Let's start.
I'd like to call it a order, a regular meeting
of the zoning board of appeals for Wednesday,
November 12th at 7:30 PM Please rise
for the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which which stands?
One Nation under God,
individual liberty and justice for all.
Roll call please.
Mr. Aya. Present.
Uh, Mr. Jersey's absent. Mr. Nvi?
Present. Mr. Perry? Present. Mr. Assessor? Present. Mr.
Clifft? Present. Mr. Green Present? Mr. Lindsay Present.
And Watts. Here, I'd like to make a motion to
Excuse Mr. Jersey
from tonight's meeting
Support.
Okay. Could we have a motion by Mr. Cliff?
Support by Mr. Lindsay
to excuse Paul Jersey from today's meeting.
All in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Okay.
It's passed. Next is adoption of the agenda for today.
I Mention it to either
Approval of the minutes for, well,
First we have to do the adoption of the agenda.
Oh. Adoption of the agenda.
And we have two items to be postponed.
Item number 10 is, is postponed to December 10th.
And item number 15 is postponed
to February 11th, 2026.
Motion to approve the, uh, amended agenda
Support.
Okay. We have a motion by Mr. Green, support by Mr.
Assessor to approve the agenda as modified. All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Okay.
Next comes the approval of the minutes of August 27th.
First.
Okay. Uh, approval of the minutes
for August 27th. You need a motion?
I make a motion to approve those minutes from August 27th.
I did get a chance to review 'em.
They appeared to be in order from my perspective. Yes.
Support. So we have a motion by Mr.
Cliff, support by Mr. Perry to approve the minutes
of August 27th.
All in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? Okay.
Those minutes are approved. That takes us
to the September 10th minutes.
Do you have a motion to approve those or
To approve? We'll support.
We have a motion by Mr. Green.
Support by, uh, Mr. Watts, uh,
to approve the September 10th meeting.
Minutes. All in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? Mr. Chair?
I, I abstain. Okay.
So it's, uh, it a passed with one abstention by Mr. Soha.
The September 24th minutes I did not see come out yet.
So we'll have to move those to our next meeting.
Make a motion to table the approval
of the September 24th minutes to a meeting in the future.
What's it? Post support. Okay. That was a motion by Mr.
Clifft. And I'm sorry, the support was by Mr. Green to, uh,
postpone the approval of the
September 24th to a future meeting.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Okay.
It takes us to minutes of October 8th,
which we just received the other day.
Or do you have a motion to approve 'em or Mr.
Chair? I'd like to know you can motion
to approve October 8th, 2025 minutes.
Okay. Is there Support? Support? Okay.
We have a motion by Mr.
Assessor, support by Mr. Green
to approve the minutes of October 8th.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Mr. Chair, I also You abstain?
I abstain. Okay. I'll
Have to abstain as well. I don't,
I haven't read 'em.
Okay. Uh, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, uh, the minutes
that passed, uh, were approved.
Takes us to item number six, Mr. Watts.
Okay. The next item is, uh, public hearing.
Applicant is I drive auto parts.
Uh, representative is Karen Birdie.
21 3 1 1 gross spec variance is requested retained
1149.64 square feet
of eight eight foot high.
Corrugated sheet metal fencing total
of 2840.64 of eight foot fencing.
Retain existing non-conforming auto wrecking yard
and expand the outdoor storage area
by 59485.92 square feet identified
as one parcel on the site.
Plan three,
retain the parking within the gross spec.
Front setback four wave five required parking spaces.
Five. Allow an 11 foot maneuvering lane to the two
southernmost parts parking spaces.
Six. Allow one eight foot parking space in the south
end of the parking lot.
And item seven, construct a building addition
to within 29.07 feet
of the east property line along gross spec
and to within 7.28 feet
of the North property line along Prospect.
Good evening Board, Karen Birdie on behalf
of I Drive Auto Parts. My client Calvin,
Her, excuse me, Ms. Bird, your address too. Oh yes.
It's uh, 2 8 2 2 5 Mound Road, Warren, Michigan 4 8 0 9 2.
My client, Calvin Hermes is here with me tonight.
I wanna begin by stating that, um, the fact
that this is called a wrecking yard in the
minutes is not accurate.
We are not a wrecking yard. We're not a towing yard.
We don't tow vehicles and hold them for the police.
We are a true recycling yard.
When vehicles come into our facility,
all the liquids are drained out of them.
The parts are then taken off of the, of the vehicles.
They're cataloged, they're inventoried,
and they're put on, uh, the internet.
When we get the car down, broken down to what's left, I,
I call it the carcass, but it's stripped down.
We then recycle the metal.
And then this is how the vehicle, the parts are used
and the vehicle is then properly recycled.
My client takes his business very serious,
and he is a certified automotive recycler.
He belongs to many of the prominent associations,
the Auto Auto Recycler Association,
the United Recycler Group, as well as the Premium
Recycling Parts Association.
These associations set standards
and processes that have
to be followed if you wanna be part of this group.
And these are the standards
and processes that keep our environment safe.
They have to follow the rules in
how they handle the fluids from the vehicles,
how they handle the parts from the vehicles, et cetera.
If they wanna stay in those associations, those associations
inspect his property Two times a year,
they do an audit and inspect.
In addition to that, the state Laura
inspects his facility also in addition to the DEQ and Eagle.
So we are a true recycler. We are not a wrecking yard.
We don't hold vehicles for people and give vehicles back.
We don't deal with the police
and picking up, uh, crash vehicles on the road.
I also wanna point out
that when my client purchased this property
quite some time ago, it was a junk yard.
It was called Sheridan Auto Parts, and it was a junk yard.
He did almost 400 loads of junk out
of this property to clean it up.
It is now cleaned up.
At that time, there was an eight foot fence.
Part of it was eight foot, part
of it was six foot, and it was damaged.
And he in fact, replaced the fence,
put all new fencing around the lot.
So this is my client's building. This is Beck.
Over here is eight mile.
This is his property and this was his yard.
This right here, all of this is already approved
as a recycling yard.
All of this fencing is already approved
for eight foot corrugated metal.
So then why am I here? My client purchased this piece
of property when he purchased this piece of property.
We now have to ask to allow the fencing to go
around that piece of property.
And we have to ask to continue the use of a
recycling yard for this piece of property here.
My client, uh,
currently employs 38 employees, 14
of which are worn residents.
These employees do all different things, um,
from disassembling the cars, um, cataloging the
auto parts, putting 'em on the internet
and delivering parts.
70% of his business is done on the internet.
People pick what they want off the internet, make an order,
and it gets shipped to them.
Pretty much the rest of it is people picking
what they want off the internet
and we deliver it locally to the, uh,
different cities around.
When you talk about a walk-in, in,
in his business, extremely rare.
Very rare. 'cause they know all the parts are cataloged on
the, on the computer
and in their own comfort, they can
find the parts themselves.
They don't need to come in.
So we have very little, uh, traffic, if you will,
With regard to the parking.
So this is the building here that we have.
And over here we have, um, if you will,
an outdoor building.
It's a three-sided building.
It's got a back, the sides a roof, but no front on it.
The parking right here.
You can see when I, when we asked
to retain the parking in the gross spec front, setback
the wave, the five spaces,
but we talk about an 11 foot maneuvering lane,
that's the smallest because this property's on an angle.
The smallest right here is 11 feet up here, it's,
uh, 21 feet.
So we go from 11 to 21
because of the, the uniqueness of this property
with gross spec cutting through the property, if you will.
So the only place that it's that small is, is right here
for this one spot.
In addition to that, when you talk about a parking lane,
it usually means the lane between two rows of parking,
where vehicles are going in
and out of their own parking on opposite sides.
We don't have that here.
This is, if you will, a horseshoe in open space.
You come in off gross spec and you pick a spot.
There's not having to have, uh, a traveling lane
between parking spots on both sides.
This was approved by the, um, planning department as,
uh, being sufficient, um, for, uh, parking.
Then lastly, This
is the building that I said has three sides.
We're seeking to actually turn it into a building with
four sides and a roof,
and this would be the footprint of that building.
Now, when we ask for a front yard setback
of 29.07 feet, please understand
that's the closest to it.
It will be, in fact more than 51.49
feet at this part of the building.
So again, what's presented here
for needing the variance is the closest point.
And we have much, uh, larger, uh, area.
This corner here is shown as not being part of our property.
My client just bought that about a month ago.
So, um, we'll be able to continue the greenery
in front of the building.
Um, that is on our property over here.
We'll be able to continue that over there.
So, in other words, at this point, like I said,
everything was approved for this,
but now we're expanding the building,
reconfiguring the parking,
and he bought more area over here.
And we're asking to extend.
So we have coverage for the piece of property bought here,
the ability to, um, expand the building
and the ability to retain the parking
as we presented on the plan.
Um, I was very specific when I
submitted my application.
I added, if you will, um, a writing
that went through the hardships.
I also filled out the hardships
that come with the application.
So I, you have a long agenda here tonight.
I really don't wanna bore you with each, uh, item.
I have addressed them in writing twice,
and if anybody has any questions, I'd be happy
to, uh, answer them.
Thank you for that presentation. Ms.
Birdie, uh, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any or close the public portion.
And, um, Mr. Watts,
I believe we have a impact statement to read in.
We have the following impact statement
from our planning department.
After review of the request
and further review of the petitioner's site plan,
the following issues were found
to impact the abutting local and general public.
Number one, the site plan indicates the access aisle
for the nine foot wide accessible parking space
to be five foot and width,
because the parking space also doubles
as the van accessible parking space.
A DA standards require an eight foot wide access aisle
for the van accessible space of this width, five feet
minimum width of 11 wait minute,
five feet wide access aisles are allowed
for van accessible parking spaces
with a minimum width of 11 feet.
If the petitioner intends
to leave the accessible parking space at nine foot
and width, the correct eight foot width
of the accessible aisle shall be indicated
on the revised site.
Plan number two, for the variance
to allow an 11 foot maneuvering lane
to the two southernmost parking spaces, the width
of the maneuvering lane is incorrectly measured on the site
plan from the far edge of the accessible aisle, the
actual width of the maneuvering lane, when
measured correctly from the leading edge
of the required eight foot wide excess aisle to the six foot
and width, even when measured from the leading edge
of the proposed five foot wide excess aisle,
the maneuvering lane would only be eight foot and width.
Number three, after further review of the proposed parking,
the planning staff has determined it is not possible
for passenger vehicles to maneuver
from the two southern most proposed parking spaces.
These two PA spaces should be removed from the site plan
regarding the location of the accessible parking space.
The planning staff has determined
that there is not sufficient room to maneuver.
And from this space without encroaching onto the public
sidewalk, this parking space should be removed
and the accessible parking space should be removed.
One spot adjacent to the north.
The petitioner shall
or should either revise their variance request
to add these three parking spaces to the amount of spaces
to be waived, or the planning staff recommends
that the petitioner should be referred back to planning
for a meeting to discuss revising the layout
of the passenger vehicle parking.
And item number four, on October 7th, 2025,
an onsite inspection was conducted at the parking area.
The planning staff, staff observed stacked parking
of three passenger vehicles in the location of the site
where the two southernmost parking spaces are proposed.
This area is not approved for passenger vehicle parking
or open storage of vehicles.
These vehicles shall be removed from the area.
This matter should be referred to the zoning division
for code enforcement.
Thank you, Mr. Wa.
Uh, so our, with the public hearing closed,
I'll turn it over to the board for questions and discussion.
If I could just start with the question. So, uh, Ms.
Birdie, I mean, hearing the
planning department's recommendations, have, uh,
have you or your client reviewed those comments
before? Or is
No, this is the first we're hearing of them.
Please understand. I went through planning
and the site plan that you're seeing was approved.
And I think that's why the comments start out
after looking at this again or something.
It was something along those lines
after a second review or something.
Because this plan that I'm presenting to you
was approved by the planning commission.
So I'm surprised.
I I don't know why when I get to zoning, um,
it's now a different story.
But if I'm understanding correctly,
they want these two spots here gone.
They want the two spots that are the most southerly gone
and they want us to make the handicap spot, um,
a little bigger, the striped area,
if I'm understanding right.
Three feet more on the striped spot and,
and take away these two spots here.
So I kind of feel like the rug's being pulled out under me
because I didn't know anything about this.
I guess I can ask my client.
We we could give up these two spots here
and correct the size of our handicap spot.
We can do that
Chair. I'm just, uh, yes,
Mr. Green.
So the, there in the impact statement,
there was more than just the parking spots.
There was reference, is your microphone on
or, yeah, there was reference to, uh, the stacking
of the vehicles
and the overall appearance of the property.
It's my understanding what they were saying is right here
when they went by, there were cars parked double right here.
That's not allowed. No. So no matter, no matter what.
So I think they're referring to the back corner piece
of property that had cars stacked, uh, three and four high.
No, he's saying right here.
He's saying they were parked, stacked right here. We
Think I know, but I don't think I, the way I read it is.
I know, but that's the way I read it. Is that, isn't
That what he's talking about? Well,
I'm not sure. I didn't talk.
So can I, can I ask a few questions
then while we're Yes, go ahead.
Mr. Green. She wants to continue.
So it says in the, in the, uh, uh, request
that it's zoned M two,
and then in your backup it says M two and M four.
It is zoned M two and M four.
So Are all this piece up here is M four.
This is all M two.
So Steve, what's the specific difference
between an M four? Just real quick,
The variance is put under the main address.
It has multiple parcels that have not been combined.
So the M four was not where the variance was written from.
Okay. We, we usually do catch that
and put it on the form added on. It's just
A, it's nothing. It's,
It's, it's, yeah, That doesn't matter.
So on this building expansion, uh,
I, I did look at the site.
What, what's the purpose? What's the building gonna be for?
So right now the building is used for pulling vehicles in
and stripping the parts off.
And right now it, it has a roof,
a back, and two sides.
Well, he'd like to enclose the building,
enlarge it a little bit, and enclose it so
that the workers aren't in the elements during the winter.
So the same thing will happen, same process goes
On, same process.
Okay.
I get, and then I, this, I this,
I did look at the property.
It, it's, uh, it's dicey.
Uh, there's, and that back piece of property, there are cars
stacked above the fences.
And that, that's, it doesn't relate specifically
to the ordinance, but that's, that concerns me.
How long, and this might be a question for the petitioner,
how long, like, so I'm just curious.
So if you get a car in there, like let's say it comes up
and someone drops it off, how long
before that car that that one vehicle, let's say,
disappears off the property? How long is the process?
I want to add, say one thing to you.
We don't take cars that come in and get dropped off. Okay.
A hundred percent of the cars in these lots in this lot
that my client has are bought at auction.
Okay. And then they're delivered. Um,
Well, I what, so when they're delivered?
Yeah. Okay. I'm just trying to get, I'm, I'm just trying
to see why there's so many,
I guess I'll be more specific there.
The cars are in the back.
There's a lot of cars that are being in the process,
I guess, of being stripped for parts and,
and that, that process.
So from a, for an understanding for, for a lay person, how,
like how long would it take one car to go
through the process or is that not a real fair question?
Come on up. You understand what I'm saying? Yes,
Yes. I understand. I just didn't
want you to think
that people dropped cars off.
Yeah. And when the petitioner comes up,
if you could give his name and address also for the record
Name Calvin Hermez.
21 3 11 Gross Back Highway Warren.
Um, so that's a great question.
Um, we use very highly sophisticated systems that tell us
what we need to buy and why we need
to buy it based on the amount of requests
and previous sales history.
And so the system actually determines how many
of these vehicles we have in the yard, how many we need
to keep, and how many we need to get rid of.
So when you go to auction,
you're specifically looking for, so
Some, some, some vehicles may come in
and we strip them out within a matter of three days
and some vehicles will come in
and we'll sit there in the yard for six months.
Fair enough. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Chair. Okay.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Sefa,
After reviewing the petition tonight,
I don't have a problem, um, with any of the items presented.
The only concern I have is just the three cars stacked out
front, but that's easily corrected.
Uh, the site plan was previously approved.
There is a picture mixed Mr. Green
of the cars being stacked.
I don't know if you noticed that. I,
I, well, this is, this is all miscommunication.
What, uh, what I'm referring to is when I drove by the site,
um, the, the height of the fence
and there's cars that are prepping
or whatever they're doing back there
and they're stacked tying up where they're over the fence.
Oh, I I I'm using the wrong word for the parking.
I, I, I see where the confusion is,
but I'm talking about the stack, the, the literal stacking
of cars waiting for whatever the process is.
Yet the petitioner wants to address that.
So when they say stacked, they were talking about
He knows, he knows now.
He said it's a miscommunication Yeah.
Staffed vehicles
that were parked the staffed vehicles. Right. He's referring to
Is the vehicles that are In the vehicle.
Right. So what, what planning was talking about is
even though they're staffed vehicles,
you can't park them that way.
Stacked. Correct. And so we're that has to stop. Correct.
But the gentleman,
Mr. Green is talking about back in the yard.
Correct. And he's talking about on the racks? Yes. Okay.
Those are my only comments. Okay.
Thank you Mr. Sfa. Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Watts.
I got Mr. Watchpoint don't run away.
So I have a couple questions.
I too was by there
and I seen the cars stacked in the,
in the junky yard part.
I'll call it junkyard part oh couple.
Recycle Yard recycling yard. Thank
You. Listen,
I, I always knew 'em as junk yards.
Um, and I might have bought a part or two out from Sheridan.
So, um, are those cars supposed to be stacked that high
where you can see 'em over the fence?
Um, by ordinance?
Basically that would be a planning condition.
And I don't know if they put a height condition on it.
Um, I know
For Their
competitors or whatever down gross back, I know they had
to get a variance
because of how high they were, which was
over 20 feet high over there.
Okay. So then the other question I have, I seem to recall
that council passed an ordinance on parking lot striping.
And I'm looking at the striping
and for all I've listened to about the a DA stuff
and learned over the past couple years, I'm wondering
how these places are getting,
'cause this one is obviously not striped
correctly by the law.
How are these places par striping these parking lots
and not doing it correctly?
Are they not getting permits and just doing it or?
Um, for the most part, um,
a building permit is required at this time.
And the striping requirements for the a DA are
implemented at that time?
Um, may mostly for the handicap.
A lot of it's not really looked at in total. Right.
Uh, I do review it from time to time, from zoning.
Um, probably ever,
or I is probably the ones that review that.
And we do look at that to make sure it falls back in line
with the site plan as well most of the time.
So it is reviewed at that time.
Uh, if we catch anyone that stripes without a permit, our,
our inspectors know to look for that.
Now, recent striping, we will send out a notice
and make them get a permit.
And if it's not right, they'll have to correct it.
Okay, fair enough. Um,
And, and that would be correct to the a DA standards,
not to the site plan.
We try to get it as close to the site plan as possible.
Right. Okay. I understand that. Yeah.
Most of the time, if it has to lose one parking spot, we,
we don't make 'em come for variance for that
because of the a DA center.
Okay, thank you. Um, I don't know.
I got mixed emotions about this.
Like I say, I drove by there
and you know, for someone that's been around a long time,
it's, it's, it is a, just a, it's a crazy layout down there
and I don't know what else it could be used for.
That's, but on the other half of the coin,
I thought there still needed a lot of cleanup
and I, there's no doubt that he did
a lot of cleaning already.
But, um, alright. That's all I got. Thank you
Mr. Green. You had a comment here.
One more question. Okay.
So h in 60,000 square feet of,
of additional open storage that's being requested, how,
how many cars can you, can you get in 60?
This might not be a fair question either,
but how many cars can you get in there
If you wanna count all these spots?
Well, I, I mean, ballpark, do you want me
to count a thousand, 10,000?
No, a hundred. No.
How many cars can you f
how many cars can you fit in? I never
Counted it 'cause it wasn't, What's the guesstimate?
This is more for this, this goes
to the stacking thing.
'cause there is an ordinance that says how high you can go.
You don't have to six,
Six times eight
16.
You're killing me. Well, come on. I'm sorry.
That wasn't something that
Three, four. I was just thinking
for a guess. Seven.
So 72 maybe 90 spaces.
So maybe 90. And maybe, maybe And then you can,
and then they, pardon me, they get stacked in racks then.
So it could be, so the fence is eight foot high.
You're looking at possibly three high.
So you know, a little under 300 more cars. Okay.
That answers my question. Thanks
Mr. Chairman.
Yes. Yes. Mr. Watts.
So I have a question. I don't know, maybe to Mr.
Waer point or maybe to the city attorney
after reading the impact statement
that we received this evening.
And the concerns is, number one
was this in front of the planning
commission and approved this was
Approved. The plan I've
given you was approved
by the planning commission.
This is why I am shocked that that's the impact statement.
Okay. So I just left planning not even, I don't know,
a couple months ago or so,
and this was approved, that parking was all approved.
So I'm not understanding, I can make the adjustments by
to getting rid of the two Southernly parking.
I can make the adjustment by making the bigger
a DAI think we need three more feet,
is what that letter's saying.
We can do that. But I'm not coming to you with a plan
that wasn't approved by the planning commission.
This plan was approved by the planning commission
and the planning department.
Or I wouldn't be here with it saying that to you.
Okay. So then my, my next question would be to either one,
I guess that give, give me the, the correct answer
is should we be referring this back to planning
before we make a move on it?
The only issue is the parking.
That's the only issue that came up in the,
in the impact statement.
So if you'd like to leave the parking off and,
and deal with the other items and then I'll go back
and redo the parking, I'll have a meeting with them.
But to put my client back through an entire reprocess
through the planning department is financially not fair.
And quite frankly, I don't think equitable at all as far
as time goes and effort.
But I can go back and redo the parking
and then come back with a variance request.
So that fits what the planning department is
Referring to. So maybe
I could rephrase my question.
Should we just postpone it to the next meeting?
So, so we get it corrected?
That's, that's the only thing I'm worried about.
I understand where you're coming from. I don't disagree.
Well, if, if I could just, well first, Steve,
did you wanna add something in first or,
Um, as far as the parking goes, I believe it has
to be reposted because now they need to waive more.
So that part will have to be reposted
before it comes before you.
So it's not just changing that parking back in June or July.
I met with Ms.
Birdie and went through the concerns
that zoning had with that parking.
Uh, so she was made aware of it back in June
that caused some of the revisions and some of the delay
before it came, before you
planning was made aware of it at that time.
But it had already been approved I believe at that time.
Um, that's probably why the impact statement shows it
that way at this time.
So in other words, if, if,
if people have changed their mind, I can deal with that.
But I've got a whole nother part of this business that
needs to keep moving.
If we could take the parking elements off
and deal with the other items, I will go back
and deal with, uh, planning's concerns about parking,
I'll meet with them and then I'll refile as far as,
'cause it does have to be re unnoticed
because I'm probably gonna have to waive more parking spots
then already.
'cause they're saying now take away the two
southerly parking spots.
Right. And if I don't have room for the extra three feet,
it might be another parking spot.
So I could then as to all the parking refile
and um, have it noticed and come back before you
Mr. Chair. So yes,
Mr. Cliff, I'd like
to make the suggestion
that in your application you also use the term you're using
up here tonight, auto re recycler instead of the
auto wrecking yards.
I agree with you. Those are 2D very different animals.
But if that's what we're looking at
and that's what you want to do here, I'd like to see
that verbiage in your application.
My application doesn't say wrecking yard
Variance is requested. Basically
That's the part the city writes, the part
that I write says
Retain existing non-conforming auto wrecking yard
and expand outdoor storage area. That item
Number two, city wrote.
Okay, maybe, maybe I did not
Write that. Maybe you
can get them to put
It in the phrase you supposed a junkyard and I complained
and they stopped calling us a
Junkyard. No, I
absolutely feel you on that.
But even a wrecking yard is a,
is worlds different from a true recycling yard.
A recycling operation is a cleaner operation.
Inventory comes and goes quickly.
It doesn't sit out there for 40 or 50 years.
Again, our ordinances are a little archaic.
So that's something that should maybe be looked at in the
future too, about proper ordinance
for an auto recycling operation within the city of Moore.
And other municipalities have done it.
I know that we haven't.
But, um, the other question I had was, uh, the hubub in, uh,
item two of the, of the, uh,
impact statement about this maneuvering lane.
And it might take Steve to have to explain to me
his interpretation of, of that.
Of course, you're not going to need 'em if you're going
to eliminate those two parking
spaces anywhere. I believe that
Has to do with those parking spaces
on, on the, in the front
There. So if those
goes away, then we don't have
to worry about that part of it,
Right? Yeah.
So if I were to say, if we look here, I'd ask you to
vote on one, two,
So seven, correct.
And seven. And then I will go back
and start over with the parking.
So basically as our board first, we need to have a motion
to separate items one, two,
and seven from 3, 4, 5, and six.
Correct?
I believe you're correct. Mr. Chair? Yes.
Mr. Sfa, I make a motion to separate items one, two,
and seven from the request tonight.
I'll, I'll support that. Okay.
So we have a motion to separate one, two,
and seven away from the parking items,
which are 3, 4, 5, and six.
Motion by Mr. Aya. Support by Mr. Lindsay.
Uh, all in favor? Should it
Before we vote? Yes. Should
it be worded that we, uh,
separate 3, 4, 5, and six?
Is that the correct wording or does it matter?
Does it matter? I don't think it matters. Okay.
Okay. So like items one, two, and seven would be like A
and then 3, 4, 5 and six would be six B, correct?
Correct. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Is anybody opposed? Okay.
So the two items have been separated. Um,
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr.
Sfa,
I'd like to make a motion, uh, on item one of the request
for items one, two, and seven.
Yes, I'd like to make a motion to approve Item one,
retain 1,149 feet 0.64 feet,
I'm sorry, 1149.64 feet of eight foot high
corrugated sheet metal fencing totaling
2840.64 feet
of eight foot high fencing
of which 1,655 was previously granted on variance
of June 7th, 2017.
Two, retain existing nonconform conforming auto wrecking
yard and expand the outdoor storage area
by 59485.92 square feet
identified as parcel one on the site plan.
And item seven, construct a building addition
to within 29.07 feet
of the east property line along gross spec
to within 7.28 feet
of the north property line along the prospect due
to the fact that it's on a detriment to the area
and the size and shape of the lot. Support.
Support. Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Aya.
I heard a few voices for support,
but I thought it was Mr. Lindsay that I here first?
Yeah. Yes. Okay. Okay.
Uh, and Mr. Ross, can we do a roll call on this one? Yes.
Mr. Aya? Yes. For the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsey? Yes. For The reason
Stating the motion Mr. Nevi?
He called me last, yes. Okay. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reason stated of the
Motion. Mr. Clifft?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor? Yes. For the reason stated in the motion
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reason
Stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts? Yes. For the reason stated
of the motion and Mr.
Uh, yes. For the reason stated motion. So Ms.
Birdie, uh, six A items one, two,
and seven have been approved.
Okay, so do we have a motion to postpone?
Yes. Can we, can we postpone it and I'll turn in
and amended, um, application
that then I'll have to get noticed.
Yeah, we'll have to get noticed
because the parking wa meant will be probably at least two
extra spaces I would think.
Yes. I'd like to make a motion, uh, to table A, request B
for items 3, 4, 5,
and six, uh, with the date to be determined
Support.
So we have a motion by Mr. Sia, support by Mr.
Cliff to postpone items 3, 4, 5, 6
to a date to be determined for this one.
Can we do all in favor? Aye. Is anybody opposed? Okay.
So at has been,
Thank you. Yes ma'am.
Okay.
Takes this to item number seven.
Okay. Item seven. Uh, applicant is Robert Bon.
Key address is 3 0 2 3 0 2 0 13 mile
Road and the variance requested is
construct a 30 by 50, 1500 square foot garage.
Okay. If you could start with your name
and address for the record and then
My name is Robert Banky.
My address is 3 0 2 oh East 13 Mile Road.
Okay. And did you just wanna explain your request today?
I'm basically asking
to put a 1500 square foot garage on his property.
This property is unique.
This property is an acre sitting on 13 mile road.
There is no buildings on this property except for my house.
It was three separate lots.
I have turned them or I'm attempting to turn 'em into one.
So I don't have a problem with how the building lays out
because originally, uh, the garage was on a parcel
that I didn't have a frontage or a house on.
So now I'm turning the three parcels into one,
which equivalents to an acre.
Okay. I own three vehicles. My sister just moved in.
That's the fourth vehicle. I have two motorcycles.
I have a go-kart. I have a mini bike.
And yes, my grandkids live in the area.
That's why papa's got all the fun
things sitting in his house.
I just need a place to put 'em under
without keeping them outside.
Um, I spent a fortune cleaning up this property, uh,
this property originally to see that was called many,
many times throughout the years
because of polite tall grass, weeds, trees, everything.
I've actually cleaned out the entire property except four
to five trees in front of the house
and one tree in the back of the house in the yard.
And that I was threatened to keep up by my daughter.
She said You can't take that tree down.
So basically my yard is clean.
There's nothing else on the property.
Like I said, I'm just asking for a 1500 square foot garage.
And if you see what I've gotten towards,
you'll understand it
and it'll gimme a little work area inside the garage.
I can peel around with some things. Nothing major.
Let's try and make my life simple.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
Uh, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone to audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any or close the public portion
and turn it over to the board
for any questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Green.
So the three lots are,
you own the three lots and you're combining them.
I have submitted everything to the planning department.
I had to do that before I applied for this variance. So you
Own all three of 'em though?
Yes. Okay. Alright. All the taxes are up to date to
One more question. 'cause
I, I see no problem with this.
Uh, does the word color me gone mean anything?
I can't hear you Do. Does the word color
me gone mean anything?
Color me. Gone. Yeah. I have no idea what
There used to be a a, a rail out in, uh,
a dragster in front of that house for years.
A what? A dragster A race car.
That's a, oh, there, there was a garage. Next.
There's, that's my
Neighbor. Oh, that's your
Neighbor. My neighbor has
that building, which,
Because I I remember that. Yeah.
Yes. That is next door.
So that's on the, as you face it,
If you're facing the property, it's to the right. Okay,
Cool. Very cool.
Alright. That was it.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Lindsey.
I just have one quick question, uh, for you Mr. Bankey.
Um, so if you have these three parcels, where
where are you intending on building the garage?
Because we don't really have a, a drawing or a, at least I
See, I, I have a drawing there.
It does, it is hard to put it,
but I'm, I was gonna run it 13 miles east and west.
I was originally gonna run the building east and west,
but now I decide to go north and south.
Instead of putting a building hanging into the middle
of the yard, it'll like be more presentable.
Is it, is it going next to your house? Behind your house?
Oh, it's behind the house. Okay.
It's on, it's actually on part of the second lot.
Okay. Which is behind the property.
I think Steve could help me with this.
This is where It's, yep.
Is it on 30, Steve?
Is it parcel? 30
Oh Oh.
Parcel Ending in oh three. Oh oh, okay.
Okay. The middle. It's right
In the middle. It's the
mm-hmm. Looks like pink.
Yeah. Saw. Okay.
I'm trying to make a uniform
with my neighbor's building there that you know about.
Okay. That answer for my question. Thank you.
Um, just for the board, I, I think the Gar garage is
bigger than I like to see,
but I think he's got plenty of space.
Um, so I really don't have any issues with this.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Watson, one question to Mr.
Watchpoint. He, he cannot build that until the, on there,
until those properties are combined, correct?
Sorry? The, the lot combinations have to be approved
before you could billed, right?
Uh, correct. Okay.
Yeah, it's in the process and he can apply
and go through everything at the same time.
Um, I don't see any reason it wouldn't be
because it's landlocked parcels and he owns
'em all. So I would agree.
I mean,
he's definitely got a lot of room there,
so. Okay. That's all I
Have. I hope this will help you. But
when I took it to is
that planning, um, that was their suggestion
for me to do is put all three lots together
and they told me directly they're gonna do it in-house
instead of doing it a different way.
That those lots are usually done 'cause straightforward.
Okay. Thank you.
Do we have a motion or any other questions? Yes. Mr.
Chair? Yes, Mr. Cliff,
Nobody else has anything.
I'll make a motion on this.
I'd like to give the petitioner permission
to construct the 30 foot by 50 foot
1,500 square foot garage.
Not a detriment to the area the size of the lot.
Um, more than warrants the ability
to sustain a building of that size.
Support. Support. We have a motion by Mr.
Cliff then I heard support by Mr. Lindsey
to approve the petitioner's request for reason stated,
Um, Mr. Cliff?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jury or Mr. Lindsey? Yes.
For the reason stated in the motion. Mr. Green? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Aya? Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes.
For the reason stated in the motion,
Watts is, uh, yes.
For the reason stated motion, Mr. Ms. Do
Uh, yes. For reason in
stated and motion your request is approved.
Okay. Thank this is new to me. Um,
You Have any question? Does this have
to be done in five months
or do I got a little bit of time?
Uh, Steve can help you with that. Okay.
'cause I know you can't build until the lots are combined,
so it's like that's an unknown date.
So, but Steve can help you with any of that stuff.
Okay. Thank you. Okay.
That's, uh, item number eight.
Item number eight. Number eight is applicant is,
uh, Roman Kravitz.
Property is 28,630.
Norwood variance requested is permission to construct a 12
by 24 288 square foot shed in addition to a two, uh,
to a 828 828 square foot attached garage for a total
of 1,116 square feet of accessory structure and floor area.
Uh, good evening. Uh, Roman Kravitz, uh,
28 600 0 Norwood Avenue.
Uh, I'd like to put a shed in the back of my backyard.
Um, my property sits on about half a acre, uh, property.
Uh, the backyard alone is about it's 14,000 square feet.
Uh, the shed is 288 square feet, which is, uh,
2.06% of the backyard current, uh, asking
for a shed, uh, this size.
Um, my family grown ever since we
moved to this, uh, property.
I have two kids now at this point.
I have at least four to five strollers, uh, bikes.
Uh, we like to do outdoor stuff, so two kayaks sitting
around under the tree would like to clean it up
and keep it tidy.
Uh, also a good space to keep a, uh,
outdoor pole in there as well.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
Uh, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone wishing to speak on the site?
Not seeing anybody in the audience wishing to speak.
I close the public portion
and turn it over to the board
for any questions and discussion.
Mr. Chairman? Yes. Mr. Sfa?
I, I took a look at this petition.
Uh, it looks pretty straightforward to me.
It's a large lot and I think the, uh, the size
of the shed is, uh,
appropriate given the amount of property.
This will be a yes vote for me.
Thank you. Any other? I al I also agree
'cause it's a large, very deep plot being 210 feet
and I guess you need storage space for all
that lawn equipment
and everything else that would go
in with that kind of property.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Watts.
I drove by there on Monday, I believe it was,
and, um, took a look from the street.
Obviously couldn't see real good,
but I'm kind of a stickler for
the property being clean
and stuff like that when people come for variances.
What have you did?
I would, I don't even know if it's your property that's,
I couldn't see that well, but I looked like there was a
bunch of brush down in the back and tree branches and stuff.
Oh yeah. Uh, I cleaned up.
So when I purchased the property, uh, about 20 feet
of the back of it, it was neglected to the point
where there are tree trunks, uh, size of my body.
Uh, half of those trees I dug out by hand.
Uh, the other half had to rent out the tractor wood chipper.
And I've been cleaning the property a little by little.
Okay, so you're working on it? Yes. Alright, perfect.
Thank you
Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Lindsay, uh,
There's no other comments from the board.
I'll make a motion. Uh, I'd like to make a motion
to grant the petitioner, uh, permission
to construct a 12 foot by 20 foot, excuse me, 12 foot
by 24 foot 288 square foot shed in addition to
an 828 square foot attached garage for a total
of 1,116 square feet
of accessory structure floor area.
Uh, due to the size
and shape of the lot, it's not a detriment of the area,
uh, it's necessary.
Uh,
Support.
So I have a motion by Mr. Lindsay, support by Mr.
Assessor to approve the request
for the reason stated roll call.
Mr. Lindsey. Yes. For the reason stated the motion
Mr. Assessor?
Yes. For the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Siah? Yes.
For the reason stated in the motion
Mr. Perry? Yes.
For the reinstated the Motion Mr. Clifft?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the
Motion. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reasons stated
In the motion. Mr. Watts
For the yes. For the reason stated motion. Mr. Mr.
Dovi? Uh, yes. For reason stated in motion.
Uh, your request is approved. Thank
You. A good evening.
Okay, Item number nine.
Okay, item number nine is the applicant is F Fs
sign signature Brand management.
Uh, representative is Frank or Fran Emanuel.
Address, 2 2 6 6 5 Ryan.
And the variance is
to install a 83.65 square foot wall sign on the east
elevation of the building.
In addition to the previously permitted 40 square foot wall
sign to the north elevation for a total
of 123.65 square feet of wall signage.
You can start with your name and address
and then take us through your request.
Good evening. My name is France Emanuel.
Address is 2 0 7 6 East 10 Mile Road,
one Michigan 4 8 0 9 1.
Um, so as you can see, we are applying for a variance
for a 41, uh, foot uh, sign.
Uh, that's the sign that's on the Ryan Road.
And the reason requesting variance for that is
because typically customers can see the sign
that's on the other side, except the one on Ryan Road is the
one that needs more visibility.
'cause that's usually where there's more traffic.
Um, there are currently, uh, a poll sign as well.
But typically some, uh, customers can't really see,
you know, the poll sign versus a channel letter sign.
It's been in our experience with a bunch of clients
that they only have one sign or they could have a poll sign,
but a lot of customers get lost just because of that.
It sounds funny, but it's the true fact of it.
Um, it's just the, you know,
individual letters and everything.
It really helps us to show where the building is
and to let people know that that building is part of, um,
the business that owns it.
'cause otherwise they're gonna think the pole sign is
redirecting elsewhere or the other side is just for that,
uh, building.
So that's the reasoning.
Um, and really there's not much
to it other than for what they have.
Uh, it's about 40,000 square foot, uh, building.
And then that part that we're applying for,
it's about a hundred feet wide.
So it's, without it, it just would be an empty spot.
And, you know, we're trying to utilize it just
to help the business gain more traction,
especially since they're just opening up now.
Okay, thank you for that explanation.
Uh, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone wishing
to speak on this item in the audience?
Not seeing any or close the public portion
and turn it over to the board for questions and discussion.
So Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Green. So Mr.
Wapa, how does this work when, so in 97 they were gave,
got permission to put a 12 by 18 foot
or 216 square foot of signage on an accessory building.
So, so does that like add on,
is it a different building or the same building? Um, or
This, this is a completely new build
and everything, so stuff's gone.
That accessory building is gone. Alright.
But for cleanup purposes, since it was a sign, um,
I would suggest resending it if you grant this.
Thank you. That's
Mr. Chairman?
Yes. Mr. Sfa. I, I'm taking a look here in the packet.
The, uh, although the sign is twice the limit, uh,
twice the ordinance, um, given the size of the, you know,
the frontage along, uh, the road, there's over a hundred,
almost 150 feet of length on the building.
I think the sign is, um, appropriate.
There's a really about 30 square feet of the 80 is
that decorative bar on the left side.
So I, in my mind, I don't really count that as signage
because there's no wording with the, um, there's sign
that they currently have is modest.
It's within the ordinance.
But I did take a drive by the property
and it is rather difficult to see the,
the rather small sign on that huge building.
Those are my only comments.
Okay, Mr. Sfa?
I would, I would agree with that and uh,
'cause I drive down Ryan often since I live in that area.
And I would be fine with the,
this additional sign
because as long as we include in our motion to waive, I mean
to rescind the request from 97 under accessory building,
that doesn't exist anymore.
If there aren't any other comments, I'll make a motion.
Let me, that is the variance for,
we're rescinding the variance. What was the date on it?
June 11th, 97.
June 11th, 97. Okay.
I'd like to make a motion to grant permission
to install an 83.65 square foot. Oh,
That's actually, I'm sorry.
That's actually on accessory building.
That's, that's not a sign. I'm sorry that
that one doesn't have a sign for
Some reason I'm missing that page with the variances
previously requested, so I don't have
It. Okay. Yeah,
sorry. It, I, I I misread that. Sorry.
There is no, that was just for a different building.
It had nothing to do with the sign. Okay, please.
Or my comments on that.
No problem. I'll strike that. I'll start over.
I'd like to grant permission to install an 83.65 square foot
wall sign on the east elevation of the building in addition
to the previously permitted 40 square foot wall sign on the
north elevation for a total of 123.65 square feet
of wall signage due to the size and shape of the property.
And it's on a detriment to the area support.
So you have a motion by Mr.
Sfi, support by Mr. Perry to approve the request
for reasons stated in a motion. Mr. Aya?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For reinstated in a motion Mr.
Ser? Yes. For the reason stated
Of the motion, Mr. Clift?
No, it's over two sizes recommended by city ordinance.
Mr. Lindsay? Yes.
For the reason stated of the motion watts? Yes.
For the reason stated of the motion. Mr. Nvi?
Uh, yes. For reason stated in motion.
Your request is approved. You can let me vote today.
Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Green.
Yes, for the reason state leaving me out,
but your request is approved.
Thank you.
Case item, item number 11. Okay,
Number item number 11.
And I'm gonna apologize before I pronounce the name.
Uh, applicant is Thomas Ika,
20,740 almo
and the variance requested is a wave, ingress
and egress to the existing detached garage
of a non-conforming residence on an M two property.
That's correct. Good evening.
Uh, MCA 1671 Squirrel, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan
4 8 3 0 4
Here to request, uh, the wave of the ingress
and ingress essentially connecting the, uh, driveway
to a garage that's located behind the property.
Uh, we purchased this property several months ago.
We brought it up fully up to code.
We passed all the trade inspections, plumbing, mechanical,
electric, uh, construction, as well as all zoning except
for this minor issue with the driveway.
And it is rooted in the fact that the partial driveway
that is there presently is actually halfway
on the adjoining lot, which we do not own.
So it'd be rather difficult for us to
build a driveway on property that we do not own.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Okay. Uh, I'm not seeing any air closed, the public portion
and turned over to the board for discussion and questions.
So when I, Dr.
Okay, so the driveway that was there, that's part of the
parcel next door, is that the way I understand that
Partially. So
the gentleman that sold the house owns essentially
that entire peninsula.
So it was not a problem for him to pour
that driveway when he owned that entire,
that land in its entirety.
But now that driveway is essentially, uh,
50% ours and 50% is.
Okay. So would that driveway be removed then or so,
or, I'm just trying to think what would happen with that.
I mean, would that, I mean,
Throw myself at the mercy of the court. I don't know what
To do with this.
Uh, let's see. Mr. Wafer, did you have a,
Um, basically what Tom said was completely correct.
Um, it is the parking spot that he uses for
that house at this time.
I, there's nothing zoning wise
that would force it to be removed.
The thing is, if they come
and do any construction there, it will have
to be looked at at that point in time through planning.
So I would be fine with it.
Stay in without any action and going from there.
Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you Mr. Mr. Waz. So
I got two questions.
Yes. One, wouldn't it be
a better idea to get like a 99 year agreement
with the other property owner
to keep the driveway there and be able to use it
Again? I don't know what
their thought process is on that parcel.
I know I, I sat down in preliminary meetings
and stuff like that, so I don't know to
what extent it would be,
but if it could be obtained, I would say yes.
I, it's a very good thought process,
but I don't know what their overall plans are.
Okay. Um, well, to the petitioner,
do you any thoughts on that?
I'm open to whatever pragmatic solutions there are,
but I can't speak on the other property's owner's
Behalf. So you haven't,
neither one
of you have approached that situation then?
No, sir. Okay. And
Quite frankly, we just, we we're, we're stuck in a limbo.
So, so
if, is this gonna be a rental?
Yes, sir. Hmm. Okay.
So now I'm wondering what kind of
situation this poses for The use of the garage.
I mean,
There's ample street parking
and you can, you can park a vehicle on the one
or two cement squares
that are there already without any problem.
Okay. All right.
Well, I guess I don't, I don't know
that I have a problem either way,
but it seems like a solution the better solution
to the problem would be to get an agreement
to maintain the driveway back to the garage.
So, just makes more sense to me,
but I don't have a problem either way.
Yeah, yeah.
I just always, my, my comment, I, I understand
and I understand why it's on different parcel.
I just worry. It's like if somebody's gonna be parking a car
there, and then what if the owner of the next parcel says,
oh no, you can't park there anymore.
'cause that's part of my property. Yeah.
That's how those kind of
neighboring disagreements can happen.
Um, but
Are there any motions? If there's no other questions,
Mr. I'll make a motion.
Okay. Mr. Ruts, I make a motion to
waive the ingre ingress
and egress to the existing detached garage
of a non-conforming residence on an M two property
Support.
So we have a motion by Mr. Watts, support by Mr.
Sofa to approve the request
for reasons stated in the motion.
Watts? Yes. For the reasons stated motion. Mr. Sia? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reinstating the
Motion Mr. Assessor?
Yes. For the reason stated in the
Motion. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reason. State of
The motion. Mr. Lindsay?
Yes.
For the reason stated In the motion. Mr. Cliff?
Man, I got a tough time with this one.
Um, yeah.
I'm gonna have to vote yes
for the reasons stated in the motion.
Okay. And Mr. Nevi?
Uh, our vote? Yes, but I did not remember hearing you say
what the reasons were in the motion.
Did they, did did you actually say them or, I did
Not. I just, you said
It wasn't the detriment. Oh,
that I didn't, I wasn't sure.
I did, I didn't catch it, but yes, I vote. Yes.
Uh, your request is approved. Thank you very much.
Okay. This, this item 12.
Item 12 is, uh, property is 26 2 62.
Ryan, representative is Reverend Lamb.
Uh, let's see here.
Hello, my name's Leo Juanes.
I'm the builder putting an addition on this. Hang
On one minute. Okay.
Variance is requested.
Is, um, retained vehicle AC vehicular access to Eureka Drive
to waive the six foot wall
and eight foot green belt along the parking lot areas
located to the north
and south property lines, abutting residential properties
and to waive modified screening.
Number three, allow 90 degree parking spots
to be no less than 17.7 foot in length
and 8.9 foot in width,
and allow parallel parking spots
to be no less than seven foot six wide
and a one way parking one way
parallel parking maneuvering lane no less than
10.2 feet wide.
Okay. So now if you can start with your name
and address for the record
and then explain, uh, okay. Your request.
Uh, Leo Ez.
I'm the builder address is 3,100
to T Court AR Hills, Michigan.
Uh, my addition was approved through planning,
but these variances come up in order for me
to get my billing permit, so that's why I'm here
so I can get my bill permit.
So, reference not here, he is out of town,
but the office manager's here if you have
any questions on these variances.
Hi, my name is Ron Franklin.
Um, I represent, uh, father Juan Lamb,
who is unfortunately detained and could not be here.
He senses apologies and his regrets.
Um, what would you like to hear from me?
Uh, whatever you'd want to explain to the board about
what your, the request
And with the, uh, first item,
the vehicular access to Eureka Drive,
as you Good folks are probably aware,
the church property extends from Ryan Road,
and then it abuts back to Eureka Road on the, uh,
uh, east side of, of the property.
We have access
on both the north and south side of the property on
the west side of the street on Ryan Road, off of Ryan Road.
And then we also have one ingress egress
off of Eureka Road coming into the backside of the property
from, uh, the east side.
It had been suggested to us by the planning department
that we close that off,
and we have no objection
to putting up a gate on that side that leads
to Eureka Road.
The exception that we would, we would like to allow is
to allow us to have access to the property,
especially on weekends when obviously we have, uh,
liturgical, uh, sessions going on,
and that's when the bulk of the people attending the parish
will be there.
We also think that it is, I think, wise
to have access both on the Ryan roadside
and the Eureka side, especially when we have large crowds,
uh, in case of emergency
and just for general traffic flow, what our suggestion
or our recommendation would be is to erect a gate
that we will have closed during the weekday, Monday
through Friday, if you will,
but allow us to have that access open
for the weekend activities,
because that's when the bulk of the people
attend the parish functions.
That was the first, the second, um, waiving the, uh,
the green belt walls on, on both the north and south side.
On the north side of the property.
Our next door neighbor is St. Joseph at.
And if you're familiar with that particular piece
of property, it's fairly large and there are no buildings
or any parking that's even within, I'm gonna guess a hundred
or 150 feet of where our fence line is.
So there's, there's no issue.
I don't, I don't believe on that side.
And on the south side, um,
there's an apartment complex, a fairly large one,
but again, from the buildings,
the parking lot to the fence fencing area,
and then from, from the fence on the other side
to those apartments is another good 50 or 60 feet.
There doesn't seem to be an issue with, um,
the need for that.
Higher fencing. We already have fencing there,
and for the most part on the
south side, there's natural vegetation
that grows along the fencing, you know,
vines and, and what have you.
And on the north side, St.
Joseph had, has a, has a, a particular tree line
that gives a natural border on, on
that particular side.
Um, I can't really speak to the parking issue.
That's fine. That's, that's fine.
Well, thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any, are closed the public portion of the meeting
and turn it over to a board for discussion
and any questions?
Um, personally, I mean, I'm very familiar with that.
'cause actually, I, I go to St. Joseph right next door.
I, I'm very familiar with St.
Cletus as, uh, with that property.
I mean, they've always had access on
Eureka Drive ever since I was a kid
and stuff like that's always had a driveway there.
And personally, I, I like the idea of a, of a gate
because I know that even St.
Louise by my house where I currently live, uh,
they have a gate at the back
that they just have unlocked on the weekends
when they have services on Saturday and Sunday.
But during the week, the gate is closed
and that stops people from cutting it
through their parking lot also.
Yes. To gain access to 12 hour, in this case, cutting it
through your parking lot, trying to get to, uh, Ryan.
Everything else I think is just good.
I mean, it's cleaning up to, to get everything Okay.
By zoning. But your property is large
and I don't see any detriments or
Anything. Thank you,
Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Watts.
Um, I was by there on Monday and I got a few questions.
Yes, sir. Um,
I noticed on the back property
behind going towards the Eureka, is
that in the process of being cleaned up?
Yes. Because I noticed there's pallets and there's Yes.
Yeah, there's all kinds of stuff back there.
If, uh, if you've been on the property,
obviously we have some con construction
that's in, in the process.
And that will be cleaned up
as the building process finishes up.
Yes. Okay. Absolutely.
All right. Um, and then the other problem I have,
I looked at, um,
the north side, in the south side,
it was more the north side.
I see there was screening on the fencing and stuff.
I think I, I just, I I, I have a problem
waving the wall or the, or a green belt. I really, so,
Which, which side?
On the north side, it just, it just seems to me,
and I don't recall exactly what I was looking at.
I don't recall what the s south side looked like,
but I'm not a fan of waiving that kind of stuff.
I mean, we need to, if we're cleaning up the property,
we need to, we need to do the right things
and not wa stuff like that.
That's, that's the way I see it.
But overall, I don't have a, I don't have a problem
with your, your project.
So, uh, I I, I'd just like to see the green belt
or a wall one of the two. Yeah.
The, the, um, the, the only comment
that I would make is that, uh,
it doesn't impede with anything as far
as any neighbors are concerned.
So I'm, I'm, I'm just wondering why,
why that, that that would be,
Well, I would assume you've been before planning Yeah.
For this project. And
they're probably, they're recommending it.
I, I don't know that they did or did not. You're
Talking about the green fence
On The green. The green, the green.
It's got the screen on it on the fence.
Yeah. Do you want that removed?
I, I just don't that we don't allow that, we don't allow
that in neighborhoods.
I don't see why we would allow it there.
I just, it deteriorates. It doesn't look good.
You know, and I, I'd rather see,
To be honest with you, shrubbery
Or trees, or
If, if I could just maybe add a comment, you know,
that the parking at Stle St.
CITAs over there has been up to that property line
as long as I can remember.
Because I mean, it's, that's not something that's new
because of the construction of the addition they wanna do.
And it's like if you put in a wall
or green, uh, green belt,
that would take away all their parking lot
space, which I know.
I mean, it's, uh, especially for somebody
that's probably been like that since the sixties. I,
And I understand that.
But times change and, and,
and they're a new, they're a new owner.
They're making changes. And it's time
to, to get it right
As, um, the area you're talking about
is toward the back of the property.
Correct. More going toward Eureka Road. Correct.
Yeah. As you make the turn to go around the back of your
Building. Gotcha. Uh,
where it comes up to those garages.
Yep, yep, yep. In the back.
It's my understanding that we didn't put that up.
The neighbors did. Hmm.
There's a couple of maybe a yard
and a half that we can see to see,
to see the neighbor's backyards.
And I think the neighbors put those, those that we didn't,
I, I know that for a fact,
Mr. Chair.
Okay. Are you done here? Yes. Mr. Green.
I think the point is it doesn't,
aesthetically it doesn't look very good.
It's not, it's not, this is not the question.
I'm just saying 'cause I went there.
It just, it either, either have a fence there or,
and make it look like all one fence.
You got four or five sections with this cloth on it.
It doesn't look good. And to be honest with you, the back
of the building around your shed
doesn't look very good either.
We understand that. Not a question there.
That is not a, uh, with your indulgence, that's a work.
I'm not asking a Question. That's a work in progress.
I'm not asking a question. I'm making a statement.
I, I understand. Apparently not.
Pardon me. Apparently not. 'cause I'm trying to finish.
So if you look at the shed, to be honest with you,
whether there's construction
or not, it doesn't look very good.
It looks not very well kept.
So that was my only problem
with the property when I drove through.
So I I, I'm in favor of your variances,
but I mean, it just doesn't look
well kept around the shed at all,
whether there's construction or not.
And I just think from an aesthetic standpoint,
whether we put a fence in or not, if you have four
or five sections with cloth on it,
and then a couple, you know, the rest of the sections
with just the fence, I think it would look better if you
just took the cloth down and,
you know, made it all up one piece.
That's me. 'cause I'm very, um, you know,
Um, very, Very picky about that.
But that's my, that's my comment. Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Green. Thank you
Mr. Chair. Yes,
Mr. Cleft. Nobody else has any other comments.
I'll make a motion on this item
to grant permission to the petitioner to number one,
retain vehicular access to Eureka Drive.
Number two, waive the six foot wall
and eight foot green belt along the parking lot areas
located at the north and south property.
Lines of budding residential uses.
And to waive modified screening, pardon me.
Number three, allow 90 degree parking spots
to be no less than 17 foot,
17.7 feet in length
and 8.9 feet in width.
And number four, allow parallel parking spots
to be no less than 7.6 feet wide
and a one-way parallel parking maneuvering lane
to be no less than 10.2 feet wide due
to the size of shape of the lot.
And that it's not a detriment
to the area support.
We have a motion by Mr. Cliff, support by Mr. Lindsey
to approve the request for the reasons stated
Mr. Cliff.
Mr. Cliff?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Sia?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reason stated
In the motion Mr.
Assessor? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the
Motion. Mr. Green?
No. It needs a six foot
or an eight foot green belt along the north line.
Watts? No, it needs the green belt cleaned up.
And Mr. Stor, uh,
Yes. For reason state in
motion, uh,
your request has, has passed,
Ma'am. Gentlemen,
thank you.
This Is item number 13.
Okay. Item number 13, K
and S investment representative Karen Birdie.
Address 11 4 30 cults variance.
Requested permission
to retain a 14.8 foot maneuvering lane along
the east property line.
I also have an impact statement.
Okay. After review of the request, no issues that
during the public after, after the, okay.
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought
you were gonna read an impact state. I'm
Gonna wait. Okay.
Karen Birdie, on behalf of k
and s investment company, LLC,
my address is 2 8 2 2 5 Mound Road, Warren,
Michigan 4 8 0 9 2.
Um, I am here tonight
for k and s property.
They're located between nine and 10 mile Hoover
and Van D**e on Colts Road.
I highlighted this to make it easier for everyone
to understand, um, including myself.
This is a property line that ran here.
This building was built in the 1950s.
That's 75 years ago.
And it's before the city was a city in 1957.
And it's before we had zoning ordinances in 1960.
Looking at the site plan, the building takes up all
of its property.
It has its parking across the street.
This plan that's here is an approved plan.
So back in the 19, well, basically in 1998,
the owner of k and s bought this back portion
of the lot next to him.
The idea is that the trucks that have to deliver
to this building, drive down this driveway, come back here,
do a turnaround, pull out, back up and deliver their goods.
This was approved by the zoning board of appeals,
um, in 1998.
Um, they also waived the hard surfacing of it
and allowing it to be gravel.
So this site plan that's in front of you has been approved
and has variances
Back in the day.
The two owners of these two properties got along well.
Things went moved along quite well.
However, fast forward to today,
and unfortunately, the owner of k and s has passed away.
His wife, who's also an owner, doesn't feel
that she can continue on the business.
And this property's for sale.
The good news is Iroquois Industry wants
to buy this property, which I think is fantastic
because they're not replacing a
building they have in the city.
They're buying another one.
So they'll have another place here in the city with us.
Um, I like that.
Uh, we, we can keep him them here in Warren.
So, fast forwarding to, uh, today,
the situation was this driveway,
if you will, is 14.8 feet.
The width of a tractor trailer is 8.5 feet.
The width of a lane on a US highway is 12 feet.
So we're bigger than that.
Um, what's happening is we thought the best way
to handle this situation where this lane,
because what's gonna happen is Iroquois Industries is gonna
come in with a site plan, right?
They're gonna come in with a site plan,
and we've got a building that takes up all the property,
and we've got an approval of a turnaround lane
for trucks back here and come out and, and load there.
But when they go to get this approved,
they're gonna have a problem
because 14.8 is not, uh,
normally the size we like to see on driveways.
So we approached the neighbor, Mr.
Sadir, and we asked,
because he's got 20.2 feet,
we've got 14.8.
And when if you go out there, everybody
just pretty much, he drives down our drive.
We drive it is shared already.
So what we did is we proposed, uh, by, upon recommendation,
by the, the planning de, uh, department,
a shared access agreement, it was drafted
and presented to Mr.
Sadir. Mr.
Sadir indicated he will not sign
that even though he does wanna continue to share the access.
So we asked for help from the planning department.
We said, let's have a meeting, let's everybody meet
and hash it out and figure out what the problem is
and see if we can solve it.
So the planning department
and different people from different departments all had a
meeting and discuss this.
And Mr. Sadir was at the meeting
and we asked if we could do a shared access
that would give Mr.
Sadir rights to that driveway
and it would give us rights to the driveway.
I'm sorry, everybody wins. Mr.
Sadir indicated emphatically he will sign nothing.
He will not sign any agreement to a shared access.
So at this point, um, in asking Mr.
Sadir why, he indicated that this back portion
that was sold in 1998 to k
and s industries
and is approved for a tractor trailer turnaround.
He'd like that property. We can't give up that property.
We can't possibly give up that property
because then how would we get goods into the building
and make the building useful?
So we were told by the planning department
that we should come and ask for a, uh, variance.
Since this building was built,
tractor trailers have successfully driven down the
14.8 foot access.
Come in the back here, turned around, pulled up, backed up,
and dropped off their goods, then pulled out.
Um, we're asking that you approve this access
of 14.8 feet.
I'd like to point out that, um,
our ordinance says that you need 20 feet for two way
maneuvering, two way.
So technically ours is a one way.
So basically half a 20 feet's 10, and we're 14.8.
So I'm asking, um, for approval
of this access drive so that this building continues
to be viable, and so that Iroquois Industries can
purchase it and have another location here in our city.
I'm available for any questions that you may have,
And thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there an audience wishing to speak on this item?
Uh, if you can approach the podium
and start with your name and address.
My name is Zao. My address is 2 0 5 8 Jeffrey Drive.
Troy, Michigan. I'm the owner of Uni Automotive Address,
1 1 4 3 2 Ks Avenue.
I've been on this business
for about almost 15 years, 14 years.
The problem is with the situation
since I bought this building, the owner that did the owner
of, uh, the next door neighbor that deceased,
we were having problems in the beginning.
Me and him, we came up to an agreement.
It was a handshake man to man agreement.
Our agreement was, as long as he's alive, as long
as I'm alive, we get to share the driveways.
The problem is they still have
machines inside that building.
Big trucks gotta come in there to get those machines out.
The reason why I'm parking on the side of my building
and I'm using their driveway.
I'm giving them about seven to 10 feet, somewhere
between five to 10 feet from my back parking lot
to allow these trucks to go back there.
If I park my vehicles on the property line,
that property in the back,
there is no way a semi truck can go back there
and turn around and come out of there.
The distance between the building
and the property line is about 75 to 80 feet.
Tractor trailer.
With that trailer, everything you're looking about,
70 feet, 75 feet.
How is he gonna go in there and turn?
If I have vehicles right on the property line,
or if I put a fence,
which is the fence has already been approved by the city,
my problem is this is what's gonna happen.
If I put a fence every time a semi-truck gotta pull in there
to make a turnaround, they're going to hit my fence.
If I park cars there, they're gonna get hit.
That's the only problem I have.
And as far as the easement, I told 'em,
I don't wanna sign an easement.
If you want me to sign an easement, there's a fee for it.
Why It's gonna depreciate my value of my property.
They offered nothing. So that's what we stand at.
Okay. Thank you for those comments. Thank
You.
Okay. Not seeing any others or close the public portion.
There's an impact statement Mr. Roths to read in
After a review of the request.
No issues were found to impact the budding
local or general public.
On October 6th, 2025 through the Macomb County land file,
the petitioner completed a lot split in combination.
Splitting the south 175 foot of the West, 80 foot
of lot five of 11 432 cults Avenue,
and combining it with lot four of 11 430 cults,
creating a new L-shaped parcel for 11 430 cults.
The new parcel number
for the com combined is 13 dash 27 dash
76 0 7,
and part of dash oh eight
is 12 dash 13 dash 27 2 76 0 37.
May I comment on something?
Actually, if there's any questions from the board, um,
then you have an opportunity to respond to a question,
but not a comment right now.
Uh, so it's over to the board
for any questions and discussion.
Mr. Sfa? You, Mr.
Chairman, looking at this, my initial thought is to,
it's been this way for a significant amount of time.
I, I don't have a problem with, with allowing them
to continue access to that, that easement there.
I mean, I don't blame the neighbor
for not wanting to sign the agreement.
I wouldn't wanna sign it either.
I'd say, wait a minute, I have 20 feet and you have 14 feet
and we're gonna share it.
You know, I wouldn't like that as a neighbor either.
But I think parcel a on this, uh,
site plan is still entitled to their 14.8 feet.
They've had it for years. They should continue access to it.
Now, that's up to them. If they're having trucks
and trailers pull into the, into the back there, they have
to be able to turn around on their property.
You know, it doesn't give them the right
to go onto the neighbor's property.
And I understand the neighbor's concerned about putting a
fence up and damage that might cause to it.
But, uh, you know, that's a, that's something
that they're gonna have to work out.
But I don't have a problem with keeping the, uh, the,
the maneuvering lane as is just with the understanding that,
you know, there's a property line
back there for the neighbor.
Thank you Mr. Sara. Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Lindsey.
Uh, I have a quick question for you, Ms. Birdie.
Um, just correct me if I'm, I misunderstood you.
I, I apologize if I did.
Um, but to clarify, are you asking for this variance
because you are looking to sell the property?
Did I hear you correctly?
We're under contract. Okay.
To sell the property right now with the Iroquois Industries.
Okay. The intent was always to have shared access.
They had done it with a handshake even before Mr.
I, I didn't know. I thought,
I thought his last name was Sadir.
Mr. Zio.
Um, uh, for years and years
and years, they, they had shared this, we can function
with our own 14.8 and we're not asking him to move cars.
We're not asking him.
He can park on his own property
where he wants to park on his property.
We can function with the 14.8.
So the idea is now that the property's being sold,
Iroquois Industries is obviously going to submit a site plan
to the, to the city, new owner, et cetera, new business.
And this is one of the items that, um, needs
to be cleaned up to have the sale finished.
Okay. That answers my question. Thank you.
Um, so for the board, um,
I really don't see an issue, um, to Mr.
Aria's point, it's been like this all the time.
My concern is I don't want to get in a position
where we are approving a variance, um, in order
for a sale to go through.
Uh, that that's an economic reason, uh, for the variance
to be, uh, granted.
Um, I would like to see a new owner purchase the property
and they can come to us
with whatever variance per their site plan they need.
And I'd feel more comfortable on voting on that.
Um, so for that reason, I don't plan on voting yes on this.
Um, I just see it as a, a, a, a personal
and financial, um, reason to, to ask for this variance.
I'm not comfortable with that. Um,
and then just to clarify, I did hear the petitioner say
that, uh, technically this is a,
a one way, this is a two-way.
Um, you have a truck coming in
and out of the same, same line.
It's, that's a two way, uh,
it's just not big enough for two way.
So those are my thoughts. Um, so thank you.
If I could just add a comment, it's like, see, I see this
as the kind issue that our city creates future problems.
When, when a building like that, I'm,
I'm assuming probably at some time this might have all been
part of one parcel or something,
or some, you know, where to have a building built
where there is like no room.
I mean, that property has no room from that.
That's what we're dealing with is walk was created
many years in the past,
and unfortunately it's like,
this is how it's been working now.
So, I mean, that's why I would actually,
'cause it's not making any changes.
They're not, it's basically to be able to still use
that property the way they have been.
So I see no problems with this.
Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Watts.
So, to Ms. Birdie, if he
becomes this neighbor that he sounds like he's going
to become and puts a fence up,
can we still turn the truck around back there?
Yes. Do you know that for sure? Yes.
We've been doing it for 75 years, yes.
And, and where I retired from, the guys turn trucks
around in very small spots, so yes.
And they could always back all the way out down there too.
Yes, they can. Yes, they can.
You know, a good driver could. Yes.
And, and, and I feel bad for anybody that has to,
to share access with somebody like that.
That just blows my mind.
Um, okay. I see what you're doing.
And I, I think, I think it's a good idea
since there's no cooperation.
I, I, I, I like that other one.
I thought a shared agreement would be the great thing in the
world, but some people don't like to, to play fair.
So thank you.
Nobody else has anything. I I'll make a motion.
Okay. To retain a four
14.8 foot maneuvering lane along the East Property line, uh,
as I don't see that it's a detriment,
I think, I think it'll all work out. Just fine.
Support. So we have a motion by Mr. Wats support, but Mr.
Assessor, uh, for,
to approve the request for a reason Stated
Watts? Yes. For the reasons
stated of the motion assessor?
Yes. For the reasons stated for the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes.
For the reason stated of the motion,
Mr. Aya?
Yes. For the reasons stated in
The motion. Mr. Clifft?
Yes. For the reasons stated of the motion.
Mr. Green? Yes. For the reasons stated the motion.
Mr. Lindsay? No, it's Economic. And Mr. Sovi?
Uh, yes. For reason stated motion,
your request had, has been approved.
Thank you.
Item number 14.
Okay, item number 14 as, um,
center for Dawa.
Dawa and research representative Ms.
Karen Birdie, 54 91 12 mile road variance is requested.
Wave both the eight foot wide green belt
and six foot high concrete wall
that is required along the North property line.
And two, to construct a building addition
to the east property line.
Good evening again, Karen Birdie on behalf of, hold on.
Lemme turn the page here.
The Center for Dawa and Research.
Um, my address is 2 8 2 2 5 Mound Road, Warren,
Michigan 4 8 0 9 2.
With me tonight is Mr. Mohamed ku.
Um, he's here with me this evening.
So with regard to this plan,
This is on 12 mile just west of Mound.
Um, I don't know if you remember, this building used
to be like auto repair and,
and different things along those lines.
It went through a lot of, uh, different owners.
Um, back up here is, um,
if you will, the Partridge Creek, um, uh,
where they have the assisted living nursing home
and all the different condos that, uh,
the green belt green backs up to here.
So the first request that we're asking is he's asking
for a building addition.
I have put the addition in yellow.
This part right here is what already exists
and they're asking to expand.
But the reason that we have to come here today,
this plan has been approved by the planning department
and by, um, the planning commission.
The reason that we have to come here is
because you can see that it's built on the property line,
uh, on the East property line.
We'd like to continue that same property line so
that the building, in fact, um, has continuity.
It would be kind of strange to fend it in
and build it like that.
And then you've got this piece of property over here that
what it's used for, nobody knows.
So, um, they're not expanding, if you will,
the prayer area of the mosque.
So the area that's here right now
is going to be their offices.
The second floor of this area is going to be the research,
which is the library of the, um, different types of, um,
uh, books with regard to the, uh, religion.
And then, uh, the bottom floor is going to be the mosque.
So this is the driveway over here.
This is currently the parking.
They're adding this parking on.
And you can see that they're proposing
to plant these trees along, uh,
the side and the back.
I put on your table, um, a picture
and I labeled it in the upper right hand corner in red
pen item 14.
If you could please look at that picture,
because we're asking to wave the wall
and the, and the green belt.
We're not saying we're not gonna put any green.
Our plan shows green,
but green belt has a very specific definition.
It has to do with heights, it has to do with width.
It has to do with with what's being planted.
If you can see on that photo that I
provided, the red pin
is obviously our property.
And all of this is the green space with Partridge Creek,
as you know, sitting on the, um, zoning board of appeals,
when you have multiple housing or a pud, if it's a PUD
or multiple housing, there's a certain percentage
of the property that has to be dedicated to green space.
And that's what this is. It's already green space.
So it would seem kind of silly to do
a green belt next to all of this green space.
And the idea of the wall
and the green, um, uh, green belt is
to protect from one zone to another.
The idea behind it is if you have a zoning use
that is more intense than the use next to it, you would use
a wall or a green belt to assist.
In this case, we already have
a huge green belt, so,
and we're not stating that we're not willing to
put in, if you will, uh, trees, et cetera.
But, um, we don't wanna lose these parking spots,
if you will, to where now we're down more parking spots
and we're providing green space against green space.
And I really don't think a wall that'd be a travesty
when you look there.
I drove back there. When you look there, um,
it's all green and beautiful.
I don't think you'd wanna put a wall in front of it,
but, um, that's why we're asking to wave, um,
the green belt and the wall.
Um, now I did drive back there
and there's an area there that's, uh, gravel
that I'm sure you saw if you drove back there,
that's all gonna be paved and striped
and made part of the parking lot.
So if there are any questions,
I'll be available to answer them.
Mr. Chair? Uh, yes, Mr. Lindsay, uh,
I have a question for you, Ms.
Birdie. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, please. I'm sorry.
Do, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any or close that,
but we have an impact statement
to read in, then I continue, Mr. That's fine.
Okay. Um,
after reviewing the request, the following issues were found
to impact the abutting local or general public one.
The planning staff has observed on numerous Fridays,
which is a primary day of worship.
The following issues, a extreme disrupt disruption
of traffic flow on 12 mile before and after worship service.
The result is an unsafe scenario for the worshipers
entering the site from the westbound right lane
backs up at least five vehicles at the maximum.
And worshipers using the eastbound left
or center turn lane backs up five or more vehicles.
B worshipers attempting
to leave the facility are mostly forced
to exit westbound on 12 mile congestion at the driveway.
Roadway intersection at times is at its maximum
designated worshipers located,
locate themselves in the driveway
and 12 mile road to the direct tra to direct traffic.
These people at a minimum should be
provided with orange vest.
Uh, it says Warren police officers should be directing
traffic d the worship times on Friday shall be separated
by at least one half hour to allow the safe entry
and exit to the site of the worshipers.
And noted on the site plan
to the petitioner received site plan approval
with conditions for a religious center building addition
to the, to add a second story on June 2nd, 2025.
And that's the end of the impact statement.
Thank you very much, Mr. Watts. Uh, so Mr.
You had a question?
Uh, yes to Ms. Birdie.
Um, I'm sure it's in the information here,
but if you could just clarify for me quickly, how big,
how big is the building right now?
So the building right now,
Just square footage, I guess
Is 2,720 square feet.
And that's with the,
the newly added second story, or that's the taco?
No, no, that's, that's the existing building. Now.
That's all gonna be, um, offices and,
and, and meeting rooms.
And the addition is 2,400
square feet footprint.
Okay. So we want to double the size of the
Yes.
Downstairs. Yep. 2,400 square feet. Yes. And upstairs.
But, um, we're not expanding the worship area.
The worship area is just being moved.
So the first floor here is all offices.
The second floor here is the library, the
research of the religious books.
And the first floor is the mosque,
the worship area.
He's already agreed at the planning department.
This driveway is actually being moved
farther away from the building.
They are not allowing people
to drop people off at the building
as they drive by the park.
They're already agreeing to wear the orange vest.
They already agreed to the half hour time period in between.
And we are adding,
Adding. So thank, thank you
for, for the square footage Question.
None. The orange vest has nothing to do with my question.
Um, I guess for the board, I, I wish
that the variance was a little bit more clear.
Uh, on item number two,
it just says construct a building addition, uh,
to the east property line.
Uh, it sounds like we're, we're seeking
to double the footprint of the building.
Um, so we, we've seen pretty recently, uh, some
of these mosques come before us.
Um, and it's clear that,
that they're causing a problem, uh, in the city.
Um, so when I look at this, you know, I,
I think there's a detriment.
Um, I do think that this item's self-imposed.
Once again, we, we've seen an issue where, you know, the,
the owner of the buildings purchased a building
and then we're trying to make all kinds of changes
to the building to, to meet our needs.
I think we should be buying buildings
that suit our needs the way that they're constructed.
Um, so I see this as being self-imposed.
Um, I don't see this being, um, something where
they can enjoy the property the way it's at.
Sounds like it's already operating as a mosque.
Um, the property's not unique.
They, they purchase it knowing
the size and shape of the lot.
Um, it would seem to be an economic thing to,
to increase the size.
I'm assuming it's going to, to add, uh,
additional community members.
Um, so I don't see it as being necessary either.
So when we look at the, the definition of, of needing
to approve a variance, we have to be meeting all
of these, uh, criteria.
Um, I don't see that we're meeting any of these,
um, on this petition.
Um, so I don't see
how we could actually be voting yes for this.
Mr. Chair. Um, Mr. Green, you have the floor.
Did someone have a before? No, you have the floor.
Mr. Green. Thank you. I thought you wanted to say something.
I'm sorry. No. Okay, that's fine. So, couple things.
Uh, so it's not a magic trick.
I have this written down before Mr. Lindsay spoke,
but this issue of,
and we've heard this a multiple times, this issue of
lay people, citizens directing traffic
is a major accident waiting to happen.
'cause they're not trained to direct traffic.
And it's, there, there is
training involved in directing traffic.
So that's not the answer to the traffic problem.
And the traffic problem is the problem there.
'cause I, I witnessed it. It's blocking the
road off and letting everybody out at the worship center
before anybody else can move.
And it's a problem. And it's
because the people aren't trained,
you know, to direct traffic.
And as far as, uh, the,
or the, the variance itself,
there's the, the threat, the practical, uh,
difficulty threshold is not, isn't being met here.
It's, uh, it's,
as Mr. Lindsay already stated, it's self-imposed.
It's an overbuild. When you overbuild these buildings
and you add to, uh, the number of people there, regardless
of the fact that it's a library, quote unquote a library,
you add, you add a number of people
and you're going to expand your parking lot, I'm assuming,
for more people, not just
for a few people going to the library.
So it's an, it's an overbuild.
If, if anything, uh,
it'll create an unreasonable impact on the community.
It already has. As far as the traffic goes.
The property itself is not unique.
So the build is, doesn't meet that criteria.
It's not necessary. And it's,
and it's definitely for, for economic advancement,
however you wanna define economic advancement.
So this particular, uh, request for variance doesn't,
in my opinion, doesn't meet any of the, uh,
practical difficulty standards
or thresholds that, uh, that it needs to meet.
So I'm gonna agree with Mr. Lindsay on that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Green. I actually, uh, I don't know,
did Mr. Green have a question for, for Mr.
Mr? Well, let me, I actually have a question
for Steve first.
Uh, 'cause I, I actually agree with my two colleagues that,
you know, I, I think our city a lot
of times we're overbuilding on a site where the site is only
so large, can handle so much and it's rebuilding too much.
But my question for you, Steve,
because with the comments regarding like the green belt
and stuff like that, that property back there,
I know you get to it via that Panama Street.
There is that one house that's off of that street,
but that big green piece of property, uh, what is that zoned
or, because I know there's,
I don't hear.
I don't hear you. It's very, well,
Let's see if it changes Here.
Try, try now. There you go. Sorry.
Um, that property is zoned PUD, it's part
of the heritage pod.
Uh, it is a residential portion of it,
if my memory is correct.
Um, I did look it up probably two months ago.
Um, when I think I was in a meeting
early on on this.
Um, it went from there just to correct one thing.
The total square foot now is
2,720 square feet
and the proposed new building
and old will be 8,520 square feet.
Mr. Chair. Thank you Steve. Yes, Mr. Watts.
So I agree
with my colleagues Once again.
We just, we just went through this with two other ones
that they bought a very small building
and then they wanna build more.
And the one that we had, I went there
to observe the parking problems
and the traffic problems, which enticed me to spend the rest
of my Fridays after that.
Going around to all the other ones
and looking at what's going on at call to prayer time.
'cause I had had a complaint when I was on council about
another place.
So I, I've been taking these in on Fridays, checking it out.
And then when we got this impact statement,
I was like, wow, this is crazy.
I mean, they're calling for the police to go there.
It's not the police's job to handle that by any means.
And if there's that much traffic coming in and out of there
and they want to add, they almost want
to triple the square footage.
Now, I understand what you're saying, that part
of it's gonna, the one part's still gonna be the same
prayer, but there's no,
there's no guarantee that that's gonna happen.
Um, and you know, I see this as being said
that it's a research center.
I don't see anything on here that says it's a mosque
or that there's called a prayer, which concerns me.
And to want to try to add this much in
and see the traffic problem.
This is definitely a detriment to the area.
They need a larger piece of property with better ingress
and egress to handle the traffic.
I, I just can't, I can't get behind this at all.
When I attend mass on Sunday,
we cause a traffic problem when we all get outta church at
the same time and we all leave the
parking lot at the same time.
And we all make a long line and go in and out.
We're all coming at the same time.
To, for mass to start, this is no different than that.
We're not here for a parking variance.
No parking variance is asked for. We have enough parking.
The people who are directing traffic are a security company
that they hire because they don't want people
stopping when they pull in
to let people off into the building.
So what they've done is they've hired a security company
they should be trained in, in, in doing that.
And they, um, uh, control the traffic.
No one's going out on 12 Mile.
I wanna be clear with you, nobody's stopping any traffic on
12 Mile or doing anything like that.
It's when the, when they come in there, we keep them moving
to the parking spaces so
that we're not holding up traffic there.
The only issue before this board tonight is not whether
or not this should be expanded, but whether
or not the East Property line, um, uh,
is allowed to be
where it already is on the original building.
This has already been approved by the planning commission
for its size that's already been approved.
What's before the board here tonight is not whether
or not to expand.
It's whether or not the expansion can maintain
the East property line.
Mr. Chair. Okay. After Mr. Watts, hang on a minute.
Alright. I understand what you're saying about the traffic,
but when I look at all the churches that have a lot
of traffic, they're large parking lots.
They have area to stack that traffic going out onto 12 mile,
11 mile, nine mile, whatever they are.
Um, they're not creating situations like this.
This lot is so deep. It is.
It, I I put it in my paperwork somewhere.
This lot is huge from a depth standpoint.
They can stack like this and go out next door,
Mr. Chair.
So Mr. Wa,
I, I understand what you're saying,
but that's not what I've observed.
I've observed those parking lots being so full.
There's no place to stack cars coming out.
That's what I've observed.
I I haven't been to this one directly
because I didn't know it existed.
But again, it's a small building.
Yes, it's a larger piece of property, I understand.
But they're going to enlarge it
and it's gonna create more of a traffic flow problem.
And I don't think that it's the right area for it.
It just, it doesn't, it doesn't seem right to me.
It's gonna be a detriment to the area.
We got an impact statement here that states that,
and I just, I don't know, like, like my mm-hmm.
Colleague here said it's a bad accident waiting to happen
that we don't need any more bad accidents in town.
So that, that's my comments. Mr. Green, you
Had his comments? Just to, just
to clear this up.
The variances I requested are a green belt
and the construction of a building, regardless of the fact
that it came from planning,
it doesn't matter if it came from planning
or where it came from, the variance
that's being requested is
to put an additional building on the property.
And that's what we're dealing with right now.
And it doesn't meet, in my opinion, the, the threshold.
It's an overbuild.
And I'm a little concerned that we got,
we just within the last five
minutes, got two different numbers.
At first it was 2000 square feet.
Now it's up to 8,000 square feet for a library. Mm-hmm.
So that's a concern of mine even more now.
But to clarify it, we're not here on, just for a green belt.
We're here to, for the variance request, request
to construct a building on the east property line.
And what I'm hearing is board members saying it's an
overbuild and it doesn't meet the criteria regardless
of the traffic and stuff like that.
So just to clarify that. Thank you Mr. Chair.
Thank you Mr. Green. Any other comments or questions? Mr.
If there's no other comments,
I'm prepared to make a notice.
Mr. Mr, are there other comments?
I do just have one quick comment. Yes. Mr. Sefa.
Ms. Birdie, you heard the comments tonight.
Uh, what is the alternative?
I mean, I, I know you're here before us for the, uh,
construction along the east property line.
What is the, what does the ordinance allow you
to build without a variance along that east wall would,
how mu how far would the addition have to
The setback? Yeah.
The setback would have to be, um, 20 feet.
How many feet was it?
Is that 20 feet? First side yard, 20 feet.
Hold on. It's right here.
2, 6 20
feet, 20 feet.
So technically they could
take 20 feet off from the east property line.
Here's what we, here's what we can do right here.
Take 20 feet off and we're able to do it.
And this'll be just open space
so we can, we can do that.
It just doesn't make sense
to have this open like that.
But that's, that may be what they have to do.
If that's what the board would like.
I, I don't think that's a good plan though.
Okay. Do,
I'm gonna say that that's what the setback is,
but that would be a non-conforming and it'd be an expansion.
So it'd still need a variance to build anything further than
what they have right now.
Thank you. That was my only comment.
Mr. Chair. Uh, I think we've heard the board's comments,
so unless there's other, other
comments, I'd like to make a motion.
Uh, I'd like to make a motion to deny permission to one,
both the eight foot wide green belt
and six foot high concrete wall
that is required along the North property line.
And number two, construct a building addition
to the east property line.
Uh, due to the fact that strict compliance, um,
would not create an unreasonable burden.
This is self-imposed. The property is not unique.
It is a detriment.
Uh, it seems to be personal or economic,
and it's not necessary
Support.
So we have a motion by Mr. Lindsay in support by Mr.
Assessor to deny the petitioner's request
for the reasons that he stated.
So a yes vote is a yes. Vote to deny. Okay.
Roll call Mr. Lindsay
Yes. To deny for the
reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Green. Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Clifft. Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Sia? Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Perry?
Yes. To deny for the reasons stated and the motion
Watts. Yes. To deny
for reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Nvi,
I will also vote yes to deny
for the reasons stated and motion.
Unfortunately, your, uh, request was denied tonight.
Thank you. I would like to make a correction.
They did have a variance
to have the religious center at less than 20 feet.
So, okay. So now that's very different information
because now we go back to the situation where
if they take 20 feet off, they can build this
because they don't need to get an approval
for a non-conforming expansion.
So I don't know if that changes anybody's votes
because I wouldn't vote for,
Well, unfortunately, on this item,
we've already voted on it.
And, um, so let's move on. So unfortunately we can't. Um,
Okay.
Okay. Uh, basis
to New business.
New business. Does anybody have new business for tonight?
Yeah. Mr. Chair. I do. Yes. Mr. Green.
So as we do these discussions and talk, it was interesting
because me and Gary were driving around
and some of the comments were made about, oh, what's a,
you know, it's a collision shop
and this is the way they look and stuff like that.
I, I, I went to one the other day called, uh,
pole position on Bonner.
You could eat off the floor
and their cars are lined up, organized.
There's not a tow truck in site.
There's no oil on the ground.
It's, it's, I just thought about it when some
of the discussions we had
that it can be done and they do do it.
And then as I was driving down 12 mile between Rubin
and Shaer, I, there was a dentist office's Elaine Colby's
office, and the landscaping is meticulous
and it sticks out like a sore thumb.
So I, I, I just laugh at myself when I think, well,
this can't be done because it, it can be done.
So with that said, thank you.
Okay. Thank you Mr. Green.
Um, there's no other new business. Motion to adjourn?
I got something Mr. Chair. Oh, yes, Mr. Cliff.
Uh, we won't be getting together beforehand, so I just want
to wish all my fellow board members
a good Thanksgiving holiday
and, uh, be safe in your travels.
And we look forward to seeing you all in December.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for those wishes. Mr.
Cliff.
Motion to adjourn
Board. All in
favor? Aye. Aye. Meeting adjourned at 9 38.