09>> Could you tell me what section that is

3:43:10again? I'm sorry.

3:43:11>> Section

3:43:1250-3-178.

3:43:16>> 178 though.

3:43:19>> On the back of the

3:43:21I think it's the second page.

3:43:37>> Um so

3:43:47>> You mentioned there's not a lot of grass

3:43:48in the

3:43:49>> No. No.

3:43:50>> No.

3:43:50Maybe you want to talk about

3:43:52>> Yeah, so and you also mentioned you

3:43:54know, about the fact that you not going

3:43:56to change the exterior much cuz you

3:43:58wanted to still get along with your

3:44:00neighbors and stuff.

3:44:01>> Absolutely. Uh

3:44:02>> Talk a little bit about that again.

3:44:03>> Yeah, the most I plan on doing is um I

3:44:07do plan on like if you seen the

3:44:10uh pictures of the building at the very

3:44:12beginning.

3:44:13Um it was some glass block uh windows

3:44:17there that's been there. I would want to

3:44:21and then the door is also

3:44:24it's not

3:44:26not say see through but

3:44:29it's just like a steel door. Me I was

3:44:32planning on

3:44:34cuz my neighbor she do waste management

3:44:36right next door and um

3:44:39she have a more

3:44:43updated style of like front door that

3:44:46basically like you can almost see

3:44:48through versus it

3:44:51that's about the only upgrade that I

3:44:54would want to do just

3:44:56to

3:44:58uh

3:45:01just to bring the better character to my

3:45:04business which my neighbor

3:45:08the character [clears throat] of her

3:45:09structure is very is very nice and I

3:45:12would just be coincide with how what she

3:45:14got going on.

3:45:15>> Okay.

3:45:16>> Um maybe a few shrubbery shrubs or

3:45:21you know I I like to plant flowers.

3:45:24That's probably about it. A few flowers

3:45:26and

3:45:28I will make sure that um

3:45:31also

3:45:32um

3:45:36the little grass I do have I do have

3:45:39landscaping experience first

3:45:42um

3:45:44um

3:45:45aerating and fertilizing and stuff. I

3:45:47actually

3:45:50I actually I have the

3:45:53two neighbors this way and two neighbors

3:45:55this way. I actually take care everybody

3:45:58lawn right now. So when I cut

3:46:01my grass I cut my neighbor's grass as

3:46:04well.

3:46:06>> Okay. Thank you.

3:46:08And

3:46:10member Johnson if you could do

3:46:1250-3 land for 180,

3:46:15which is somewhat similar to this one.

3:46:22>> Yeah.

3:46:23>> Excuse me, did you say 7 173?

3:46:25>> 180.

3:46:27>> 180.

3:46:29>> Please ex-

3:46:30I'm sorry.

3:46:32Please explain how the type, dimensions,

3:46:34and character of open spaces,

3:46:37landscaping, earth bank berms, fencing,

3:46:40screening, buffering, signs, walls, and

3:46:44other site features are designed and

3:46:46located on the site

3:46:49so that the proposed development is

3:46:51aesthetically pleasing and harmonious

3:46:53with nearby existing or future

3:46:55developments.

3:46:56>> Yes, ma'am.

3:46:57Uh like I was saying,

3:46:59um

3:47:00the windows can be aesthetically

3:47:04cuz they're glass blocks like basement

3:47:06windows. That is something. But a lot of

3:47:09repairs and stuff that I want to do, you

3:47:11know, is the kind of, you know, was

3:47:12depending on how

3:47:14further much I'll be able to go as far

3:47:17as

3:47:18uh

3:47:18getting a special land use.

3:47:21Um also, like I said, I wouldn't do a

3:47:25like a lit-up sign. I would do something

3:47:27that's a sign that's not illuminated

3:47:31um because the normal business hours are

3:47:34from 9:00 to 5:00 uh

3:47:36and

3:47:38there's there's no need to illuminate

3:47:40anything at night uh after 5:00. Also,

3:47:46um

3:47:49the

3:47:50uh I There is a fence

3:47:53um for the driveway that would be open

3:47:57during business hours and closed during

3:48:01I mean closed when

3:48:03out of operating hours, which, you know,

3:48:06uh

3:48:07that's what all the other uh

3:48:10neighboring structures do.

3:48:12Everybody gates is open until about

3:48:14after 5:00 and everything is closed up.

3:48:16It's very uniform as far as

3:48:18um

3:48:21how

3:48:22the row of structures is are very

3:48:24uniform and unison with their gating

3:48:29uh

3:48:30and as well as

3:48:33their employee parking.

3:48:36>> Okay. Any other questions for the

3:48:38applicant?

3:48:40All right. If you want to step back,

3:48:42we're going to do

3:48:43>> [clears throat]

3:48:44>> You want to step back? We're going to do

3:48:45We're going to do public comment now.

3:48:47If there's anything negative that's

3:48:49brought up during public comment, you'll

3:48:51have an opportunity to come back and

3:48:53rebut those comments.

3:48:55>> Yes, sir.

3:48:55>> Okay.

3:48:56All right. We're going to

3:48:58>> Am I able to rebuttal the lawyers and

3:49:03uh BC's comments as well?

3:49:06>> Yeah, absolutely.

3:49:07>> Okay. Thank you.

3:49:09>> Okay.

3:49:11Uh

3:49:11we are going to open up public comment

3:49:13in the auditorium

3:49:15for

3:49:1618425 Weaver.

3:49:19If you're here in the auditorium today

3:49:21and you want to make a public comment

3:49:22specific to 18425 Weaver,

3:49:26uh please come down to the podium.

3:49:29Seeing nobody, we'll switch to our

3:49:30virtual participants.

3:49:32If you're out there on Zoom or online

3:49:33and you'd like to make a public comment

3:49:35on 18425

3:49:38Weaver, please raise your hand.

3:49:40Public comment on 18425

3:49:43Weaver, please raise your hand.

3:49:47>> Yeah, somebody here.

3:49:51>> Oh, go ahead and come on down, man.

3:49:56>> Got to be sworn sworn in.

3:50:07>> Hi.

3:50:07>> Put your name and address on the record.

3:50:09Put your name and address on the record.

3:50:11>> Hi, I'm Elise Taylor. My address is

3:50:1445622

3:50:15Union Park Drive, Shelby Township,

3:50:18Michigan 48315.

3:50:20>> Raise your right hand.

3:50:21You affirm your testimony for the board

3:50:22today is the truth?

3:50:23>> Yes.

3:50:23>> Thank you.

3:50:25>> You have 2 minutes, ma'am.

3:50:27>> Okay, so I'll be short. Um I've been

3:50:29here with Mr. Young on his journey and

3:50:31I've watched him and what he has built

3:50:33and it has been completely beautiful.

3:50:36>> Thank you.

3:50:36>> It has been beautiful and admiring

3:50:38watching him what he's done over this

3:50:39time. Um

3:50:42he's very

3:50:43very attentive into what he's doing.

3:50:46He's been very adamant. Um I do

3:50:49understand that the structure is small,

3:50:51but there is not a lot of live traffic

3:50:54going through and out. Um and everything

3:50:56is mostly made by appointments.

3:50:59Um

3:51:00this facility now is giving him room to

3:51:03grow, which I'm sure he will grow.

3:51:05But this is just the beginning and I'm

3:51:07sure he's fine with making adjustments

3:51:09on what needs to be done.

3:51:11Um and that's pretty much just what I

3:51:14wanted to say.

3:51:15>> All right, thank you.

3:51:18Any hands up? Uh Director O'Brien?

3:51:22>> No, no hands, Mr. Chairman.

3:51:24>> we're going to close out public comment

3:51:26then

3:51:27and we will switch over to uh

3:51:30Oh, actually you wanted to uh come down

3:51:32and

3:51:33uh do a little rebuttal on this.

3:51:34>> Mr. Arkin has his hand also.

3:51:36>> Okay.

3:51:38Come on down.

3:51:38>> Come on down.

3:51:44Ready.

3:51:47Okay, I just wanted to comment not

3:51:50uh

3:51:51just on a few things to just to add a

3:51:53few

3:51:54few things.

3:51:55Um

3:51:58>> [snorts]

3:51:58>> they were saying that I had three

3:52:00reviews, right?

3:52:02Um

3:52:04Uh I do have a a trail of emails that

3:52:09I've constantly emailed them.

3:52:13And

3:52:16I've constantly um

3:52:19in- inquired about, you know, the

3:52:21process or the next uh step or whatever.

3:52:24Um

3:52:27They they said they get it was

3:52:30from the last review, they made a

3:52:33decisions within 30 days, but um I n-

3:52:37I'm

3:52:37the reviews only asked they asked for

3:52:40explanation, but I don't know if it's

3:52:43their responsibility or

3:52:46if

3:52:47you know, whether I should because

3:52:50if I had a chance to change to revise my

3:52:54drawing because if if I would have known

3:52:58that uh

3:52:59it was over concentrated or

3:53:03that

3:53:04um

3:53:06that the parking wasn't adequate enough,

3:53:08I would have revised it right then and

3:53:10there before it even came to a denial.

3:53:13Um

3:53:15When they did the review, they only just

3:53:17added what they

3:53:21you know, things other things about

3:53:25you know,

3:53:26some of the ordinances, but

3:53:28um I don't know if that's their

3:53:30responsibility, but they never really

3:53:31gave me a chance to review considering

3:53:35that it was over concentrated and or

3:53:40uh

3:53:40not enough parking space.

3:53:43Okay.

3:53:45And also

3:53:47the dealer's license that

3:53:51I'm uh

3:53:52trying to acquire is a class B used uh

3:53:55license uh dealer's license, which

3:53:59uh I am already pre-licensed

3:54:02with the state of Michigan for that.

3:54:05Um

3:54:09Also,

3:54:12uh they count the parking spaces as if

3:54:14like,

3:54:16you know,

3:54:17nine

3:54:18uh

3:54:19what is that? 9 ft by 20 as if

3:54:24clients was driving like as if customers

3:54:26was going to be driving in my sales

3:54:28room,

3:54:29you know?

3:54:30If you think about it, if you go to a

3:54:32sales room, they're not cars not parked.

3:54:35They could be parked like this, parked

3:54:37like that. They're not parking uh the

3:54:40the size of a

3:54:42uh

3:54:43regular public parking. You you you

3:54:45understand what I'm saying? That's why

3:54:47the state

3:54:48asked for square footage

3:54:51versus parking spaces.

3:54:54Uh I was overhearing that

3:54:58they was uh you guys would have uh uh

3:55:01got the requirements from the state,

3:55:03which I uh

3:55:05meet those requirements.

3:55:08Um

3:55:10Right? So,

3:55:14and uh

3:55:15say

3:55:17um uh then the

3:55:19the uh

3:55:23the situation where how you going to

3:55:24maneuver these cars, uh get them in and

3:55:27out of there?

3:55:28Um but, you know, that would be on

3:55:31It's just like,

3:55:33you know, valet going to take your car

3:55:36and park it

3:55:37and, you know, pull it out because, you

3:55:40know, from whatever liability can come

3:55:43from pulling it out. But,

3:55:45if you didn't count 9 by 20,

3:55:49it it is adequate enough space to

3:55:52maneuver out of there and

3:55:55and and

3:55:57is more than nine spaces.

3:56:01If you if you if you you know, depending

3:56:04on how you look at it in the sales room

3:56:06versus

3:56:08outside parking, right?

3:56:11Okay.

3:56:12Um

3:56:14And as um Mr. Osborne was showing

3:56:17earlier, he rolled past

3:56:19a lot of those addresses

3:56:22just recently a couple of days

3:56:23yesterday.

3:56:25Um

3:56:27the ones on the block are totally

3:56:30abandoned and and and vacant.

3:56:33Those should not even be So, listen,

3:56:35this is what I'm saying.

3:56:36How are you saying it's

3:56:37overconcentration when there's

3:56:39abandonment? That don't even go

3:56:41together.

3:56:43It's abandoned. How's it How's it

3:56:44overconcentration for me? Okay, yeah,

3:56:46there's the land use there.

3:56:49It it was that, but if it's abandoned,

3:56:52it can't How can it be

3:56:53overconcentration?

3:56:54If it's abandoned and not being used or

3:56:57not being not or it's not accessible to

3:57:00the public.

3:57:02So, it to me it shouldn't be

3:57:06overconcentration for buildings that's

3:57:08not accessible to the public, right? I

3:57:09mean,

3:57:12it can't be overconcentration to the

3:57:13public if it's abandoned and and and the

3:57:16way they look, there's no telling how

3:57:18long they've been abandoned. They could

3:57:19have been abandoned for years, you know,

3:57:21how they how they look, you know?

3:57:23And also,

3:57:25the one sales room that come close to

3:57:28being by me is .8 miles away.

3:57:33So, although it's 225

3:57:35ft from me,

3:57:37it takes .8 miles to get to it.

3:57:41That's a whole mile almost to go around

3:57:45because

3:57:46this is a M2 zoning, so the blocks are

3:57:48kind of long.

3:57:50Then you got to go to the light, go

3:57:51under the underpass, go around the

3:57:53precinct.

3:57:55Come like it's really a task to get over

3:57:59there, you know.

3:58:01Uh

3:58:02also

3:58:08uh

3:58:10I'm not a I'm not asking for a

3:58:12traditional

3:58:15dealership. I am asking

3:58:18for

3:58:20uh a non-traditional.

3:58:23We we know yes some people do sell cars

3:58:28on site and yes some people do and they

3:58:31also do online sales.

3:58:34But

3:58:36you know

3:58:37everything is almost electronic now

3:58:39since the pandemic like

3:58:42you know, a lot of people they really

3:58:44enjoy the fact that they can have a car

3:58:46delivered or

3:58:48um and and that's the market I'm trying

3:58:51to

3:58:51go for, you know.

3:58:53That's my target market. So it's

3:58:56although I need the special you laying

3:58:58use of a dealership, it's it's it's a

3:59:01non-traditional dealership where

3:59:04uh

3:59:07uh which is that's my target, you know.

3:59:11Um and like I

3:59:12>> [clears throat]

3:59:12>> you know, and although I'm saying a lot

3:59:14of these things and rebuttaling,

3:59:17uh

3:59:17the truth of the fact of the matter is I

3:59:19tried uh

3:59:22I tried for the revision.

3:59:25Like I I got emails about the revision.

3:59:27They told me I

3:59:28um

3:59:29I have I mean of course I can't present

3:59:32these emails to you, but I have a

3:59:34backlog of emails

3:59:37asking and asking and asking and they

3:59:39could have easily

3:59:41addressed it me in the proper time and

3:59:44that's what

3:59:46make me fearful having to do this thing

3:59:49over again.

3:59:50Uh,

3:59:52you know,

3:59:53who goes to show the the the length that

3:59:56they send me through the next time.

3:59:59You know what I mean? Um

4:00:01and I've tried to revise. I I didn't

4:00:04come with um

4:00:07I didn't draw these drawings myself. You

4:00:09know what I mean?

4:00:10Um,

4:00:12the architect alone cost me to to to do

4:00:14this cost me $12,000. I don't

4:00:22So, um

4:00:27I wouldn't say that it was three

4:00:28reviews.

4:00:30Uh, they saying it's this three reviews.

4:00:32It was

4:00:33Why would it be three reviews?

4:00:35It should be one review. You tell me

4:00:38what I'm missing and then I get it. Why

4:00:39is it three?

4:00:42That's because

4:00:43I've been getting prolonged

4:00:46and also

4:00:54um

4:00:56I wasn't informed how many ordinances

4:00:59that I was violating. And why would I I

4:01:01mean, I don't know if that's procedure,

4:01:03but

4:01:04All they had to say is one time. A uh um

4:01:11This in violation of a lot of things and

4:01:14I would have I would have had I paid

4:01:15him. I would [snorts] have had him

4:01:18revise whatever needed to be revised.

4:01:21I don't I'm not an architect. I don't

4:01:24know the ordinances. That's

4:01:26why I had hired help, which

4:01:30you know.

4:01:32Um

4:01:35You know, put me in a

4:01:38You know, just paying a hiring for that

4:01:40help.

4:01:42You know.

4:01:44You know, put me in a position to where

4:01:48you know, a

4:01:49scarcity position.

4:01:52Um.

4:02:04So.

4:02:10So, before the denial I had no

4:02:13information. And and I and I and I I'm

4:02:16telling you I have emails.

4:02:18Eat So, they said July is when they made

4:02:21their decision. I got I got a I got

4:02:24emails from May.

4:02:28That's May, April, May, June. That's

4:02:30almost 6 months.

4:02:33And then you make a decision and not

4:02:35tell me

4:02:36what what was the problem with you know,

4:02:38what

4:02:39ordinances that that I was

4:02:42>> [snorts]

4:02:43>> violating or well that that it violated.

4:02:48So.

4:02:51At this point, although

4:02:56there's still drawings need to be

4:02:58reviewed.

4:03:00The new drawings.

4:03:04I'm [snorts] pretty sure you know

4:03:07you can understand

4:03:09the changes in this drawing that I

4:03:12wanted to make and

4:03:16um

4:03:17maybe there could possibly be an

4:03:20exception.

4:03:23Or maybe I could report with new

4:03:25drawings.

4:03:27Or or maybe

4:03:30I could um

4:03:34Maybe Maybe if I resubmitted, it could

4:03:36be expedited considering

4:03:40the inconvenience that that I'm actually

4:03:43going through to even be here at the

4:03:45appeal board is an inconvenience.

4:03:48When

4:03:50you know, I could have had a chance for

4:03:52revision.

4:03:54You know, and that cost cost me money. I

4:03:58I want I

4:03:59I was even told to adjourn and maybe I

4:04:02can use the funds

4:04:04to possibly appeal

4:04:08the hearing itself.

4:04:12Maybe I could adjourn

4:04:15cuz adjourn the appeal board

4:04:18and maybe I could use those funds to

4:04:21appeal the hearing itself.

4:04:25>> Mr. Young, I think uh

4:04:27you know, the board sees and and feels

4:04:29your emotion.

4:04:31Uh

4:04:32you know, so I think uh

4:04:34you know, I think that we have a pretty

4:04:36good handle on things and uh we probably

4:04:38need to go into a board

4:04:39uh board member only discussion at this

4:04:41point.

4:04:42>> Mr. Arkin had a comment.

4:04:44>> Get to the end of this uh

4:04:46get to the end of this hearing, okay?

4:04:48>> Yes, sir.

4:04:49>> All right.

4:04:50We appreciate you.

4:04:51>> Oh, Mr. Arkin had a comment.

4:04:53>> Yeah, did you have a I seen your hand up

4:04:56uh attorney Arkin, did you still have a

4:04:57comment?

4:05:01>> Sorry, it just took a second to unmute.

4:05:03Very very quickly,

4:05:05I just wanted to say that you know, the

4:05:07[clears throat] Power has

4:05:09I think described

4:05:11their business proposal business plan in

4:05:13great detail um for everyone's benefit,

4:05:17but we'll just first provide a quick

4:05:19reminder that BC never

4:05:22uh was in the position to evaluate that

4:05:24business plan under the traditional

4:05:26special land use hearing and simply

4:05:29never got to that point um just because

4:05:34the denial came based on the site plan

4:05:36and and the site plan alone.

4:05:39Um and to that end

4:05:42fully understanding and appreciating

4:05:44that the appellant's business plan

4:05:47may be somewhat untraditional or perhaps

4:05:50might not fit squarely within what

4:05:53zoning conceives of as a used um motor

4:05:57vehicle sales room

4:06:01when BCED was presented with the site

4:06:03plan proposing both the sales room and

4:06:07the vehicle services

4:06:09that is what it had to apply at that

4:06:13time.

4:06:14Um and lastly I would just note it seems

4:06:17like the appellant is at the same time

4:06:21as appealing that denial also expressing

4:06:24[clears throat] interest in

4:06:26a new site plan that would not include

4:06:28those vehicle services. So I'm not sure

4:06:30to that end what uh this appeal would

4:06:34get them since again it's only about the

4:06:38veracity um

4:06:40of BCED's decision at the time. It it

4:06:44sounds like the pathway forward if I may

4:06:47suggest

4:06:48would be a new site plan

4:06:52just of the motor vehicle sales room

4:06:55that's focused on on just that desired

4:06:58use

4:06:59um to go through the site plan review

4:07:02process

4:07:04um

4:07:06and to be evaluated on the merits of the

4:07:08business as he is proposing it and

4:07:12desires to operate it. But again as a as

4:07:15a prerequisite to that the old site plan

4:07:18that includes the vehicle services

4:07:20that's the subject of this appeal

4:07:23needs to, you know,

4:07:25be disposed of and this body's

4:07:28um

4:07:29part in that is to dismiss

4:07:30[clears throat]

4:07:31the appeal.

4:07:33Um so that so that we everyone can move

4:07:36forward with the evaluation of a new

4:07:39site plan through the proper channels.

4:07:41Thank Thank you for the additional

4:07:42minute to speak.

4:07:44>> All right, thank you.

4:07:45>> Okay, we're going to go into a board

4:07:47member only discussion

4:07:49and then a

4:07:50uh

4:07:51a motion obviously is always uh

4:07:54uh appropriate. Um

4:07:58I would

4:08:02I'm slightly

4:08:03slightly perplexed, but my right now I'm

4:08:05leaning toward

4:08:07uh

4:08:08reversing the appeal.

4:08:10Uh

4:08:11I think that the

4:08:13uh the appellant

4:08:15would be uh

4:08:17greatly advised to hire a consultant

4:08:20and to uh

4:08:22uh kick your architect in the butt

4:08:25because your architect should have

4:08:27picked up on

4:08:28uh a lot of the things that

4:08:30uh BC has a problem with.

4:08:33I would also uh look into that

4:08:36if I were you, Mr. Young. I'd look into

4:08:38that class C and class W.

4:08:41I think C and W or B and W?

4:08:44B and W. Uh I would look into those two

4:08:46classes of B and W with the state uh

4:08:50as

4:08:51uh

4:08:53inspector

4:08:54uh Pierce recommended.

4:08:57Uh

4:08:58you know, so it I

4:08:59you know, it would be my opinion anyway

4:09:01that that that we should reverse this

4:09:04this decision. I I I don't think that we

4:09:07should be holding the appellant up by

4:09:09having to start over.

4:09:11I don't think that uh I think there was

4:09:14a lot of disconnect probably between the

4:09:16appellant and certain

4:09:19departments within the city.

4:09:21And

4:09:22you know, quite frankly, you know, we

4:09:24hear it all the time it's not that

4:09:26uncommon that you get told

4:09:28you need to do these two things and then

4:09:31you go to the next meeting and they're

4:09:32like, oh well, you also have to do X, Y,

4:09:34and Z and then you go to the next

4:09:36meeting and get told well, you took care

4:09:38of all those, but we got one more thing

4:09:39for you to

4:09:41we see it here, we see it in the streets

4:09:43with inspections.

4:09:44Uh so, it's not uncommon that you get

4:09:47more than one opinion depending on who

4:09:49you're talking to at the city, so

4:09:51Uh I I just

4:09:54you know, the amount of investment that

4:09:55he's made, what he's trying to do

4:09:58you know, the fact that that

4:10:00you know, he's held up right now because

4:10:02he's already you know,

4:10:04sold too many vehicles, so he doesn't

4:10:06have income coming in.

4:10:07You know, I really think that we should

4:10:09uh

4:10:10reverse the decision of BC and

4:10:13get this guy over the finish line and

4:10:14get this building opened.

4:10:18Remember Osborne.

4:10:19>> I agree.

4:10:21Uh

4:10:21I understand where you're coming from

4:10:23and I also

4:10:24hear what the

4:10:26petitioner was saying. However,

4:10:28give a little bit of pushback. A lot of

4:10:30people invest in their business plans

4:10:33and don't necessarily have those around

4:10:35them

4:10:36who

4:10:38are looking to move things forward

4:10:40expediently.

4:10:42Um

4:10:44the site plan

4:10:46while the while the

4:10:48petitioner does have

4:10:51great ideas and amendments to the site

4:10:55plan, unfortunately

4:10:58like he said, the architect wasn't here

4:10:59today.

4:11:01And it seems like

4:11:03they haven't been around for

4:11:07any of the discussion with

4:11:10BC, which I would assume that's what

4:11:12they are hired to do.

4:11:16And just going off the site plan that I

4:11:17see today,

4:11:20there are admirable changes to it as

4:11:23well as the

4:11:25use, but

4:11:29looking at the decision that BC made

4:11:32for this August 20th

4:11:35letter,

4:11:40it says we have completed our review of

4:11:42your application and site plans

4:11:44resubmitted via ePlans on July 17th.

4:11:47And I believe that's the site plan that

4:11:49we have, and that seems to hold up with

4:11:52the denial.

4:11:54So, I would be

4:11:56on that side of the

4:11:58decision.

4:12:03>> Will they care to make a motion? Member

4:12:04Bowman.

4:12:05>> I actually kind of want a clarification.

4:12:07Would you please explain what you mean

4:12:09by an appeal being reversed? Would this

4:12:11mean that effectively the appeal would

4:12:13be undone, he'd get a refund on the

4:12:15appeal appeal fee, or how would that

4:12:17work?

4:12:18>> No, so if we reverse BC's decision,

4:12:22then his site the current site plan that

4:12:25he has at that point then is not uh

4:12:29you know, it's been

4:12:30what do you call it? It's been denied by

4:12:32by BC. So, he would be able to amend it

4:12:35again and resubmit it without having to

4:12:38start over.

4:12:42>> Okay, so but in other words, you would

4:12:44be granting the appeal?

4:12:48>> No, we'd be reversed, so

4:12:50we'd be reversing BC's decision, or

4:12:53that's what I

4:12:54>> You can reverse BC's decision, but it's

4:12:56not a granting of the

4:12:57>> Yeah, overturn the denial.

4:13:03>> Okay, I mean I'm not sure what the

4:13:05difference between that and granting the

4:13:06appeal is.

4:13:08Oh, this isn't.

4:13:13Ah.

4:13:14I got

4:13:16Okay, I understand what you're saying

4:13:18now.

4:13:19Okay.

4:13:21>> All right.

4:13:22Any other comments or get a motion from

4:13:25somebody?

4:13:25>> I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, would you explain

4:13:27that again? I didn't quite understand

4:13:29what um what we're doing is

4:13:32>> Okay, so

4:13:33>> reverse.

4:13:35>> Mr. Young submitted a site plan for the

4:13:37BC.

4:13:39There's been back and forth between Mr.

4:13:42Young and BC.

4:13:45At

4:13:46some point BC decided, you know what,

4:13:48we're done messing around with this

4:13:49case, so we're going to deny the site

4:13:51plan.

4:13:53The applicant has

4:13:55is appealing

4:13:57BC's decision to us

4:14:00because he wants to resubmit a new site

4:14:02plan without having to start over

4:14:05uh because that'll take several months.

4:14:08And so

4:14:10my opinion today is that we

4:14:13we should reverse

4:14:15BC's decision

4:14:18and allow the the appellant to resubmit

4:14:22another site plan without having to

4:14:23start over.

4:14:25It's Member Osborn's opinion that BC

4:14:29made the right decision and that

4:14:32you know, that the appellant should have

4:14:33to start over. I just don't

4:14:36Time's time's money in a small business

4:14:39uh climate

4:14:40and I just don't want to

4:14:42cost the appellant more money cuz he's

4:14:44going to have to pay for

4:14:46starting over and I also don't want to

4:14:48cost him 3 months or so

4:14:50uh worth of uh

4:14:52back and forth with the city

4:14:54when he's already I mean

4:14:56honestly, the site plan that he

4:14:57submitted is probably not going to

4:15:00change a lot.

4:15:02What's going to change is

4:15:05the fact that he that he

4:15:09is changing the due date. Yeah. He's

4:15:11changing the use, right? So, the site

4:15:12plan itself is probably not going to

4:15:14change a whole whole lot.

4:15:15I mean, there's going to be some things.

4:15:17And then at some point in time, they're

4:15:18also he's also going to have to come

4:15:20back before the board because of the

4:15:22overconcentration and and and

4:15:24>> So, what did Attorney Arkin advise?

4:15:29>> But right now, all we're all we're doing

4:15:31is we're we're, you know, we're looking

4:15:32at this

4:15:34you know, site plan.

4:15:35Uh, you know, in the drawings and stuff

4:15:37that he has

4:15:38and basically making the decision

4:15:41really whether or not we want him to

4:15:43have to start over.

4:15:44>> Did Did I understand that Attorney

4:15:47Arkin's comment that if he were to

4:15:51submit a new site plan, it would not

4:15:54have to start at the beginning?

4:15:57>> Uh

4:15:59>> That That was

4:16:02That was not what he said. He He said

4:16:05that he would speak speak to his

4:16:07petitioner, but

4:16:08he said that he should start the

4:16:11site plan review process all over.

4:16:15Resubmit a new site plan.

4:16:17>> Okay, thank you.

4:16:19>> [snorts]

4:16:19>> But he did say that he would

4:16:22encourage

4:16:24the city to review it

4:16:25>> timely.

4:16:27>> But I mean, that's that's

4:16:29Right. That's up to the law the case

4:16:32law.

4:16:35>> He has his hands up.

4:18:24>> Remember Osborne?

4:18:25I'd like to make a motion.

4:18:32BZA case 2026-00057

4:18:36location being 18425

4:18:39Weaver

4:18:41where the proposal is Jarren Young

4:18:42appeals the decision of the building

4:18:44safety and engineering and environmental

4:18:46department, SLU 2026-00052,

4:18:51which denied the site plan to change use

4:18:54to change of use occupancy of the

4:18:57existing 3,920 square foot building for

4:19:00use as motor vehicles

4:19:02used

4:19:06Uh

4:19:08The applicant also proposed to provide

4:19:10incidental

4:19:11and accessory use of the facilities as

4:19:13light duty vehicle service

4:19:15establishment.

4:19:19The

4:19:21My motion is that this board uphold BC's

4:19:25decision.

4:19:26The

4:19:28petitioner

4:19:30did provide

4:19:32responses

4:19:34to sections of the approval criteria

4:19:41where he would

4:19:45renovate an existing structure.

4:19:49Many of the changes

4:19:51would not occur exterior, but he would

4:19:53uphold the

4:19:55surrounding

4:19:57area as far as the look of the business

4:20:01area, but he would do some changes to

4:20:03the interior.

4:20:05Unfortunately, those changes were not

4:20:08in my mind, were not provided

4:20:11to this board

4:20:13in the existing site plan that BC

4:20:18presented,

4:20:20which was submitted on July 17th,

4:20:232026.

4:20:26What I found was that the site is not

4:20:28large enough

4:20:30to accommodate its land use.

4:20:33As

4:20:36the spacing requirements

4:20:39were an issue, the over concentration is

4:20:41an issue.

4:20:44The parking

4:20:46areas for his displays

4:20:49I tend to agree with BC

4:20:53that they were not uh they did not

4:20:55provide appropriate means

4:20:57to access to the street or the alley.

4:20:59There was no pedestrian walkway.

4:21:02No 5-ft width pedestrian walkway on his

4:21:05site plan.

4:21:08There were not suitable facilities

4:21:11for storage of parts

4:21:14or vehicle or uh fluids.

4:21:17Nor were there suitable facilities for

4:21:19rubbish or debris.

4:21:21So, because of those things on the

4:21:22existing site plan that this board was

4:21:24shown,

4:21:28I make a motion that this board uphold

4:21:30BC's decision.

4:21:33>> Second.

4:21:34>> We got a motion and a second.

4:21:36All those in favor?

4:21:37>> Aye.

4:21:38>> Aye.

4:21:39>> Any opposed?

4:21:40>> Nay.

4:21:41>> Nay.

4:21:41>> Roll call.

4:21:43Board member Carr.

4:21:46>> Aye.

4:21:48>> Board member Johnson.

4:21:49>> Nay.

4:21:51>> Board member Bowman.

4:21:53>> Nay.

4:21:54>> Board member Parker.

4:21:55>> Nay.

4:21:56>> Board member Osborne.

4:21:58>> Aye.

4:22:00>> Board member Roberts.

4:22:02>> Aye.

4:22:05>> We have three yes, three no's. The

4:22:07motion

4:22:11fails due to a lack of

4:22:15>> No, we only have

4:22:16>> required votes.

4:22:18>> Uh we have an issue here. This was

4:22:21>> I'm going to take a a 2-minute recess.

4:22:23>> Erica, give me 4 minutes.

4:22:26>> Hey, we're going to recess for 2

4:22:27minutes.

4:22:29We'll

4:22:29come back to quorum

4:22:31at 1:32.

4:22:41>> That's

4:22:43So the motion is

4:22:45Hold it right there.

4:22:50That's probably what they're talking

4:22:51about.

4:22:57I had to look.

4:22:59I had to flip-flop a little bit.

4:23:03There just wasn't enough.

4:23:08There just wasn't enough, actually.

4:23:20I'll have

4:23:25You can always double-check it and find

4:23:27something out.

4:23:30Yeah.

4:23:31You know, and sometimes you know,

4:23:32especially property maintenance

4:23:37until the next day.

4:23:39I understand it.

4:23:48Everything at one time I wanted to do.

4:23:50And

4:25:04>> All right.

4:25:05Recess is over. We're back to uh

4:25:08>> Attorney Savage.

4:25:10>> Attorney Savage?

4:25:10>> So, um

4:25:12Erica Savage on behalf of law

4:25:13department.

4:25:15So, under the circumstances, with the

4:25:17three to three vote, um my

4:25:19recommendation would be to take

4:25:21>> Is your mic on?

4:25:22>> Yes. My recommendation would be to take

4:25:24the matter under advisement and bring it

4:25:26back. There's no majority vote. So,

4:25:29because you all are tied and there's no

4:25:31majority vote,

4:25:33um

4:25:35it it doesn't automatically make it a

4:25:36reversal, either. So,

4:25:39there's no there's no reason to redo a

4:25:42vote or do anything else because you're

4:25:44tied right down the middle.

4:25:45We need to just bring it back when we

4:25:48have

4:25:49uh more board members and we can get to

4:25:51a majority vote.

4:25:53>> Okay. So,

4:25:54>> That's my

4:25:54>> We'll bat, Mr. Chairman.

4:25:56Um

4:25:57it's we'll take it under advisement,

4:25:59bring it back next week,

4:26:02and hear it under

4:26:04>> We'll bring it back when we know we have

4:26:05enough board members.

4:26:07>> We're we're going to

4:26:09allow So, we need to allow the absent

4:26:12board members to to to review the

4:26:14transcript.

4:26:15>> Mhm.

4:26:17>> And we'll bring it back.

4:26:22We'll bring it back under advisement.

4:26:24This this is under advisement. And uh do

4:26:27we want to give

4:26:28uh, Mr. Chairman, 1 week or 2 weeks?

4:26:32I think 2 weeks for the board absent

4:26:34board members to cuz I want to be able

4:26:35to communicate with them.

4:26:38October 26th. So,

4:26:41uh, Mr. Chairman, I will read this uh,

4:26:43BCA case

4:26:452026-00057,

4:26:49Jeron Young, appeals the decision

4:26:52of Building Safety Engineering and

4:26:54Environmental Department, SLU

4:26:562026-00052,

4:27:00which denied the site plan

4:27:03to change of use occupancy

4:27:06of an existing

4:27:08uh, building for motor motor motor

4:27:11vehicles used sales or sales lots.

4:27:14That case is being taken under

4:27:16advisement due to

4:27:20uh, the fact that we had a tie vote and

4:27:23not enough members to render

4:27:26an

4:27:27a a decision. This case will be taken

4:27:30under advisement until October

4:27:3326th. Is that the right date?

4:27:35October 26th, and it will be heard

4:27:39under advisement

4:27:41after we hear the cases on the 26th.

4:27:44Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

4:27:45>> Thank you, Director.

4:27:47All right, we're going to move into uh,

4:27:48general public comment. If you're in the

4:27:50auditorium today, and you'd like to make

4:27:53a general public comment, please come up

4:27:54to the podium.

4:28:02>> Thank you, board members.

4:28:04I'm going to make this brief cuz it's

4:28:06been a long day. I'm here

4:28:09uh, pertaining to the case that was

4:28:10heard earlier, BCA 2026-00

4:28:16054.

4:28:18Uh, basically, uh,

4:28:22the decision was not a

4:28:24five vote uh approval. We did have four

4:28:27that did approve. Um and they had three

4:28:30that did not. And uh basically, I

4:28:33remember one of the members thinking

4:28:35that they had to um make a decision

4:28:39based on what BC said said because uh I

4:28:43don't believe they understood some of

4:28:44the things that were that they denied us

4:28:47for. Uh BC did deny us because they had

4:28:51the four mandatory criteria that had to

4:28:54be met. Uh they said that there was

4:28:56severe uh overconcentration and spacing.

4:28:59I do want to reiterate quickly that

4:29:02that area does not have this use of

4:29:05service. They have two service stations

4:29:08and one

4:29:09uh light duty service uh that is

4:29:13absolutely closed, shut down, and

4:29:15non-operable for years.

4:29:18The other thing that BC said said is

4:29:20that

4:29:21this would be an additional fourth auto

4:29:24repair use, which would be a conflict,

4:29:26but it's not an additional fourth auto

4:29:29repair.

4:29:30There already is a approval of a used

4:29:34car, which is already a auto repair use

4:29:37for that facility. I just want to make

4:29:39sure that they're clear to know that

4:29:41this is not adding another uh uh which

4:29:45BC said does not adding a fourth auto

4:29:48use. It's going to put in place a lesser

4:29:52intensive auto use because someone could

4:29:55put in the more intensive used car use

4:29:58in place.

4:29:59This is a lesser use, and it's all done

4:30:02inside, so that it's going to be better

4:30:04for the community. Also,

4:30:06this will uh when we looked at the

4:30:09situation when they looked at they said

4:30:11the on-site violations and unpermitted

4:30:14operation, that does not exist. They

4:30:17took the time, which they needed to do,

4:30:20to get their building paired for the

4:30:24approval that they were requesting for

4:30:27the used tire use. So, before they

4:30:30actually did the cleanup and and

4:30:32repairs, it was unsightly and things of

4:30:35that nature. So, basically, that has

4:30:37been eliminated. Uh the other issue was

4:30:40the site plan, and it we it did have

4:30:42conditions and we were prepared to make

4:30:44sure the site plan reflects all the ob-

4:30:47uh uh objectives that they had uh

4:30:50outlined. And the last thing is that and

4:30:53and that's something that's um that

4:30:56we're going to make sure happens. But,

4:30:58also, the environmental uh red flag

4:31:01about the um

4:31:03contamination really had nothing to do

4:31:05with our property. Had nothing to do

4:31:07with that business. But, we did agree

4:31:10and with your conditions that of

4:31:12approval to actually do the study. We

4:31:15have already investigated and found

4:31:17people who could do that environmental

4:31:18study for us. And I just want to read

4:31:20one last statement. I do want you to

4:31:22consider that that BC's This is what

4:31:25they made their decline on. And those

4:31:28objectives have been met.

4:31:30That's what I want to emphasize. So,

4:31:33it's not that they they made the

4:31:34decline. Uh we're trying to overturn

4:31:36something that they did. That is that

4:31:38they did that in error. Um

4:31:41First of all, I want to thank you again

4:31:42for listening to me. And First, we want

4:31:46to express our sincere gratitude to the

4:31:48four board members who uh recognized and

4:31:51mediated

4:31:52um

4:31:53mer- Excuse me, who recognized the

4:31:55merits of this petition and voted and

4:31:58granted uh relief today. While four

4:32:01voted

4:32:03votes demonstrated clear majority

4:32:05support, we recognize the hurdles uh

4:32:08required to revise BC's denial. Uh to

4:32:12the members who hesitated

4:32:16or voted against,

4:32:18we respectfully ask you to reconsider

4:32:21before

4:32:23this record

4:32:25this recorded case closes.

4:32:27The honorable

4:32:30body

4:32:31BZA exists and is specifically empowered

4:32:35by law to step in and overturn BC's

4:32:38decision in unique situations just like

4:32:41this one. We agree wholeheartedly with

4:32:44the four members who recognize that our

4:32:47case meets that exact threshold and that

4:32:51voting to reverse the denial is the

4:32:54right decision for this community.

4:32:58This petition

4:33:00petition does not introduce a new

4:33:03automotive blueprint into the

4:33:05neighborhood which I already mentioned.

4:33:08It transit

4:33:09It's

4:33:11Excuse me. It transit

4:33:15It changes a long vacant high intense

4:33:19used car lot into a low intensity full

4:33:25fully enclosed neighborhood service that

4:33:28does not currently exist.

4:33:31The surrounding community showed up with

4:33:33unanimous support with letters of

4:33:37that are on record and zero opposition.

4:33:40Residents or neighborhood businesses, no

4:33:44one opposed it. This is something the

4:33:46community said they wanted. Our client

4:33:48has already invested significantly to

4:33:51clean and to paint the building and the

4:33:54property securing the parcel and

4:33:58activating

4:34:00a what they're doing now going to be

4:34:01activating a neglected corner. If there

4:34:05are specific operational conditions,

4:34:08screening measures, or stipulations

4:34:11needed to

4:34:12ease your reservations.

4:34:14We will accept them on the record right

4:34:17now.

4:34:19We ask any member who voted in

4:34:22opposition to consider making a motion

4:34:25of reconsideration with conditions, so

4:34:28we do not leave this

4:34:30property vacant and send the wrong

4:34:33message to a community

4:34:35and a small business that are ready to

4:34:38invest in Detroit.

4:34:40There are two options that I'm proposing

4:34:43to introduce a motion for

4:34:44reconsideration today, or

4:34:47reconsideration under your allotted time

4:34:50between today and Thursday. And I do

4:34:53want to thank you for your time.

4:34:55>> Thank you.

4:34:56>> Great day.

4:34:57>> Hey, anybody else in the auditorium that

4:34:59like would like to make a public

4:35:00comment?

4:35:01If not, we'll switch over to our virtual

4:35:03participants. If you're out there online

4:35:06and you'd like to make a public general

4:35:08public comment, please raise your hand.

4:35:13Anybody's online and you'd like to make

4:35:15a general public comment, please raise

4:35:17your hand.

4:35:19Anybody to record?

4:35:20>> No hands.

4:35:21>> All right, we'll close out public

4:35:23comment.

4:35:25Any [clears throat] new business?

4:35:26>> No new business.

4:35:27>> Here our next hearing date's going to be

4:35:28October 19th,

4:35:302026. Any advisements?

4:35:33>> The September 28th, 2026 BZA hearing is

4:35:37now posted on YouTube.

4:35:39>> Okay. Any old business?

4:35:41>> No business.

4:35:42>> All right, motion to adjourn.

4:35:46>> Move to adjourn.

4:35:47>> All right, moved and seconded. All those

4:35:49in favor, I.

4:35:49>> I.

4:35:50>> We are adjourned. Thank you.

```*