All right, good evening, everybody.

Welcome to the May 7th, 2026 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting, public meeting.

We have looks like we have a full board today, and I guess we'll start by calling the role to make sure that we have a quorum.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Here.

Board Member Rocker.

Here.

Board Member Current.

Here.

Vice Chairman Smysky.

And Chairman Lomber.

Here.

Five members, we can proceed with business.

We are joined also by members of our city departments.

We have Don Schmidt from DPW, Peter Laritson from uh DNS, and Ed Richardson from DCD.

They will be offering testimony at a later point in the hearing.

We'll have them all sworn right now.

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do.

Um, pretty full agenda.

We have a couple of adjournments.

Um, I will have uh in the agar, our board secretary read off those adjournments shortly.

Um we will read first.

Well, actually, we'll see if uh the board members have had a chance to review the minutes from the meeting we had last month, and if so, if there's a motion to approve, to approve the meeting, second.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Aye.

Board member current.

Aye.

And Chairman Nollenberg.

All right, so the minutes from last month have been approved.

Um, we have a number of items we're gonna go through called the uh that are on the what's called the consent agenda.

There are a number of addresses that will be read and the the recommendations that have been made by the city departments.

The board will vote on all of these in a block.

Um if anybody is present for one of the items that's about to be read that does not wish for action to be taken today and wishes to have public comment.

We will pull that item off and place it on for a hearing for uh for an item on a future hearing.

So when the consent agenda is read, just indicate if you're here on one of the items only if you want to uh have it to speak on it or have it pulled off.

If you're just here to find out what happened, that's fine.

Uh, you don't need to tell us that.

Uh there are a couple of adjournments on the consent agenda.

Um, I'll have I think there may be some additional ones.

We'll have Madam Secretary read off all the adjournments.

Okay.

Um, so you want me to read off the public hearing too.

Yeah, just be in case anyone's here.

Okay, sure.

So on the consent agenda, item number seven, 1568 North Farwell Avenue has been adjourned.

And item number 20, 8225, North 107th Street has been adjourned.

On public hearing, um, item number 39, which is 6435 West Capitol Drive, has been adjourned.

Item number 41, 3631 North 76th Street has been adjourned.

And item number 50, 6300 West Blue Mound Road has been adjourned.

Okay.

Um, I guess we can read the rest of the items on the consent agenda in order.

Uh go ahead.

All right.

Item number one, 2030 West Hampton Avenue, a use variance request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number two, 2671 North Holton Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number three, 3102 West Hampton Avenue, a use variance request, staff recommends a 20 year approval.

Item number four, 9601 West Silver Spring Drive, a special use request recommends a three-year approval.

Item number five, 8428 West Silver Spring Drive, a special use request, staff recommends a three-year approval.

Item number six, 1625 East Irving Place, a use variance requests staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number seven, 1568 North Farwell Avenue has been adjourned.

Item number eight, one 1234 North Prospect Avenue, a special use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number nine, 777 North Milwaukee Street, a spot to use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 10, 9235 West Capitol Drive, suite 400, a special use request, staff recommends a three-year approval.

Item number 11, 8310 West Appleton Avenue, a splashy use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 12, 1730 North 7th Street, Espacio Use Requests staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 13, 3475 North Clefum Street, Espasia use requests staff recommends a three-year approval.

Item number 14, 5500 West Fond du Lac Avenue, a special use request.

Staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 15, 3359 North 25th Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 16, 1763, South Muskego Avenue, a special use request.

Staff recommends approval to run through October 16th, 2030.

Item number 17, 1643 South 38th Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends a five-year approval.

Item number 18, 2353 South 43rd Street, a special use request, staff recommends a three-year approval.

Item number 19, 7945 North 76th Street, a special use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 20, 8225 North 107th Street has been adjourned.

Item number 21, 9171 North 76th Street, a use variance request.

Staff recommends a 10 year approval.

Item number 22, 6910 West Brown Dear Road, a use variance request.

Staff recommends approval to run through August 7, 2030.

Item number 23, 4800 South Tenth Street, a spotcha use request.

Staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 24, 3045 South Connecticut Avenue, a special use request.

Staff recommends a 10-year approval.

And item number 25, 2750 South Greeley Street, a dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends approval to run with the land.

Aside from the two adjourned items, is anyone requesting public testimony on any of the other items that have been read?

Yes.

Are you asking for them to be taken off the consent agenda?

Yes.

We'll come.

Yeah.

We're not gonna have testimony today, but just the recommendations for 19 is 10-year approval.

It's a special use.

20 has been adjourned at your request.

21 is a 10-year recommendation.

And you said up through 22.

Yeah.

And then that's the August 7th.

But if we it's either we either have to vote on it now, or if you want it to be taken off, we have to put it off publicly notice it so that any so that it can be a public hearing.

We can't do it now.

We can't have any discussion on those items right now.

No, but if you want if you're not if you don't agree with the recommendations, we have to pull it off.

So it's up to you.

1920 and what yeah, they can if we have to do it.

Um they have okay.

All right.

So with that record, um, we will think we can vote on the remaining items.

Um is there a motion?

Sure, motion staff's recommendation on all the consent agenda items.

Second.

All right.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Aye.

Board member Rocker.

Board member current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Smyski.

And Chairman Lomberg.

Uh items thank you.

Those are approved.

And for the record, that was Alderman Taylor, she was joining us.

I didn't want to have it be some mystery person.

No, that's okay.

And you have other items with us too.

So, all right.

So the consent agenda items with the exception of the two adjournments, has been have been approved.

We can now it's past 4 15, so we can commence with the public hearing portion of our evening.

These items are um gonna be called in order.

There may be a few that are gonna be called together just because it's the same address, and um what we'll do is we'll have the applicant if they're here come forward, or if they're online, we'll get their presence.

Anybody else that is gonna want to give testimony or input will you'll have to let us know so we can have you come forward.

If the elder of the district is present and wishes to give us input, they will come forward, and then we will um hear from the city departments who've all been sworn, have the applicant present some information, answer any questions we might have, and then we will take some action as a board.

Um, if an item is going to end up being contested, and that it's gonna take more than a few minutes to to handle it, and we have a number of people from the public that wish to uh testify.

We may have it adjourned to a later hearing date where it can be given more time and noticed as a contested here.

With that being said, Madam Secretary.

Item number 26, 1335 South 10th Street request to continue occupying the premises as a light motor vehicle repair facility.

This matter was adjourned from the July 31st, 2025 public hearing by the board and its motion to adjourn.

The board requested that the applicant submit materials addressing GCD and DPW's concerns related to the installation of landscaping and the placement of the existing decorative metal funds.

The applicant submitted materials on March 30th, 2026 in an effort to comply with the request.

Could you give us your names and mailing addresses, please?

Um, uh, ubicación del 1335 sur de la dice.

135 subtents.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

The microphone, please.

Yeah, sorry.

Okay.

Yeah, you can form this.

That one.

You can move that.

It's yeah.

No, you're okay.

Okay.

Sparbosa 503 West Lincoln.

Thank you.

And is there anyone online for 1335 South Tenth Street that would also like to speak?

Please raise your hand if so.

Okay, and I'm not seeing anyone online.

Could the two of you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Thank you.

All right.

We'll hear from the city departments.

And if Mr.

Barbosa, if you need a minute to help with any type any interpretation, that's fine if you wanted to do that.

But we'll hear from DPW first.

Okay.

So my comments are have been updated.

Um, so what's in the hearing summary is not what's in the database.

So um, it was the fifth comment um uh in the hearing summary that should be struck.

Um the applicant has submitted revised drawings that show that the fence is no longer going to be in the public article, and so the fifth comment should be or request should be replaced with that the fence adjacent to the parking lot is relocated so that it is fully on private property as shown on the plan submitted to the pose office on March 30th of 2026.

Um that's it.

I'd also like to emphasize that we do have a condition that no more than 14 vehicles are parked outside on the lot for any reason at any time.

All right, it's uh DNS, no additional comments, the DCD.

I believe my comment uh also refers to the March 30th plan.

So I have nothing additional beyond that.

Okay, thank you.

And we did have some correspondence from President Perez's office just sort of discussing that there had been some prior conditions that hadn't been um followed and was didn't really say there was an objection, but requesting that we do a shorter approval just to make sure we have compliance.

His recommendation was maybe running it concurrently with the lease.

Um that ends in May of 2028, basically, yeah since we are here in May so um does the applicant or Mr.

Ravosa on behalf of the applicant have anything to add relative to the comments or the application or the president's comments I I believe we haven't tried the items the concern was that the existing change fence was in the public right away and that there was no landscaping we prepare some joints submitted to the city with the structure permit and this is the process of proceeding to do those changes and um some of the conversations would be still finished, I believe.

There was a concern about some garbage that accumulates outside.

We are choice that there's uh an entity a block away that provides meals for transit people.

They congregate in the area and then tell them whatever is the vendor.

And they agree they understand that by removing the fence they will comply and also then they will decrease the quantity of automobiles, they suggest the 14 or less, and then just so that it's clear if there is even if other people that aren't customers or employees are putting trash onto the property that the applicant knows she needs that they need to be responsible for keeping the lot clean, they'll be blamed for anybody else's mess, right?

She understands the concern and she's making the attempts to go outside the building and try to become a return to me.

Um board members, any questions or concerns about compliance?

No questions made.

Um has the fence been relocated yet, or do you have a timeline for when that will be completed?

The permit was obtained last week and then she spoke with a contractor this morning and another one yesterday.

She was going to make the decision this week.

Okay or early next week, proceed.

Great.

Thank you.

Well, unless there's any other questions, I do think a short-term approval um is a good uh a good approach, especially if there were concerns in the past.

This gives you an opportunity to demonstrate what a great operator you will be.

Um, so with that said, I would move to um having found that the five criteria necessary to grant a use variance have been met based on the testimony provided today, the information in the file, and um all of the comments in the hearing summary, including DPW's updated comments.

I'd move to approve this for a period of two years, subject to those conditions.

Before there's a second, I just wanted to note too that there was a communication about making sure prior conditions as long as they're not replaced by newer uh conditions.

Should would you have an objection to those being included as well or reiterated?

No, okay.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded.

Uh Madam Secretary.

Board Member St.

Arnold Bell.

Aye.

Board Member Rocker.

Aye.

Board Member Current.

I'm Chairman Smyski.

And Chairman Lumber.

All right.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Item number 27, 1012 South 2nd Street.

Request to occupy the premises as an adult retail establishment.

This matter was adjourned from the April 2nd, 2026 public hearing by the board and its motion to adjourn.

The board requested that the applicant meet with the district's alderman and the community regarding the proposed use, submit a revised plan of operation, modifying the proposed hours of operation, and meet with the plan examiner to determine whether or not an additional dimensional variance would be required for glazing.

The applicant submitted materials on April 21st, 2026 in an effort to comply with the requests.

Hello.

Can you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Felix Winters 1010A, South 2nd Street.

Okay.

And then just to check, is there anyone online here for 1012 South 2nd Street that would like to speak?

Please raise your hand if you'd like to speak on this item.

Okay.

And I'm not seeing any raised hands.

Okay.

Could you raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give?

Is the truth the whole truth and not?

I do.

No additional comments.

Oh, I'm not going to move myself.

DPW.

Nothing to add.

DCD.

Nothing additional.

Okay.

And this so you were here just last month, and that you actually brought some of the some of the concerns or you preemptively addressed with materials you handed out, which has now been included in our packet.

And then you made some a revised plan of operation to address the hours amongst some other things.

We have those materials as well.

And I you did a we did have some correspondence from President Perez's office as well.

Um basically hasn't having no objection, recommending or asking that maybe we do a three-year approval.

Um does anybody have any concerns?

I think you pretty adequately addressed any every all issues that were brought before us at the last hearing.

Yep.

Do you have anything else that you want us to know?

No.

Okay.

So having found that the criteria necessary to grant the special use have been met based on the evidence in the file testimony received.

I would make motion to approve this for a period of three years with conditions in the hearing summary.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Aye.

Board Member Rocker.

Aye.

Board Member Current.

Vice Chairman Smyski.

Alright.

And Chairman Lundberg.

Aye.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Take care.

Have a good day.

You too.

Item number 28.

624 West Scott Street.

Request to occupy the premises as a community living arrangement for SIFT 16 occupants, a social service facility, and an accessory use parking lot.

And is there anyone online for 624 West Scott Street that would like to speak?

I'm not seeing any raised hands.

Hi, could you give us your names and mailing addresses, please?

Mara Lobo, and the address is 624 Westcott.

Thank you.

Luki Charamos the addresses 624 Westcott.

Bill Corine, Perspective Design 11525 West North Avenue, Wawakosa.

Thank you.

Could all three of you please raise your right hands?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

I do.

All right.

DPW.

Okay.

So DPW does not object to the special use for community living arrangement at this premises.

DPW does have concerns regarding the configuration of the proposed parking lot to be located to the north of the proposed building.

The parking lot has proposed.

The parking lot is designed to have a driveway approach to South 7th Street and a direct connection to the adjacent North South Alley.

DPW is concerned that the proposed parking lot configuration will create a potential cut-free route between South 7th Street and the public alley.

DPW is also concerned that the proposed driveway approach on South 7th Street will eliminate approximately three odd street parking spaces and be disruptive to pedestrian traffic on South 7th Street, the east side in particular.

And then otherwise we just have standard, except for yeah, item request number one is to that the applicant revises their site plan to eliminate the driveway approach on 7th.

And then the other two are standard DPW conditions.

Okay, thank you, Don.

DNS, no additional comments.

DCD.

Just would probably have to modify our landscaping condition uh based on uh DPW's uh condition that if the uh driveway is removed that might impact what was submitted as a landscape plan.

So we basically say that they should submit or advised landscape plan uh kind of in accordance with uh whatever submitted to DPW that meets code.

All right, thank you.

So the driveway approach, I the revised plan is calling for gated access, but not eliminating that on 7th Street, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

So I know they're considered a cut through area.

The gated access doesn't help me with the on-street parking either.

True.

I did put the cut through part, maybe, but not the parking issue.

Right.

So what is like the lot is is a lot big enough.

Do you you know, trap the traffic engineering department of the city says they if you cut off the if you close the access on seventh, you can access a lot in and out from the alley.

And then there's the public parking available.

I think there's like I don't know if it was this case or another one where someone was worried about reduction in parking.

Do you is that a feasible plan to just do what DPW is asking and close off that driveway or I don't think so.

So this project was this is the second time we've been back.

The first time we had the access on 7th Street.

The reason we're here is we've added the access to the alley with additional parking.

So the reduction of the three park public parking spaces was accepted before.

Right, it was also not connected to the alley.

So all of this parking from what they've submitted is for their staff.

Right.

So as far as I'm concerned, the majority of their buildings are actually on the other side of the block.

Um, and right now they're parking off the alley or maybe on streets.

I'm not sure where staff are parking, but they're already using the alley for access, which is why we're kind of throwing them that way.

Well, that kind of if the if before the one access off of seventh was fine, then why wouldn't it be fine to just have one access off the alley instead?

Yeah, I guess that's that's what I meant by like is can you do the in and out in one access?

You did before, you can do it again just on the other side.

Sure.

Um so what do you think about that?

I mean, I think the only uh question I have because I know that this will eliminate, you know, the end to the entrance of 7th Street 3, but in the reality, they almost the entire block, it's this property, right?

Uh so I think there's only one house left in the corner, and the other so not a lot of currently right now, not a lot of people use that curtain 7th Street or parking in the angle.

Except for maybe the church across the street.

They have a parking.

They have some parking relative to the side.

I mean, there's a reason why there's angle parking on that street.

So I have to assume there, you know, it was not put there just willy-nilly.

Otherwise, we would have straight parallel parking on both sides of the street.

So, I mean, is the parking going to be primarily for guests or excuse me, for um staff and so visitors to the building, will they be using this lot?

No, no, uh, I think all the more reason to prioritize street parking then if we do have people public people from the public arriving for whatever reason.

If they don't have access to this lot, I think the adjacency makes sense.

So the gates were added because of the concern from DPW of being a cut through.

So we didn't have the gates, then the visitors to the building could use the parking lot, right?

So we've we have essentially increased the parking of this area with this lot minus the three public stops.

So the so we we've taken away three parking spots, and then we've added a whole new parking lot, right?

So we've gained parking.

And sorry, I understand, but it doesn't sound like the parking lot is for anybody other than the staff of the the.

So the original idea was for anybody that will use like visitors.

We don't have a lot of visitors in those areas because that's really really private.

It's just a few visitors at a time.

We have 15 individuals in there, so they are not coming to 15 at the same time so the idea was to leave it open so whoever wanted to use it whether it's a client what I mean clients they don't bring cars but if it's a visitor or if it's a staff if available they could use it so that was the intention of extending and adding more parking so at the beginning we were not using that lot but we said okay let's use a lot and add more parking spaces so we thought it was going to be a good idea.

I'll just share with the board my preference would be that we close that if we have alley access that provides I think maintaining a uh the sidewalk experience that pedestrians experience um and not having it a curb cut mid block is probably most protective of um of uh public health safety and welfare and pedestrian sake so well maybe I'm board member other board members have things to say I I mean I UCC is as we've said many many times as excellent work in the community it's needed providing much needed social services but I know when you're expanding and we're expanding in that area too but I do think we have to strike a balance um and I do think that yes you're creating this parking for um employees that would then no longer have to park on the street and perhaps some uh other visitors of the building um but there are some neighbors here too that do need parking and even they're not good the church people no one else can park in your lot unless they're visiting UCC so that's what those three spots it's only three but you know three here three there that adds up right so I it seems like a not often to and then you don't have to worry about the gates well you can still have one if you want but it there won't be a throughway problem it doesn't seem it seems okay it seems appropriate to at least preserve a couple of street parking spots just given the congestion in that area but I don't know if anyone else has any differing opinions but I I kind of I tend to agree with board member Cena on that on that I don't know.

I think it's a reasonable to wind up uh just providing more street parking than it is other parking so I would I would support support the uh if that's a that's a motion I can make a motion sure um so having found that the criteria necessary to grant a special use have been met based on the testimony provided today the information um provided by staff and um in our file I would move to approve this um for a period of 20 years subject to the conditions in the hearing summary including the closure of the um driveway approach on 7th Street.

Second the motion madam secretary board member St.

Arnold Ball aye board member rocker aye board member current aye vice chairman Smysky and Chairman Lomberg thank you so am I able to comment or are we done well it's done but you're just parting shot across the bottom no no I'm just it you know this was approved this way prior well now how is it changed you didn't go to the alley before you it's a different you've changed the site plan.

You're completely modified the set layout of the site so if we reverse this and we close the alley access that would I I can't answer what changing the plan again what what approval what necessary permits or what necessary activities that would require?

We have to go through the, you know.

That's why you're back is because you changed it.

That's fine, that happens all the time, but now with the new design, this is why these comments have come in.

But it's a 20, you've been approved for 20 years.

I understand.

It's pretty good so I'm I'm you know if if it flipped and it didn't connect to it, DPW still have a problem.

So EPW what you need I think we just have to.

I just think we have to.

Yeah, I just think we we've we've voted on this.

You can, you know, you have you can contact the boat's office and see if there's anything you want to change your contact on.

If you want to change the planning might end up back here, you might not.

I don't know.

We can't figure that out now.

I it's not even up to us what comes before us.

Just for my clarity, I had a condition that was, you know, kind of based on what uh there.

So I still need some landscape tweaking if that uh street curve cut's going to be on.

I think that was incorporated in the motion, so that there may be some adjustments of landscaping.

All right.

So I'm sorry, real quick.

I just want to point out that uh whenever the church just, you know, I accept all these conditions and charms, but um, always when church and a daycare that is very close to them, if they need our parking lot facilities, we will remain it open at night so they can use it all the time.

That's a collaboration we have with them, and we never had a problem.

I just wanted to point that out.

Well, you guys are fantastic neighbor.

Like I said, I meant what I said about what this is just one little aspect of this plan that needed to be uh we agreed with the city department on this one.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Item number 29, 6,000 South Sixth Street.

Request to occupy the premises as a temporary concrete batch plant that does not meet the screening and landscaping requirements.

Is there anyone online that is here to speak on 6,000 South Sixth Street?

Please raise your hand if you'd like to speak on 6000 South Sixth Street.

Don't see anyone online.

Looks like we have nothing.

You can't hear me.

You know, yeah.

I don't um Iran, can you hear okay online?

I would just ask everybody to get a microphone, please.

When you speak, can we speak to you?

All right.

Um, I don't know if he wants us to start.

Um we would just need everybody to um give us your names and mailing addresses, please that would like to speak.

Any Finco 6001 South Sixth Street.

Thank you.

Foster Finco 6000 South 6th Street.

Still need your name and mailing address.

Uh Cheyenne Jansen, the business 2015, West Main Street Landing, Wisconsin.

Austin Bryant, same as and Alderman Spiker is here, it is in his district.

Uh go ahead, just step just grab that microphone a little bit and then get us.

Greg Shaw, the owner of 6000 South 6 by 311 South Ninth Street.

Okay.

Anybody else?

Nope.

Okay.

Okay.

And then everyone that's going to speak, could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the church.

Thank you.

DPW, nothing to add.

DNS.

Based on a review of the information submitted by the petitioner relative to this proposal and without benefit of any testimony, which may be presented at the board of zoning appeals hearing, the department of neighborhood services finds the criteria for special use under 295311 of the city code has not been met.

The department has been in an active enforcement mode for several years.

The property owner made a business decision to not comply with city ordinance.

And regardless of the batch plant, the lot itself is still in violation with regard to use.

The department has already received complaints regarding fugitive dust, excessive noise, and vibration from the batch plant.

Decisions made by the owner and applicant have caused a detriment to the surrounding neighborhood, which violates the criteria for protection of property and therefore prohibits approval of the special use.

I should add, for example, uh they're not following their own proposed site plan.

They have two crushers, uh, and the one that I highlighted to you uh that we looked at yesterday again, uh, is not on their approved plan.

So have strong concerns that any conditions of approval uh are going to be adhered to.

They're in violation now, and uh we the department can't support this special use.

We don't have a comment on the landscaping variance.

Uh Mr.

Richardson, DCD.

Uh uh DCD has serious concerns about how this is operating and the location of the crusher and piles and impacts on neighbors.

It's our understanding that this project was exclusively for a six-month project uh involving construction at the adjacent airport.

So, therefore, basically uh we feel that if the variance is granted by the board that it be conditional upon uh for a period to expire on June 30th, uh 2026, which is the date that the petitioner's uh lease expires with the landlord.

Okay, so that was there's a lot of people here, and obviously there's a bad a bunch of bad history.

Can we just get clarity?

Is that's when you're gonna that's less than two months from now?

So is that when the end of the operation is?

Yeah, correct.

Yeah, this is uh as stated, this is a temporary use to service the uh international concourse project.

Uh, we performed the demo on that project.

We are using this uh plot of land here to recycle the material to then go back to the project to be used for reconstruction as part of the uh uh overall project at the airport there.

So then, so the years of history is that that's what I'm I'm kind of confused, and I don't know if Alderman Spike, who who wants to enlighten me.

Are you saying that you're get your pulling stakes?

You will be off that site and not not operated in any capacity, and June 30th.

Correct.

If we get approval to be able to finish our work, yes, yeah.

Well, I mean, but by we're hearing that for years there's been I can't speak to any of those past history.

We've only been there for a few months.

I assume you are neighbors.

Did you write a letter?

I'm across the street every morning.

I go woke up by the rock crusher, and the planging of the concrete buckets dragging across for two months.

How long is that?

Two months, roughly, and without occupancy permits.

So there's no input by the neighborhood before he started it all.

And I'm so so I even so I'm here, I'm not gonna put word in your mouth, but I'm here.

What I'm you're probably gonna say, I don't care if it's still June 30th, we want it to stop now.

No, not necessarily.

I mean if we follow the code, it'd be one thing, but yeah, first disregard for city ordinances is him stubborn the nose at getting the proper permits.

Agreed, and it's frustrating to it's frustrating to everyone, it's frustrating to the alder, it's frustrating to the enforcement.

It's frustrating to us when uh, well, it hasn't been in front of us to not, they haven't not complied with our conditions.

Well, as I understand, these are just previous operators at this site.

That's great.

The site has been in enforcement.

I don't believe the crusher came after February of 2026.

So, with that being said, I don't, I mean, Alderman Spiker, if this is in fact this the case that they're gonna finish this project and they're gonna be gone.

What do you what is your input on that?

Uh everybody I've talked to objects to it.

So they started doing uh the work without occupancy.

So it's another case which you've seen many times before of people asking for forgiveness rather than permission.

I don't think that's a generally a good policy.

I think that encourages then folks not to seek permission to begin with.

The mobile home park to the south is probably the poorest area of my district.

It sits very poorly with me that folks think they can come in with this sort of operation and have noise dust things and just think because you know the people involved are have bigger issues in my their lives that that's something that they should have to put up with.

We also have an objection on the file from a business to the east of there, and the FENCOs are to the west.

So pretty much all around everybody's press objected.

You know, it's a frustrating thing because these types of operations are inherently going to be disruptive for a period of time and create dust, even if through mitigation best mitigation practices.

But if it's short term and people are kind of aware of what's going on, you might not get the pushback.

I guess it's my fear is if we if we say if we deny it, they're just gonna finish anyway and then leave when they leave.

But I don't know if it seems like it if they're not the ones that have caused the problems historically at the site.

I I don't know.

It's troubling to me, and I would love to hear from the property owner um as to how we've gotten to this situation at all.

Because if you've only been there for two months, and this has been an ongoing um enforcement nightmare that exceeds two months.

What else is operating there?

Right.

Well, then maybe we can bring them.

I just comment real quick to the uh uh forgiveness versus permission um situation.

It wasn't not our intention at all to be asking forgiveness.

Our intention was fully to have all of our occupancy in place before starting any operations.

We did start this process.

Yeah, or I think it was November or November.

November of last year.

Um it's just the timing with the construction that and uh you know what we're doing, meeting.

Well, we had everything 100% in in January, then it came back with wanting additional info.

We've resubmitted in February.

Um basically someone had sent another email to our office, and because that email was not answered, it was basically a question about the owner, which nobody in our office knew any information about, so we responded to.

Um we didn't realize, but they pulled us from being on the zoning or in the meeting back in it would have been early March, basically when we were scheduling to start.

Um, so unfortunately, once we realized that we were not on that meeting, I responded to the email, and then we had already missed the deadline for the April date, so then it got pushed to May.

So I completely um appreciate it.

But the initial planning of this whole project when we were setting up and getting our permitting for the uh airport demo um with discussions with some folks at the city um about setting up uh temporary recycling on that adjacent property right next to the airport.

It had been not really displayed to us that it was gonna be as challenging as it has been to do this temporary.

I thought it's gonna be a lot easier to apply for a temporary crushing permit, kind of like we apply for our demo permits, and then do the operation for uh the few months that we need and then pull out and wrap up.

So it was never our intention to have to ask forgiveness at all.

Just well, it seems reasonable explanation.

Then you're the owner.

You want yeah, why don't you come forward so we can get some clarity.

We can have a chair if you want.

What if you guys give you guys one of you guys giving the chair?

I think I've owned the property like about four years.

Four years.

This is the first tenant that I've had here.

We've been moving dirt and getting the site ready to occupy.

This is the first tenant that we've had.

Um it's a six-month lease, and with the lease was you know, get the permits, whatever.

Um the lease expires end of June, and we've agreed and I have no intention of renewing the lease.

So end of June, the lease is over, and they're um we'll be gone from the property, and hopefully done, you know, done with the project, and we can all move forward.

What are you moving forward with after they leave?

What's that?

What are you moving forward with as a plan after they leave?

Contractor's yard, outdoor storage, what I've been approved for.

I think the storage of the product is an approved use, but the crushing of the concrete I think is what the problem is.

But I've gone through all the approval process and done you know pretty much everything I can.

The site is pretty much ready.

He has no occupancy for a contractor yard.

He's not he's not done.

I don't, yeah, I don't have documents.

I don't have an occupancy permit.

We're still finishing the project.

So I so the day that they vacate the property, what are you doing on your property?

Finishing uh we'll be working on it while they're still there but we have landscaping to do uh seed to put down the moving of the dirt is all done but we just have the grass and the trees and the plantings to finish up and some fencing and get the paving and and paving a portion of the front sorry so my well it seems like a the problems aren't really with HM brands and uh so I I mean look if there's a two month operation they it's there should be absolutely an expectation that the there's fence screening minimally the landscaping variants is kind of moot for these for for eight for HM or HM brands just because it's nothing's gonna get installed in two months.

I mean one one option is to let this applicant complete their work which and forget I think just frankly deny or the landscaping very I don't that's gonna have to come back forward to us when we have new proposals for this for this site.

The landscaping variance I mean if it's literally for two months is that just something they can withdraw I mean if we deny it then there's a tie to that decision for future use there is a complication with Mr Shaw's property in that um part of the site is actually in an overlay district where the biggest concern is having a boom with landscaping.

That's not a part of this poser case but that's kind of a part of what the property uh in terms of trying to do landscaping for this crushing operation I I think that's kind of mute right and and I don't want to tie any any um this landscaping decisions to future uses seems like something that could be dismissed and then action taken on the use portion where and the dimensional variance of the um the screening with the opaque fence right the overlay district that he mentioned is all intact that's what fostered asked for across from your house that's the height requirement the width requirement that's all there so adding any landscaping there I don't you know that's yeah but the but they're not to ask them to put in landscaping for something that they're gonna be done with in jam by in less than two months doesn't make any sense to me can I ask a question of the H um folks in the event that the permit would be denied today this project is still ongoing you're still under contract I'm assuming with Milwaukee County is there a plan B like it do you have a backup plan?

Is there a place that you can go to complete this work.

I mean the uh the materials on site already very costly to try to move it to a different site okay yeah and just to clarify on the the duration of the lease here the whole duration is not we're not gonna be recycling and crushing for the full next two months we got about roughly two weeks two and a half weeks of actually crushing left to do and then the remainder of the time it's just going to be moving stone.

And when do you do the crushing what what are the hours generally generally between 7 a.m and 4 30 is like when our crews work not necessarily the entire time crushing because there is maintenance involved but um would it be feasible would you consider understanding that you have some neighbors here who have um had some pretty negative impacts um being in close proximity to reduce the um that time frame of which you're doing the couldn't the crushing maybe from eight to four or something like that too.

Yeah, I mean, we couldn't look at that.

And the more the the more we reduce the time the longer it takes overall in days, but it's you know definitely something we can do.

But if you have until June 30th with your lease, and you could be done in a couple of weeks, but instead of being done in a couple of weeks, you take a month and do it in more desirable hours or less undesirable hours is probably a better way of putting it for your neighbors.

Um, and then you'd still have a month to clean up the site and move move on.

I think that's what a consideration that would be a good way to sort of ease out of your projects.

Kind of it's kind of a mess.

I your explanations for the delay, that happens.

I kind of understand it, but I'll tell you where I'm at right now.

Sounds like you guys have a contract.

I understand how these things work, especially when you're working with government, like you're you're on a time frame, it's gotta happen within a certain period of time, and it this is less than ideal.

Um, I think you also signed a lease with somebody who has a history with the city that is uh really problematic, and they have not been a good neighbor to the neighbors that have been there before you came.

Um, and there are some serious concerns about their ability to do anything uh worthwhile with the property after you leave, but that is kind of not what's uh our problem right now or your problem right now.

Um, but I guess it is uh something I that's important for the neighbors that are here to know that um we see it.

So uh if we can get to a solution that helps to get you to a point where you can safely vacate that property, I think that there are other methods of which to deal with the other issues.

You were gonna say something.

And what do you think about ours?

What is your meaning the Fencos are the ones who are most directly impacted because they are literally across the street, so I guess what would assure so it sounds like the it will take longer if there's a narrower window, however, you don't want to be woken up at seven every morning with the sound of the what would what would secure you your quality of life, given that you are the people who are actually directly impacted.

Um, what would be an acceptable?

Uh yeah, I mean, I can hear what I've heard them say is that they can be done in a month, not a problem.

So we could say that you get a real short lease and they can crank it out, or we can if they just get till the end of their lease, they can we can adjust the hours so that it's less disruptive during it.

I think I'm sorry for the brands because first of all, they're dealing with the guy that isn't truthful.

Second of all, you haven't said got any permits for what work you've done, a few uh uh when they took out a uh not landscaping permit, you didn't take out an occupancy, took an or uh zoning of permit out.

What does that tell us?

Nothing.

All his work on there is he completely changed all the dirt on that property, made hills, drained off water to neighbors that no plan was looked at when that was originally taken over by Mr.

Barbian, he had to have a topographical map of that area, so any change to the height and limitations, he would prove that the water was maintained on his property.

None of this is but done by the owner.

They come in and I feel sorry for them, but you know they got a burn, as he stated in front of my house.

That's fine.

They set the rock brusher up on top of the burn.

I mean, come on, and you know, the piles are rock.

My car was outside two days and it's covered with lime.

I brought it outside.

You can come see it, it eats the pain away.

Can you move that rock rusher rock crusher to the location where it's supposed to be and still finish this up?

I mean, I think that's crazy.

Yeah, how we we've gotta make this better for these guys.

But too much if it's car, you know.

I I think I sit on my couch and look out the bay window and I'm looking at uh 10 to 20 foot berm with a five to 10 foot pile of concrete, and on top of the concrete are two cranes and a rock crusher, and I'm hearing wind shimes.

It's terrible.

I mean, I live next to an airport, and I've never made a noise complaint in my life.

So over 30 years, I got I got our car alarm going off several times a day.

It sounds like people are dragging a car with the wheels across my driveway.

We've all narrowed it down to the branch.

You know, this isn't the the history of the site isn't them, and that's gonna have to be addressed differently.

There's enforcement actions.

If they have if something new comes before us, there's history with this site as it relates to their operation.

Can you guys move the rock rock crusher off the berm within the site where it says in the site plan and effectively wrap this up?

Yeah, we can we could move it over to the uh to the east farther from close to the west.

Um it's not on the berm at all by any means.

Um, on top of a cement.

There's well, we're not gonna there's a there's a pad that it sits on that's roughly about you know four to five feet high, but um, it is a tall machine, so I'm not gonna deny that one bit.

Uh, but yeah, we could we could move it over.

It's um, you know, that the drawing that we put on in place here, it's pretty I mean the machinery that we're talking about, it's all tracks, it's all mobile.

It it uh as you crush the concrete and you you you move the machine right through the concrete, like you know, um so it it's hard to display exactly where it's gonna, you know, be on the site on uh map.

It's a temporary so with that, do you would you prefer to have them finish this as quickly as they can, or do you want to limit the hours and put some conditions?

I mean, I know this is unusual to get this detailed in a meeting, but I it's kind of asking when you're not the possibility Iran doesn't have it's that's not we can't explain that to you.

Uh that's that's a city department, but I it where we have a short-term thing here, we seem to find a solution so they can fulfill their contract and get out of your something and get their operation out of there.

Well, if you're telling me I'm being held up to the point of that, you have to read it.

I won't read it.

But I'm telling you for all that time they had to do it and with the guidance they had from the owner, they didn't go ahead and we should all do the rest before we're shooting down here.

I could have told them what was happening with their treatment.

They're flugging the park, the old blue period, right now.

We got ducks walking around the wall, because the owner changed the landscape at the end of the box being blocked off the print.

I think I understand, but the owner, this is we're getting I I your frustration is real and we hear you, but a lot of it doesn't have to do with the with these two.

So that I get it.

And it says all right, I wanted to take some extra time and get this done today.

I give you the forum.

If they can get it done quickly, that's great.

If they can move the rock pressure and the cranes so that it's not at the end of my driveway, that would be wonderful.

What is it?

You want to modify the hours.

Let's say doing this at seven o'clock every morning.

Eight to four.

That's what that's what Lindsay said.

Yes, at eight to four.

I guess, Mr.

Chairman, I want to reiterate, I can't make any guarantees of enforcement.

Well, that's the thing.

We have we have perhaps the applicant could exp could provide some testimony as to how these conditions are going to be adhered to.

Uh because I don't have the staff.

Um we're we're in the construction industry.

We we deal with a lot of this every day.

Um, nobody wants construction happening across the street from their house, especially in demolition.

I'm not saying you in particular, I'm just saying in general.

Um, it's not in our interest to um create a bad reputation and anger the neighbors.

So if if there's guidelines of eight to four, then that you know that's the guidelines we follow.

If it's seven to four, if it's seven to three, um yeah.

And to the microphone, please.

So like I'm going to work every morning, seven o'clock, the alarm goes off.

Yeah.

So I'm used to it now, but get it on the other side of the berm, so we don't have to hear it as much.

Move your plant.

What we're we're done.

We're done with the discussion.

We're gonna make the we're gonna go forward.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell had some concerns or thoughts about changing the hours.

What do you what did what do the board members want to do?

It's this is gonna be a problem until it's over in two months.

Well, what I'm hearing from the neighbors is they want this done.

Right.

Um it sounds like it's starting at seven is annoying, but it won't be any less annoying if it starts at eight.

Um, so I guess what I would say is the condition would be do not begin before 7 a.m.

and do not end after 5 p.m.

So only operate between the hours of seven and five.

Um, and get it done as fast as possible.

Move the equipment away from the street and into the interior of the property as much as possible.

Um with that said, I would um I think just all of these can be just timeline.

Yeah, yeah.

Free.

Yep.

So I would move to approve the special use and the dimensional variance based on the testimony um here today, the information in the ebook, um, for a period of two months, um expiring June 30th of 2026, and subject to all of the conditions we discussed, including the moving of equipment, the modification of hours.

Can we can you amend that to um include the moving of the equipment by early next week?

Yeah, I mean they could the equipment should be moved immediately by Monday the 11th.

You do it right now.

No, I'm missing.

You hear you you have just do the best you can to get your job done and give them some peace.

And if you don't have an already shared contact information, it probably would be a really good sign of goodwill.

All right, is there a second?

A second, no, sure.

Who did we want to give that to?

Thank you.

All right, I have a question.

What does this variance give them the right to do other than what would you just explain?

The state of it's not the limit.

It's just all the future use of this property.

They're the rants are out.

Any nothing else is allowed to happen there right now.

From if there's no occupancy, there'll be enforcement, you have an alderman, you have uh noise complaints, you can probably pd.

If something comes up, there's a history here, and you'll be noticed, and you will I I will count on it that you'll be here to tell us about any issues that are going on with the new proposal as it you're immediate neighbors.

Uh we have to call the role.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell, aye, board member Ocker.

Aye, board member current.

Aye, Vice Chairman Smyinski and Chairman Member.

Okay.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Uh thank you for coming down.

I we do appreciate it.

Item number 30, 40 30 South Pine Avenue.

Request to add a light motor vehicle sales facility to the continuous non-conforming light motor vehicle repair facility and body shop.

And is there anyone online that is would like to speak on 4030 South Pine?

And if okay, we do have one person online with a raise.

Oh, wait, we took it away.

There you go.

All right, we have one, two, it looks like we have two people online, Mr.

Chair.

Wait, three.

Is it gonna be a contestant?

Yeah, it might have to.

So, can we just get a uh stock on who online if they're wanting to speak?

If they're in favor and opposition, sure.

I'll I'll start from the top.

So we have Brandon McLamore.

Um, you are self-muted.

If you want to unmute yourself and tell us um if you're here in support objection, if you want to speak.

Hi, good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes, I'm in favor of the of the businesses, uh, whatever they would like to accomplish.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, we're gonna we'll come back to you uh just swear if we're just where you're in.

Uh next person is Cheryl Bennett.

Uh, you are self-muted if you want to unmute yourself and tell us if you're in uh supporter objection, please I'm in support of the rightness okay thank you um and then Dr.

Christine Swanda could you please tell us if you're here in support or objection I also in support okay thank you and then also I see Terry Williams uh Terry did you want to speak on this or are you just listening in okay Carrie's from the Alder Woman's office I'm not sure if she wants to speak or if she's just listening um oh that's Terry Williams sorry um and we do have a correspondence from her.

And then um we also have people here as well did you want to give us um you're hearing objection support sure but could we trigger that there are these people live on that are calling about it to that yeah we're just trying to find out if we can if we're gonna have to postpone this and we postpone this for four times now so we've adjourned it last meeting and now we're trying to do this again just I know you're opposed to you were both opposed to it David Christianson opposed sopinsky I live next door property one second we think this has only been scheduled once yes it was adjourned Mr.

is adjourned by the applicant last month.

Yeah we were not notified of it and we came down here during a tornadoes uh warning and watch and we're told when we got here that it was adjourned.

Well yeah I mean I can't mail it out it's frustrating um all right we thought there were more I think we're gonna I think we're gonna go forward because I there's letters of of support um you've letters but you're here we're gonna hear from you um I think we're gonna go forward and take the time it's needed it's not a if there was like 10 people you know we'd have to we'd have to adjourn so what we're gonna do is get everyone in the room names the mailing addresses where are you in we'll get the people online ringing from the city departments um and then we'll proceed so I know you just said it do it again.

I'm Gary Karpinski I live next door at 3996 South Pine Avenue and I'm opposed to the like most vehicle yeah just we're just gonna get names mail addresses when they actually want to hear more about just other than a vote.

David A Christianson I'm cornered to corner to the auto shop that what's the address I am at 841 East Norwood Street Milwaukee Wisconsin 53207.

Okay applicant is joined by counsel my name is Harlan Hernandez what's your where do you want mail decision uh 4030 South Pine Avenue okay um we're gonna go through the people online uh did we didn't get addresses we didn't know I didn't get those everyone get sworn at once okay um brandon mecklemore um could you please give us your name and mailing address please brandon McLamore 3915 South Pine Avenue Milwaukee Wisconsin 53207 thank you all right next person Miss Cheryl Bennett could you please give us your name and mailing address oh wait no 1792 Tamarack Street in South Milwaukee.

Thank you and then Dr.

Christine Schwanda could you give us your name and mailing address please Dr.

Christine Schwanda 3940 South Pine Milwaukee 53207 okay thank you so then uh those are the only ones who have raised their hand to speak online um so then if everyone that has um raised their hand to speak could you please raise your right hand.

We're gonna swear you in.

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do.

I do, I do.

Thank you.

Let's hear from DPW.

DNS to send a review of the information submitted by the petitioner relative to this proposal and without benefit of any testimony, which may be presented at the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing.

The Department of Neighborhood Services finds that the criteria for special use under 295311 of the city code have not been met over the past 10 years.

Plus, uh the Department of Neighborhood Services received dozens of complaints regarding the grandfathered repair garage and body shop.

These complaints mainly center around excessive paint fumes affecting the neighborhood excessive noise from the garage in terms of mechanical noise and music and the general storage of vehicles, both junked and operable outside of the completely enclosed building without an occupancy permit.

Seven special enforcement orders have been issued since 2017, and a municipal judgment was obtained in 2023.

Complaints have dropped off until the current notification was posted on the city's website.

It is unknown if the business has been conducting itself in a neighborly manner or the neighborhood simply gave up complaining after years of no change.

The department's position is that the existing uses negatively impact the neighborhood, and adding any additional uses would only compound the problems.

If the board does uh choose to approve uh the special use, we do have our standard auto body and repair shop uh conditions of approval with the acknowledgement that what's before the board is for light motor vehicle sales.

DCD, the petitioner is seeking a special use to add light motor vehicle sales to the existing legal non-conforming auto body shop.

A similar request was denied by the board in 2018 after a significant testimony from neighbors who expressed continual concerns with problems of noise and fumes.

Therefore, DCD is concerned that the addition of motor vehicle sales will result in an intensification.

So I will have negative impacts on the neighbors.

If the special use is granted, uh, DCD is requesting a revised landscape plan.

So just to um frame some of this, basically the exit all the problems they get their legally non-conforming use.

The things that have been driving neighbors nuts.

We've seen a lot of the letters are problems that aren't before us today, and what we're being asked to do is I think basically what Mr.

Richardson says, intensifying a use that's already causing a lot of problems.

Um, so to be very clear, we are we are here just to hear about adding light motor vehicle sales.

The paint, the odors and the fumes are they're not gonna be less.

It's causing a negative impact, I understand, but we can't deal with that.

Just want to be sure everyone understands, though, that and the applicant as well.

But reading this material and seeing the complaints of the neighbors and looking at the photos, I'm it's gonna be difficult to see how adding more more you more of a use to this property is gonna somehow be better for the neighbors and be more protective.

I would ask you to recuse yourself.

I'm not gonna recuse myself.

I've reviewed.

It sounds like you've already made up your mind before we've even.

I haven't, and I'm not going to use myself.

And we can't, but I'm I'm saying this because people come before us, I understand.

Please, please.

People come before us, and they have an expectation that we're gonna hear about all the issues that drive them nuts about the use that have nothing to do with what we're before what is here before us.

And lawyers like you and I understand the nuances of how this works.

Having worked in city government yourself, you certainly know that.

They probably don't.

I'm giving them an opportunity to understand the process and how this government process works.

We're gonna hear your case.

We're gonna hear your applicants uh appeal here.

We're gonna we've heard from the city departments.

I'm just letting them know that we understand that they have issues.

All we can consider with regard to their concerns is what this added use is gonna do to those concerns to the concerns they already have.

Not what's already there and already allowed to happen.

So I think it was appropriate for me to make those comments.

Anyway, that being said, I would support what has been said by you.

Okay.

We're specifically looking at just this used car sales.

We cannot have conversation or address any of the previous unfortunate and uh uses that have uh been uh perpetrated on the neighbors.

That's not what we're here for today.

It's strictly the sales.

Correct.

So with that being said, um go ahead.

Thank you.

Could I ask um Mr.

Lairdson a question?

Sure.

Thank you.

Um Inspector Lairdson, uh a minute ago you said there have been dozens of complaints.

Um, could you list those for us, please?

We can get there.

Uh it'll be a moment.

Since 2020, how about this?

Since January 1st of 2023, when Mr.

Hernandez took over.

Correct.

And I'm not talking about complaints, I'm talking about verified complaints.

And members, Mr.

Chair and members, I apologize for being aggressive out of the box, but I apologize.

Those of you that know me understand that I've been doing housing enforcement in this town um since the 80s, and I have never ever seen a situation where two neighbors have dragged around a city government like these two gentlemen have.

Um you will find out, you will find out.

I I appreciate that.

I provide we also have correspondence from the alder one.

I understand that, and we're going to try to get to what that correspondence is about.

It all comes down to the complaints of these two gentlemen.

And um, so I provided you copies of the complaints that they have made.

I have provided you the inspection results from the complaints.

Now, let me give you an example.

Let's say that I don't like that picture behind you, and I complain every day about that picture.

Now there's nothing wrong with that picture being displayed in this room.

There's no law violation, there's nothing of the building inspector or public works can do about that picture.

These two gentlemen have complained and complained and complained.

And when you drill down and hopefully we'll give the same analysis and ask the questions, provide the verified complaints verified by building inspectors since January of 2023 when Mr.

Hernandez took over, you will find out there are none now.

Well, hold on.

Can I just push?

Like I'm not interested in appeasing and hearing all of their complaints about the smell and the issues with the not legal non-conforming um uses.

What I'd like to hear, I'm not interested in in this presentation.

I want to hear how you how your applicant is going to be able to operate this this proposed use in a way that meets the four criteria.

And I think we're gonna weave into that.

Yeah, but I just want to do this in a way that's not gonna that's gonna be the criteria, that's what we need to hear.

That's yes.

What I want to word for this yes, you know.

What I want you to understand here is that we have a legal business that has had no lial violations since Mr.

Hernandez took over.

If um I provided you, I did just so you have an inkling of what we're dealing with here.

If you look at the documents I provided you, which show Mr.

Karpinski walking around on the property, taking photos of every license plate in the property.

We had to post the property no trespassing.

I had to send him a letter to say we're gonna call the police if you don't stay off our property, and then um you'll notice there are two additions.

If you want to know how far, and and again, the alder woman's complaints and and Ms.

Williams and and the alder woman both know better than to deal with complaints that are unverified.

But what we have here is you have two pictures of Mr.

Karpinski standing and standing there, not on the property here in question, but standing on the corner of 13th in Oklahoma, which is a relative of Mr.

Hernandez's property.

That's what we're dealing with in terms of harassment of this issue.

Now, to deal with what we're asking for today, I I put a satellite photo on there.

And so they repair cars, they fix them up, and now they're talking about getting ready to sell.

And if you look at the satellite view, what we're talking about is I think there's a there's a picture of four cars right next to each other.

I think one is blue, one is white, and then there's every other one is silver.

That is all we are proposing is to sell cars at um that location, uh to post the cars there on the sky.

You can see them in the sky.

You can't see it from the um the street.

There won't be anything advertised.

There won't be any additional use except people coming to the property, which they're already coming.

There's customer parking there.

Uh I think we can live with everything that building inspection that that applies.

Some of these things, the building inspection lists that don't apply.

Um, we can deal with uh DPW, and I would also propose that as part of the landscaping um for that DPW has uh is that we uh put a uh six-foot opaque fence along the uh north side of the property so that these two gentlemen do not uh have the opportunity to continue day in and day out taking pictures into our property.

The north you may want to reconsider your fence proposal.

Well, I'm just asking that it's not his property.

Where does the bowls are coming?

You know what?

Here's the thing.

Here's the thing.

The Mr.

Lairdson is correct, it's not his property.

However, the individual whose property it is has to go over Mr.

Hernandez's property to get to his business.

So I think when we ask him if we can put a fence up, that he will agree.

I expect that, but we are going to have to deal with the harassment of these two individuals because all we're asking for here is to be able to put four cars exactly where the four cars are right now and put them up for sale and have some people come and buy them.

That's all we're talking about here.

We're not talking about anything else.

Now, Mr.

Hernandez knocked doors in the neighborhood and you see the result.

I think there's more people uh online than the than the ones that signed in, but or that we're trying to get in, but we are only asking for that.

And um, when you read about Ms.

Williams and and the Alder Woman's comments of the complaints, they are only talking about these gentlemen's complaints, and I have provided you the result of those complaints.

I stood with Inspector Serdic a couple of weeks ago to deal with the complaint about paint fumes, and there were it was laughable.

We were all laughing.

Can I ask a question of DNS really quick?

Yes, just one second.

DNA excuse me, sir.

Dennis, have there been any verified um complaints and or orders issued related to uh salvage vehicles or outdoor storage at this site in since 2023?

Yes, there was an outdoor salvage order in February of 23.

There was a minor maintenance order in March of 23.

Uh those were abated uh without fee.

Um that uh uh and then since then, no, there have not been complaints until uh just uh uh this past couple months, and those complaints have not been verified.

Okay, so so from if I can just summarize what I heard.

Uh there have been abated issues related to outdoor storage and salvage, but nothing recent and nothing that's been verified recently.

That's correct.

Okay, thank you.

That is all I want to hear.

I have one question of principle.

Why do you want to start selling the cars?

Um honestly is it's mostly to get rid of some old inventory, so in order for me to um get rid of inventory that's probably not deemed fixable by insurance.

I have to get a dealer license to put it back into the auction.

That's mainly my main reason.

I mean, I I'm strongly uh I believe that it would not make operations worse.

Um I haven't even made things worse, to be quite honest.

I mean, that's the my main reason to have the dealer license, simply just help with potential whatever potentially it's might be an issue.

When didn't you start selling cars?

I have not started uh selling cars.

I live in the area and I've driven past our establishment, and I saw the cars that were parked uh on the uh west side of your property right up against Pine Street.

I saw it several times as I drove through there.

So you had been parking there, you had feather ticks out there identifying that you were selling material.

So I'm familiar with this.

I'm not believing that uh um I I think this is an intensification uh that's going to continue to cause additional problems for the neighbors.

Uh I I don't have faith at this point that I'm sorry, I'm not honestly confused.

I don't know which I'm talking about.

He's microphone, please.

As a witness, as a witness, I'm bringing this.

He's asking me this question, you know.

But what you have just testified to as he's not testifying.

Well, he just said he's a witness, but you hold on, hold on, stop.

Vice Chair Shemeisky is not, he's said he drove past and he noticed it.

We have eyes.

Are we supposed to ignore?

He's not introducing, he's asking a question.

So you okay then explain it?

But stop asking for recusals and all this.

We're just let just let's hear what is he mistaken?

Is it a different property?

He's mistaken, I'm not 100% sure.

What is he talking about?

Okay, honest.

So you you have so you've not had there's never been like flags out of cars for sale?

No flags for sale.

I haven't posted anything for sale.

I mean, have I privately sold one of my vehicles?

Is that okay?

Well, then it just but don't like what do you mean have I privately sold this?

What I just explained.

What I mean by that, explain my own like car.

Right, right.

Did you have a car like your car parked on your property with a with a for sale site?

Never okay.

I I just because when it's like the question of did I do this, is he thinking, never just want to find out what's happening.

Yeah, no, no, never never had a banner, never had flags, never posted something with a sign for sale, never had any of that type of uh movement, I guess.

So we have the when I was looking at this.

My honestly, my biggest, just looking at the pictures.

I was in it, it's a little bit clearer now as to what these sale vehicles are going to be for or what your plan is.

But looking at these pictures, I didn't, I just was wondering where are they going to be parked?

There's no room anywhere for sale vehicles.

So are you saying that some of these existing vehicles on your lot are like you're not they can't be repaired to be sold, so you're just gonna sell them to an auction, yes, wholesale, but and and you need a dealer's license to do that?

Correct.

So in order for like if you go to any auction or if uh in order for for you to properly sell or pass the vehicle through the auction, you have to have a dealer license.

So for example, I think I believe a state of uh Wisconsin, the DOT.

If if you want to if someone were to leave uh for example, we did an estimate on the vehicle, someone were to leave a vehicle for more than uh two weeks, you know.

Sometimes they leave it for a month, you know.

At this point, I don't have legal possession to do anything with the vehicle.

In order for me to do that, I have to send this uh pretty much documentation to the DOT.

And once I come back in one of the requirements, and then I should have brought a a form what they ask us to privately or publicly sell it in an auction.

Mr.

Chair, I just want to I the I just want to clarify again that the spot where the four cars will be is identified in the picture.

There are four cars parked up against the building.

That's that's what I was can you do.

There's there's I think it looks like I think it's a silver, a blue, a silver, and a white, and they're parked right in a line, they're facing south up against the building.

Those that is the spot that we are proposing would be available.

So the the complainants won't even see or have any way to it will not affect them in any way, shape, or do you see that in your talking about this?

When we're not talking about people coming out of the lot and looking and you're just having some come and pick the cars up that you're listening for option in a in a flatbed or whatever, taking them away.

Pretty much, yeah.

If he wants his wholesale dealer's license, he can only sell vehicles to wholesale dealers.

He can't have people come on the property to buy cars like retail sales.

Well, it and the the light motor vehicles uh proposal doesn't say just four cars, it's it's an open book.

You can do as much as you want once you get well, but he's bound by a plan of operation that's enforceable.

See, see that's there isn't there isn't an enforceable thing right now, guys.

That's what I'm trying to say.

Is this these legal non-conforming uses are not subject to conditions issued by this body?

That's why I was trying to frame this at the beginning.

So y it could definitely look uh like as Vice Chair Shemisi said, an intensification.

That's why we're trying to get to the bottom of what the plan of operation is to know exactly what if if this were to be approved, what rules they are bound by, what exactly he's trying to do.

And I'm trying to bring that up now.

Just hold on one second.

I do want to hear from you, but I want to find uh the plan of operation on my screen here.

So I'm trying to see if this is lined up with what's see when I'm seeing four deliveries pickups for day.

What do you why do you need four to seven deliveries or pickups per day for this purported use?

Yeah, so I got confused.

I thought it was my current operations.

Okay.

And then now that you clarified at the beginning, it was just soldiers.

All right.

Go ahead.

Presently he parks about six to eight cars on the street now.

With the front parking structure there, there's a handicap and uh visitor parking.

They're constantly flow.

Where are these cars gonna go that they can't park there now when we have an abundance of cars on the street?

I think what I'm hearing them say is there will not be any di this this use will not bring more vehicles onto the lot than already exists is my understanding.

That will never happen.

If if f has performance from the the the comp the people that own the buildings and the new owner the new guy who's running it, it just gets worse and worse.

It's not even summer.

Um, there's so many vehicles there now.

How is it going to be better to have more vehicles on the property when it's already overfilled?

This is right.

This is what I want to what I wanna give you.

This plan, you have a lot of good things going on.

You have a non-conforming uses that are causing issues.

Can't really do anything about that.

You're adding this.

How is this in how does how does enforcement deal with this?

How do they know what cars that are parked on the street are not if those aren't cars that you're gonna be listing for sale?

You know, you say no no public the one of the conditions of DCD or excuse me, BPWs is asking for say no, um, no display vehicles are parked on the on the public right of way, right?

So on the street.

You can't have cars that are you're gonna try to sell parked on the street.

So if their cars parked on the street, what how how are you gonna protect the neighbors by allowing DNS to go in and enforce and say those cars are parked on the street that are later gonna be for sale, displayed for sale?

You know what I mean?

You can kind of get away with a lot of stuff when you have this this melding, and that's what we're trying to protect the neighborhood.

I'm just a bit confused.

If I were to park cars in the street, if there are cars parked on the street, there's complaints that cars are parked on the street.

No, okay.

So there's no cars on the street.

You're lying.

So I mean, I I guess are we talking about sales cars or are we talking about what cars are we talking about?

Exactly the point, right?

No sales cars can be parked on the street.

If there are other cars parked on the street that are for your other uses, who's gonna be able to distinguish what they are, are they sales, are they not sales?

Is it an enforceable plan of operation?

Is the DNS is thinking not?

So I want to hear from you guys.

How can you make it enforce?

So there's a thing of four vehicles that park in the street.

Um sometimes when I come in for short things, or I'm there for most of the time.

I mean, I it's 'cause I go in and out.

It's right in the antenna.

I mean, there's there's no neighbors around there.

Uh I could think of one of my texts parking there.

Um and that's pretty much it.

My wife, when she comes visits me, I mean, she's never parked next to the neighbors next to the streets.

I'm sure you have aerial image before the location is right next to the antennas.

No, no, no customers.

Let's take a break.

No, customers.

I want to hear from the people that are waiting patiently online.

I think they're all people are here in support.

Who wants to testify that's online?

I don't want to start in.

We can start with Mr.

McLamar.

Yeah.

Uh yes.

And uh and remind us where you're where you live in relation to this property.

Uh so I'm on um the up towards the middle of the block, uh 3915 South Pine Avenue.

Um, what do you want to tell us?

Uh just basically I I walk my dogs through past that location uh three times a day.

So I morning, afternoon, and night, and uh don't see a nuisance at all from my standpoint.

Obviously, I don't live right next door to the establishment, but there is uh, in my opinion, it's a pretty quiet establishment.

It doesn't cause uh a nuisance from my standpoint.

Okay.

Well, thank you.

Who else?

Okay, um Cheryl Bennett.

Would you like to speak?

Yes, please.

So I'm sorry, go ahead.

Oh, no, that's okay.

Go ahead.

Okay, so I actually currently live at 1792 Camarack Street in South Moon.

But I lived on Norwood Street for 21 years, right near H and H until last fall, and I'm uh back at that property often as I still own it.

So that's why I feel qualified to speak to this issue as a nearby longtime property owner.

But I've never personally experienced any issues with H, nor have I talked to any neighbors who had any issues with them.

I you know, I've never heard an excess of noise or seen anything that would be problematic.

You know, they in my opinion, they run a great small business.

Um, you know, employee people, um, you know, obviously pay their taxes, you know, they're an asset to the neighborhood, you know.

And on a personal note, they've shown themselves to be a more um affordable alternative for body work, you know, kind of um an aside, but um, but you know, just a good alternative for people who um can't afford higher price places or maybe want don't want to file an insurance claim.

But you know, I just I guess I just don't see how um I feel like they're being found guilty until proven innocent in this case, and I don't understand you know how adding these um minor vehicle sales so he can get rid of properties that can't be fixed.

You know, we'll add in need add to any noise or fumes that people are com complaining about.

Um I you know, I just don't understand um you know it doesn't it just isn't um speaking well to me of how supportive of small business Milwaukee is if they're just gonna let a couple of people um you know thwart this this business's uh progress.

All right, thank you.

Okay, anybody else?

Um we also have Dr.

Christine Schwanda um who should be able to speak.

Yes, thank you.

Uh I'm on the same side of the street about four houses down, 3940 South Pine.

Um so I bought the house in 2024.

I actually didn't know that they were a body shop until a few days ago.

Uh I run every day past the business as well as work from home 100% of the time.

Um I'm actually in support because I feel like this would benefit the neighbors who are upset about it because this would be getting vehicles out of the property.

So this would actually reduce the amount of uh like overflow that is currently on the property.

Uh I again I didn't even know that that was the case at the time.

Um, but just thinking about it um logically, uh, the ability to move property off of that location more swiftly would be a benefit to the street and to the business itself.

So that would be promoting the business, helping him uh employ people with such and such as the previous person spoke to, as well as uh reducing the amount of vehicles on the lot at any given time.

So I think that uh being able to do that would be a benefit to everybody on the street.

Thanks.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone else?

I know the alder woman's uh aid was present.

I don't know if she wants to add anything at this point.

Like the alder woman may be on now.

Um we can check and see if she wants to speak.

Um Alder Woman Dmitrievich, would you like to speak on this matter?

This is we're on 40 30 salt vine.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes, okay.

Thank you so much, everybody.

Um, I actually am not going to be saying much more than the two letters that I put in for the two items that I have up.

So I have a letter that is objecting um to this item, and there's neighbors here.

Um thanks for adding that letter to the file.

Um, but I remain uh with my objection that is in a letter on the file.

Okay, thank you.

And then Mr.

Chair, we do have one other person that just raised their hand, Luis Saldivar.

We'd have to swear him in though because he's just fan down fees.

Sure.

Um Luis Salvar, did you were you here for 40 30 South Pine?

Did you want to speak on that item?

You should be able to unmute yourself if you're here to speak.

Mr.

Chair, he has his hand raised, but he's he's still needed.

Well, spent a lot of time on this item.

Um, okay.

Can you hear me?

Yes, hi.

Hi, were you here to speak on 4030 South Pine?

Yes.

Okay.

Did you want to give us your name and mailing address, please, so that we can swear you in?

Yes, my name is Luis Saldimar.

I have to say 653 Norwich Street.

I've been living in this house for about four years.

Hold on, hold on.

Um, could you please raise your right hand so that we can swear you in?

Okay.

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Okay, thank you.

Um, would you like to go ahead and um give us your testimony, please?

Um I've been living in this house for four years, and I see the business there.

And I'll walk also with my wife around those business, and I have no issues, no problem with those businesses uh being working in there.

I don't see no much traffic or noise or any issues at all.

That's what I can say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I want to say if there's any questions from board members, and then we'll give one more moment to counsel and then decide what we're gonna do here.

I had like a just to clarify a few things that were like, there's a lot of things said.

Um this is wholesale license sale.

No, no, it's retail sales.

Okay.

So what are your plans for signage?

For signage, um, I wasn't really planning to put any signage just because again, I wasn't applying to.

So if there was a condition, if this was approved and there was a condition that there be no signage, like flutter flags or anything like that, that would be fine.

I would be fine.

Board member, we do have those in as conditions of approval.

Forgive me.

Uh just for the public uh for the public's clarity.

The days and hours of operation, that's specifically for the used car dealership, and that's not related to the repair garage or the body shop.

Correct.

Thank you.

And let me, with respect to the days and hours of operation.

Why is it nine to five?

Um, why do you have to have hours?

Can you have by appointment only?

Can you have a more restrictive hours just to give additional?

I mean, what what how does that work when you're calling someone if you got to have four wholesale cars?

Come pick them up.

They sell you when they're gonna come, right?

And then so it's so it's retail.

So the hours of operation.

I know, I'm sorry, you're saying that, but you're not having customers walk on the lot to buy cars and drive them off.

Uh so what was the question again?

I'm sorry.

Uh-oh.

I know.

Oh, yeah.

So see, this is what I'm confused.

The hours, okay, okay.

But we're trying to figure out is what it sounds like you're planning on doing is taking vehicles that you cannot repair and present like someone wants to have a new car or a used car to drive because they're they got into a car accident.

You have cars that are can't the bad title or whatever the case may be, and you're wanting them to be sold to an auction or whatever.

Yeah.

So why is it retail on that wholesale?

Maybe you can explain that, guys.

Why is it sounds like what you're trying to do is so the the retail part came because of so the auctions solely would require uh a wholesale license.

But like I said, in the DOT when I'm you know, I put them if I were to put a mechanics lean, if anything were to be left behind, I have to have a privately or public to the uh to individual.

So then that case it would convert into a retail license.

That's why I'm applying already at this point for a retail license.

So I'm mostly gonna be by appointment only online.

Um so you are selling to individuals, not just to people that are buying, gonna buy them from you and sell them at auction.

So my main focus is going to be wholesale auction.

Um, when I'm not everything, I'm buying it from wholesale.

I mean, buying them from wholesale to sell them.

You're not simply taking vehicles that you have of repairs mean on them and selling them.

So it's a it's because it's it's kind of broad.

It's a combination.

It's both is what you're saying.

Yeah, but it's not just hey, this is a uh car that we fixed and they didn't come and claim it, or they didn't pay for it, and so we're going to sell it.

So, really, this truly is it's it's not just um kind of taking your existing business and modifying it to kind of deal with kind of the the inventory that you have through your existing business, it is truly expanding it to say, not only are we dealing with the cars that are already on our lot that I've already taken care of, but I am bringing in new vehicles for the purpose of sales.

Exactly and I see that as in my future plans.

Perhaps that's oh well currently.

I'm asking what you're playing.

Okay, apparently, my currently main focus is mostly wholesale, so like selling it back to the option.

So purchasing and selling them to the not just when I mean selling, I mean like the inventor that's currently being there.

It's just I mean, is that what I'm I just think if I got straight?

There's two there's two things.

There's that selling off the inventory, and then that you can't sell, and then fixing up cars, buying cars at auction, fixing them up, and then selling them from those four spots.

Right.

How many?

How many cars done on that lot can be parked there, so it's not a congested mess.

I mean, that's what we any we could put a condition, any car, this many cars for any reason, period.

That way it constrains you on all of your operations.

I don't know if we can figure that out today.

The plan of operation might need some revision.

Master Chair, I feel like I need greater clarity from this applicant.

It's been very confusing.

What the actual plan is.

If this is going to be wholesale or retail, if we're doing this to address just our inventory, or if we're doing it to expand the business, if it's a combination of all of this.

If what I've read and the testimony I've gotten today, just is not clear, Mr.

Chair.

Um, the alder woman does have another question.

Okay, go ahead.

I'll go in.

Uh thank you.

I see I have the same questions that you have.

That's confusing.

I'm it's still very confusing as to how many cars.

It just feels like if this permission is granted, it could be a large number of cars at any time, and I'm not even understanding the enforcement of it.

This is what the neighbors have been communicating.

Yeah, and that's it well.

They're four car sales is clear, but what I want to know, I would like to hear what an appropriate amount of lot restriction size.

I don't know if that means that we have to get some input from DPW.

I would feel more comfortable going forward if we have some ability to impose some condition on this use that we are overseeing uh that's not a legal non-conforming use that will actually branch out and have a little bit of an impact on the operation as a whole from an enforcement perspective.

If there's a limit, let's just throw a number out there.

Let's say it says 30 cars on the lot for any purpose at any time, and whatever it is.

I'm just giving a hypothetical, that means that you have you know, someone enforcement can drive by there's 40 cars, doesn't matter how many are for sale.

You're in your the it's a it's a cycle um, you know, issue because honestly, what's happening with these is less important than whether it's an intensification.

If we deny this, they can there's low there's no guardrails that that we can impose, it's just whatever uh regular nuisance uh violations or complaints, noise complaints, odor complaints, whatever.

If we want to try to get some control over this operation i would need to have that information to feel comfortable before and a clear understanding of what exactly the plan is and honestly I think the applicant would probably want that I think so too if it's in their best interest if you are operating a portion of your business is non-conforming and you're you're substantially changing it and all of a sudden it opens you up to uh board of zoning appeals related enforcement I think it's in your best interest to think through how does this impact what is already legally protected I'm getting some deep sighing over from DPWs you are so I I mean if I so it might move here I'm talking to the applicant now that's why I agree yes um to obtain a uh the services of a design professional to set up a parking plan because otherwise I'm gonna throw a number out um the other reason why I'm saying it might actually be helpful because I think Pete uh alluded to this earlier um there is a dry aisle between your north property line and uh and the next and the residential property that doesn't belong to you that belongs to the property to the east the contractor you're yeah um and there are vehicles parked in there but those are not yours is my guess is I'm guessing like those belong to the contractor so I I think just for clarity's sake for everybody because there's a lot of clarity seeming to be needed all over the place I mean we need to be clear what is actually your property where does your property end and what is actually available for your perking um that would help me out a lot otherwise I will throw a number out that's that's fine.

No I don't want to so what I would like to what I would like I would like a I do agree with a site a parking plan we need an opinion about appropriate amount of vehicles to be parked on this site um any other thing like you talk somebody mentioned a fence if there's anything that that you're planning on changing make sure that you go through the permit center to figure out if there's any other applications that need to be before us we can deal with this and um revise your plan of operation because you did acknowledge that some of the stuff you thought was kind of related to your other business keep it to your application and certainly we'll want to have an understanding of how they how they're what the interplay is between the two businesses.

But if we I want to have more information before I make a decision and if we deny this or adjourn this nothing changes for anybody you can't sell cars and you can keep doing what you're doing that's bothering the neighbors so we need to get this clarity to figure out this is going to work can I add my two cents in about from BPW land about the fence yeah um I would just as like my competitive from DNS did I would urge caution about promoting a fence because I think where everybody thinks it should go that is not his property right there is a very uh it's a shared driveway right let's let's just deal with that so if you look from the sky you will see a different color you'll see I don't like we're I I under I get I want to hear about this next we there's but we got to hear something that we keep talking about that so the the contractor there so Mr Hernandez's property does not a butt up against Mr.

Karpinski.

There is a swatch of land that they are discussing owned by our tag construction yes now ourtega has to go on to Mr Hernandez's property to get to that swatch of land he has to drive over Mr.

Hernandez's property share driveway please don't interrupt oh listen listen hey enough we're done.

We're gonna take them up.

We're gonna hear this all next time.

Yep.

I want to get motion to adjourn.

Second.

Is there a uh there's a second that I'm secretary board member standard members are not on a bow.

Aye.

Board member Rucker.

Hi.

Board member current hi could experiment some of the why don't they have an occupancy permit?

They're not doing what they're seeking to do with selling cars.

It's not before.

We don't we're hearing about I told you at the beginning, we're hearing we're here about light motor vehicle repair.

They will get that if they get Mozart approval for that use.

None of us have the cars to sell 300%.

Sir, you're gonna have to talk to a lawyer or somebody who explained it to you why that doesn't matter, why that's not what's before us.

I'd explain that at the beginning of the hearing.

Madam Secretary.

Um Vice Chairman Snyski.

Chairman Holberg.

All right.

You understand what we're asking for for the supplemental materials so that we can come back and make a decision based on the true plan.

I understand what you are asking for, yes.

I'm not sure how it's going to work.

Or I I again I continue to hear from the older woman.

I hear I hear the the chair, you just talked about issues when it's been proven in this hearing that there are no issues.

And that I'm I'm counseling.

I do know what you understand what the request is by the board.

So you can come back next time.

Having done those things, there are no issues.

I just I didn't say to tell me with an issue, I asked for a revised site plan.

We asked for a parking plan, uh excuse me, uh revised plan of operation for a parking plan so we can figure out how many vehicles can be parked on this for all of these uses because we can put a condition on that one thing.

So, are you gonna be able to do that or not?

Yes, but we're only asking to park four.

I had cars.

I get all right, we're done.

Next item.

Uh Mr.

Chair, I think we can call the next three together.

Um so the next items are item number 31, 2318 South Austin Street, item number 32, 2324 South Austin Street, and item number 33 is 2332 South Austin Street.

Um, all three of these cases there are requests to construct a multifamily dwelling that does not meet the required South Side setback.

Um, and then I believe the Alder Woman is still online.

Is there anyone else online that is here to speak on 2318, 2324, and 2332 South Austin Street?

If you'd like to speak, please raise your hand.

I believe there was one person that indicated um Miss Churchill, did you want to speak?

You don't have to okay.

Thank you.

Was there anyone else online for this item?

Okay, Mr.

Chair, I don't see anyone else, so we do have Miss Churchill online um to speak.

And then are you the applicants?

Okay.

Could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Bring the mailing address PO box 1652, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201.

Thank you.

And I'm Mike Oates, I'm with Epstein UN Architects at 333 East Chicago Street.

Thank you.

And then um, Miss Churchill, could you just give us your name and mailing address as well, please?

Yes, Madison Churchill, 329A East Lincoln Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 53207.

Thank you, and then um the older woman has uh she has her hand raised to speak on this item as well, Mr.

Chair.

Okay, well I don't we let's hear from the city departments first and then DPW.

I'm just trying to emphasize a fairly unusual condition that we have the plans um along the alley show like there's a seven and a half foot wide area that sort of loops around a house so that we get a 15-foot alley space.

We are requesting that there be an access easement for that area um reported against the property.

Um otherwise it's standard conditions for BBW DNS.

No additional comments uh DCD.

No, this is uh all that's before us is the variance for the shortage and south side setback.

This is a very unusual sort of thing.

Uh it's not your standard south size setback.

Uh, when you have a building that is uh up to 100 feet deep, you only need three feet of setback.

Uh this building has is about uh 276 feet deep.

If I measured uh correctly on this, and the cold is such that once you're beyond that a hundred-foot point, you have to have some additional setback because complicated formula I don't want to get into, but uh kind of the rear end of the south side of the building um doesn't have the required setback, which is more I mean they're providing at least 20 feet of setback down the entire uh south property line, but the way the mathematics of the code are such that they need a little bit more setback than what's there.

Um the building, the you know the first two floors are are kind of for parking and that sort of use, and then the upper floors are kind of shaped kind of as I call it like a capital I, so that it's kind of wide at the front, wide at the back, and narrow in between, and all that area in the neural area also meets you know more than exceeds code, and so there's just this little thing that has to be dealt with.

Um, there is a hardship.

Uh Dawn was making reference to the alley that you've got a residential property that kind of goes halfway through what should be the alley.

The petitioner actually shifted the shifting the building southward a bit to so that people on that alley are not locked by anything, uh and again the problems caused by the property on the north side of the alley, not this petitioner.

So uh, and you know, in shifting the building, that kind of also reduces what was already kind of a small setback requirement.

So we do find that the uh criteria for variance have been met.

Uh the design of the building meets the spirit and intent of the ordinance because it does provide a significant amount of air and light uh into that area.

Uh we feel it's needed for preservations of property rights, and we've got exceptional circumstances and hardship uh kind of with the alley and the nature of the site.

Um and we do not believe that it will create a detriment um part of this area where they need the variances for a part of the building that's that's going into a hill that basically um almost you know at greater below grade, so that kind of reduces the impact.

And we therefore do recommend uh approval of the requested conventional varieties.

Thank you, Ed.

Um did she swear you guys in?

Yeah, I just yeah, I was gonna say, okay, I'm I'm sorry, we've got a little confused there.

Um, and Miss Churchill, can we also swear you in as well?

Can we have all three of you please raise your right hands?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give?

Is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

And then Mr.

Chair, um Alder Woman Demetri, if you'd like to speak first, if you can.

Yeah, I was gonna see if you wanted to move.

Did you comment speak?

No, she's self-muted.

Alder Woman, would you?

Oh, there you go.

Yes, are you ready for me?

If you want, I do you want to go right now or do you want to hear from yeah, it's up to you.

Idia said you wanted to speak first.

I do if that's okay.

Um thank you, and I'll be brief actually.

So this is different than the other one, obviously, in many different ways.

Um the former item on Pine.

I had a letter of objection.

Here I have a neutral letter.

Um, but I did want to inform you that as you deliberate here, um, that we had two.

So you can see how kind of divided this is two public neighborhood meetings that I helped co-host at two libraries in the district, as the letter states.

Um, and it was quite divided.

Um, so I wanted to make sure I at least uplifted those concerns, made sure I formally let you know there was division.

Um, there are obviously um a mixture of objections and support in this file.

Um, so I just wanted to make sure I carried that forward, and I thank you for your work.

I wish um I was able to say more, but even myself as of today, um, I am currently undecided as well, and I'm trying to um listen as much as I can intently.

We had the two meetings.

We've also made some parking changes that I introduced at the council for the two-sided parking.

Um, but there remains um to be some concerns, and I'll let the neighbors continue to speak for themselves, but I did have to um add to the record that there was that division, and we had those two meetings.

So thank you so much for your work.

Alderman, can I ask you a question?

Did you would you uh characterize the division as being centered around the concept of like the building, the multifamily building, or the actual setback?

Is it it was more it was it more about like what was being constructed versus how close it was going to be to the property line?

Well, it was a mixture of a couple things, and I'm I'm trying to make sure they're only within your jurisdiction.

Um, Rackham obviously looked at the financing.

There were some discussions of design setback patios, um, height, um, and I am not a boza expert like you all are, but I believe there's a couple of neighborhood neighbor, excuse me, um, objections based on those matters as well.

Um, the division was just, you know, on the larger issue that I think the neighbors are still struggling with um there's a couple of houses that are just currently single or I think duplex that are boarded up, and this is a pretty substantial change to a multi-level um over 100 units.

Um, so it will change you know that corner significantly.

There were things that are out of your purview, like parking and congestion and mitigation, but I think within if I understand the scope, um it's really on the design, and there were some questions developers answered them, but there still remains some discontent um as well as support for this project, and I'm wish I could um give you more information, but I myself, as Alder am undecided at this time.

Okay, no, that is helpful, and we certainly as always appreciate uh your input, so thank you.

Um was there was it was Miss Churchill?

Is that who else was in there?

Okay, um, and yeah, go ahead.

Hi there.

Um I'm just a concerned neighbor, those those properties are right in my backyard.

Um, most of the people on this street have been long-term renters.

Um, so we have a little community here.

Um, I've spoken to other neighbors, um, I strongly oppose this.

Uh Lincoln as it is, is busy enough, plus those three houses are well, two of the three houses actually.

The third one doesn't have much of a backyard, but those are some of the largest backyards of single-family homes left in Bayview, and the only reason they're sitting there is because they haven't been put up for sale.

Um, and I I believe I'm not sure if I can ask a question.

Uh the same company that owns these houses owns the Clemens factory across the street.

Is that correct?

Yes, why are we destroying three single family homes instead of the factory that's been sitting there rotting for years?

Well, and you can answer it if you want to.

But I mean, the people can purchase the property, it's really the the the construction of a of a large multifamily apartment building would be would be allowed.

It's the variance that they're seeking, the setback.

That's why I was asking Alderman Dmitrievich about like the header and the tone of the neighborhood meeting because I suspect, and I wasn't there, of course, but I suspect that there were people more concerned about a big apartment building being built rather than the sort of nuanced thing that's being sought before us today, which is the setback uh shortages.

It doesn't change the fact that the people that people that are upset about the construction of an apartment building have very valid concerns, but it doesn't, it's outside of the scope of the consideration of the dimensional variance in in many ways.

We certainly have to consider the project as a whole, but they could change their design and just build something, and we wouldn't, and it just wouldn't matter.

We we would they would just be able to do it.

Um, and I think what Mr.

Richardson was was kind of advising is from the department of city and development's perspective.

These sought the variances that they're seeking are actually if they were gonna build a building, it would actually be of benefit to the neighbors.

Uh well, just to the neighborhood that uh instead of just adhering to the code specifically.

Um, I mean, that's that was kind of what I took.

And we we've seen similar cases to this.

I can think of places where to build um in a way that would not require a variance would actually create a situation that would be maybe less desirable.

Right.

And and I get it, like these cases are always hard when they're um like the main part of the property is something that you can or the main part of the project is something that can be done by right, and what we're being asked to weigh in on is like really small and technical.

Um, but you know, as I look at this and as I hear kind of the concerns from or the um information shared by DPW and by DCD, I think it's really clear that like this variance makes sense um for for this layout, and um I have no objection to it.

Well, and let's just give you brief, just briefly address you know the per we have some people listening.

Um the reasons you're seeking these variants is on this project to make it work better in the neighborhood from your perspective.

Whichever one.

Um with without the variance, the owner would not be able to develop the building that they want and get full use of their property.

So we've looked at drive lands and parking stall depths for the parking, and we've compressed it as much as we can to make the building as narrow as we can, and we're actually moving it to the south to provide access to the properties on the alley, which are blocked by I guess you call it a non-conforming lot, so it building has to be pushed to the south, and when that's done, that's what causes the need for the variance.

So it's really just to maximize the use of the lot.

Okay.

Any other questions?

I'll make a motion for uh having found that the criteria necessary to grant this uh variance request have been that based on the evidence and the file testimony submitted.

Uh I would make motion to approve this to run with the land.

I'll second.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell, aye, board member Rocker, board member Current?

Opposed.

Boardman, sorry, Vice Chairman Smysky.

Hi.

And Chairman Lomberg.

All right.

Okay.

Thank you.

We have one more.

We're obviously behind.

Let's finish item 34.

We'll take a break.

Item number 34, 2353 West Fond du Lac Avenue.

Request occupy the premises as a daycare center for 53 children per shift, ages infant to 13 years operating Monday through Friday from 6 a.m.

to midnight.

Um, and are you the applicant, ma'am?

Yes, I am.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 2353 West Fond du Lac?

Um raise your hand if you'd like to speak.

Okay, and Mr.

Chair, I'm not seeing any raised hands.

Could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Oh, my name is Monique, and my mailing address is 3731 North 36th Street, you won't keep Wisconsin, my three to one.

Thank you.

And could you raise your right hand, please?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so question.

The ebook that I am looking at, there are no DPW comments.

Is that correct?

No.

Don, I think if you slowly scan down, it might show up automatically.

Yeah, I don't know.

I I sent an email earlier where I just sent the case summary, so I didn't give you an updated one.

Do you want me to you want me to read your comments for you sure if you wind up doing it.

Okay.

Or I can give you my case summary.

Okay.

I don't feel emailed that.

Okay, sorry.

You know, um, okay.

So this looks three.

I have three conditions of that.

Yes.

Yeah, last part of that's good.

Alright, all right.

So one thing, um, just to emphasize that the site plan submitted to the boat's office on May 6th, 2026 is approved.

They adjusted the location of the dumpster that adjusted to actually show the property lines in the right location.

And that we are requested the loading zone DPW is requesting that a load zone be established on West Ash Street.

And ideally loading and unloading of children should happen on hash.

I didn't put a condition in there specifically because very well you know you gotta go somewhere.

So that's fine but you know knowing how busy Thomas Avenue is that's the reason for that.

The last item is not a condition but I would like to mention the ramp in front of the building um there is a my understanding is that there is order on that.

It kind of looks like a water slide right now.

So I understand that the building owner may have constructed that it's in this game.

But would it be that it's an exit door anyway but she's what I saw I talked to her about it okay if it was an exit door with a water site that might be kind of well I don't know that's why not leave it just so that you were in there in the public right of way.

So in addition to permits from the development center plan exam you are also going to need to get the EW permits for her or any modifications to that rank.

Okay.

Additionally because you're in close proximity to the street corner um you will need to talk to DPW about how that interplays.

Okay.

Okay.

I'm gonna pass that back.

Okay DNS no additional comments DCD nothing additional all right do we have we don't have any comments from Alderman Stamper on this one board members do we have any questions or concerns with this application.

Sounds like she's already aware of the issues of DPW raise and wanting to fix them anyway so um just take a second this looks like a one year lease or the what yeah it's just one year.

Are you yeah are you doing a daycare anywhere else now yeah so how how just how long you've been doing this uh for over four years for you I I was in it at my house you know your house now you need a place you got enough clients yeah all right how much are you gonna have to I mean I is there any uh remodeling or anything you have to do in this church area is it kind of ready to go like if you got an approval how long before you can start having kiddos there um I actually have to do the um I didn't start anything yet because I was going back and forth with you guys um about these like this so I have to put an extra bathroom in the sink in there and yeah so you think like by the end of the summer you could be ready to go about or something I'm just trying to get a feel for when you yeah by the end of the summer okay yeah all right board members just for sure I'll make motion for having found that the criteria necessary to grant the special use that the method I'll make a motion to uh approve this for a period of two years with conditions in the hearing summary second madam secretary board member St.

Arnold well board member Rocker board member current aye vice chairman sweinsky and chairman alder hi all right thank you all right we'll take about a 10 minute break I know we're behind but we gotta give Karen a rest and we'll be back thank you that was all you did on too much Yeah, that's a good idea.

Okay, Karen, are you back?

I am here, ready to go.

All righty.

Molly said, all right.

We I think every single one of you is sitting in here already since we're running so far behind.

So you probably understand the drill.

When we call your item, come forward, and um we'll hear from the city departments and we'll hear from anyone else who's here to speak on the item.

Uh hopefully, well, I'm not even gonna say anything, because I want to just not jinx it, but we'll uh try to get on with our program a little bit uh more exceditiously.

Next item, please.

Uh Mr.

Chair, before I call the next item, would you like me to read through the adjournments?

Because I think some of the people that are here weren't here when I read them earlier.

Yeah, I think it was items thirty-five through forty-four or adjourned.

No, I'm sorry, go ahead.

So item number thirty-nine, sixty-four thirty-five West Capitol Drive has been adjourned.

Item number forty-one, thirty-six thirty-one, North 76th Street has been adjourned.

And item number fifty, sixty-three hundred West Brett Mountain Road has been adjourned as well.

Um, so if you're here for any of those items, they will not be heard today.

Um, so our next item that we're calling is item number thirty-five, uh 4915, North Twenty-fourth Street.

Request to occupy the premises as a 24-hour family daycare home for eight children per shift, infant to 13 years of age operating Monday through Friday.

And then also, just for the record, board members saying our bell had to be excused for the remainder of the meeting, but we do still have four board members and have a quorum and can continue.

Um, and then um, are you the the applicant, ma'am?

Okay, thank you.

Um, is there anyone online that is here to speak on 4915 North Twenty Fourth Street?

Okay, and Mr.

Chair, I do not see any raised hands.

Ma'am, could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Monica's got four nine one five North 24th Street, Milwaukee.

Thank you.

And could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Thank you.

The Department of Neighborhood Services finds the criteria for special use under two ninety-five three eleven of the city code has not been met.

This is a request to operate a family daycare 24 hours a day in residential neighborhood.

DNS does not support 24-hour daycare operations in residential neighborhoods as it creates potential noise problems associated with late night early morning drop-off.

Um, and pick up, excuse me.

Operating a 24-hour business from a residential unit also changes the use to a commercial activity.

And then we do have our standard uh daycare type uh conditions should the board choose to approve this.

Okay, thank you.

DCD.

We're gonna uh slightly modify our condition regarding submitting a copy of the Wisconsin daycare license.

Uh that should be uh to request that they submit a copy of the license that reflects the expanded hours of operation for the site.

The petitioner uh does have a license, I believe currently for operating family daycare home and daytime hours.

All right.

Thank you.

But you're maintaining the play space, the no yes 3 a.m.

place base usage.

Fair enough.

Um is this just a situation where you have clients that need third shift child care and you already operate and you're seeking to allow uh access to those families as well?

Yes.

How long have you been doing daycare work?

Or two years.

And just at this at your residence, yes.

I'll you know, I sort of say this every time, but there always are the DNS always kind of has a concern about the possibility of a sort of a commercial use or a business operating in a residential area, but we as we daycares do tend to be pretty low minimally impact, have minimal impact on neighbors because these kids are sleeping during the the hours, and I suspect that um that will be the same with your operation.

We uh generally treat all of them the same.

Do board members have any concerns with this particular application?

You're seeing it as being distinguishable from other in-home daycares that we have seen.

If not, make motion, sure.

Having found that the criteria necessary to grant this special views have been met based on the evidence from the file testimony received.

I'd make motion to approve this for a period of two years with any conditions in the hearing summary.

A second, board member records aye, board member Curran.

Aye, Vice Chairman Smythe.

Hi and Chairman Womberg.

All right, thank you.

I want a house page.

I don't want to say it.

Oh, you can send it to the Boza office if you want.

Okay.

You're welcome.

Unless anyone in here wants her to say it.

Take care, thank you.

Item number 36.

2817 West Carmen Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a contractor shop.

Is the applicant here for 2817 West Carmen Avenue?

Or online, okay.

Is there anyone else online to speak on 2817 West Carmen?

Okay.

Um James, did you want to give us your name and mailing address, please?

Uh my name is James Urkey.

My mailing address is 1026 714th Street, West Hallis, Wisconsin, 53214.

Thank you.

And then could you please raise your right hand?

Yep.

You affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, it is.

Mr.

D is that I H R C K E.

That's correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

DPW.

Nothing to add.

DNS.

No additional comments.

D C D.

Yeah, this case was approved back in uh November of 2024 and was granted a 15-year approval, but they did not uh obtain the uh their permanent permits within the one year that's part of the uh Port of Zone Appeals bylaws.

So this is basically a reaffirmation of what was permit previously approved, and we recommend uh uh identical approval.

Anything different, Mr.

Ur erkey in your plan of operation from No, I just no, I just had read the thing wrong where I got all the permits, but not the occupancy permit in the right amount of time so okay nothing different, it's the same.

Okay, and then Ed, go ahead.

Yeah, uh we do recommend that they be granted uh given two years to get their permits.

Okay, so what's unless board members have a concern we've already looked at this we've approved it it's the same plan um there's a recommendation by dc e that we expand the the time for you to get your permit to two years which will probably help prevent this this mistake from happening again so you don't have to refile um board members any concerns with that recommendation or uh just doing the reapproval for 15 years uh mr chair i would recommend uh 15 years from uh november 7th of 24 okay keeping sorry mr chair uh do you want to do the 15 years from the date of the decision because i yeah that's what i think that so basically sir we're just gonna like hit the reset button and give you a little bit more time to get your occupancy is that does that work yeah that's fine whatever you guys want to do it like the way back machine so you'll go back to um your original approval date all right sounds good all right uh is there a motion mr chair funded the criteria for the variance and met based upon um all of the information that we had previously reviewed and the technical review by staff second time around i will make a motion to approve this um for a period to expire november 4th oh wait no 15 years from november 7th 2024 um with the addition additional um condition that there's two years to obtain occupancy permit second mr chair the can i just give the actual date of the decision i'm sorry it was november 11 2039 that the decision was signed do you want to run it through that date uh yeah through ele uh november 11th 2039 is that right now i'm just kidding yep margin here okay all right uh go ahead thank you all right board member rocker i board member current aye vice chairman someone and chairman okay uh i thank you sir all right thank you have a good one you too next item sir chair did you want to call these together or separate since they're two uses like I think we can do all the yeah well she can let's just do them separate but this is she can just remain in the chair okay sure item number thirty seven fifty two forty nine north thirty fifth street request to continue occupying the premises as an elementary and secondary school for 200 children first shift four to fourteen years ages four to fourteen years operating Monday through Friday from 6 a.m to 7 p.m.

And is there anyone online that is here for 5249 North 35th Street this uh case is for the elementary and secondary school please raise your hand if you'd like to speak on if you're online and would like to speak okay and I don't see any raised hands for anyone online could you give us your name and mailing addresses please and please speak to my Jocelyn Hall.

5958 North 38th Street New Walking Wisconsin 53209.

Uh key recarter 7642 West Leon Terrace UNB Milwaukee Wisconsin 53218.

Thank you and could you both please raise your right hands do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're give or about to give is a truthful truth and nothing but the truth.

All right DPW nothing but DNS no additional comments DCD nothing additional right so we're gonna what we're talking about now is the school portion.

Well let's see first if board members had any questions and the materials how long was the last approval I think Ed's looking it up I'm you got a give me just a second.

Okay, so I don't know.

I have a March 8th of 2018.

That's when it was last approval no they got a five-year approval about that time.

Uh the that date of the decision or sorry, the expiration for that decision would be March 14th, 2023.

So it's a five-year approval on it.

This is just the same plan of operation.

Yeah.

Um okay, well.

Yeah, go ahead.

Having found that the conditions for special use have been met.

I motion to grant this for a period of five years.

So board member rocker.

I board member current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Smicy.

Right.

And Chairman Mombert.

All right.

Okay.

Let's do the next item.

Item number 38, 5249 North 35th Street.

Request to occupy a portion of the premises as a daycare center for 15 children per shift, ages three to six years of age three to six years, operating Monday through Friday from 7 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

And I'm just gonna check again.

Is there anyone online that's here for the day care of this site?

5249 North 35th Street.

And no one appears to be raising their hand online for this item either, Mr.

Chair.

All right, well, same appearances.

Uh you're still under oath.

BBW.

DNS.

No additional comment.

DCD, nothing additional.

And this, um this is a new addition to your to the school uh the the plan of operation for the school, correct?

Um does anybody have any reason to think that this shouldn't just line up.

Okay, yeah.

Unless there's an o unless there's any questions.

I mean your plan of operation is straightforward in both.

I know you made some revisions to what you had previously done with the gym and all that, but it was pretty straightforward in my review, and it sounds like the other board members too.

So if there is a motion, I think it's just make them the same.

I'll make the motion having found that the criteria for special use have to be met.

Um I um motion to grant this for a period of five years.

I'll second.

Board member rocker, aye.

Board member current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Smyski.

And Chairman Ollberg.

Aye.

All right, thank you.

Item number 39, 6435 West Capitol Drive.

That item has been adjourned.

Our next item is 7609 West Capitol Drive.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a motor vehicle filling station.

This matter was adjourned from the April 2nd, 2026 public hearing by the board due to a failure of appearance by the applicant.

Um is anyone online for this item?

I see Alderman Westmoreland is online.

Is the applicant in the audience or online?

Yeah, Mr.

Chair, I'm not seeing the applicant raising their hand online.

Um well, I guess um Alderman or Alderman West Merlin.

Have you had yeah I know we've got your letter and that you've uh you were okay with this and and requesting a three-year approval.

Have you had court communication with this applicant recently?

No, I don't think that board should approve anything.

I mean at what point, at what point do we say you know, you can't continue to ignore and we can't continue to accommodate.

I mean, this is the second time.

Um I mean, obviously, do what you please, but I'm I'm not here to say that I can support this considering that's why and that's why I'm asking, because sometimes it's it's a renewal and there's not really issues, but there sort of were some complaints.

If if you were reporting back that that you've had no issues and that this is a good business and it's it's simply a renewal, we could proceed, but I if if you haven't had any communication and and you've got some concerns and they're not here and you're here wanting to maybe uh have some more information, um I think it would be appropriate to they've been there has been uh notice sent and it is not uh there's not not an appearance today, so what is the board's pleasure?

Motion to adjourn and I send a letter to the applicant indicating that if they I think we did that last time.

Flight loss tonight.

I'm just missing dismiss all right motion to dismiss.

Second, okay, madam secretary, uh board member rocker, board member current, aye, vice chairman smysky.

Okay, and Chairman Lomberg.

Aye.

Um, so if the applicant wants to renew interest in this, they can refile, re um, you know, just start over.

So, I've got a question for Pete.

If you guys can still hear me.

Yeah, go ahead.

So now what happens?

They don't have a bowl of approval.

Uh if their occupancy permit is expired, we'll be writing in order to obtain an occupancy permit or discontinue use.

Okay, sounds good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next item.

Next item 3631 North 76th Street has been adjourned.

Um, item number 42, 3740 North Bratney Street, request to occupy the premises as a health club.

And I see someone walking up.

Is there anyone online for this item for 3740 North Ratney Street?

Please raise your hand if you'd like to speak.

Okay.

And I am not seeing any raised hands.

Could you please give us your name and mailing address?

Yes, Jesse Schaub 5060 North de Bercy Boulevard.

Thank you.

And you're here um as the applicant?

Yes, okay.

And then could you please raise your right hand?

Um did you give your emailing address?

I'm sorry.

What's that?

Did you give your new mailing address?

I'm sorry.

I didn't get it okay.

Uh do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do, thank you.

All right, DPW.

DNS, no additional comments.

Uh excuse me, DCD, nothing additional.

Are there any questions?

Um board members.

Is it an expansion?

Uh I'm moving several buildings down.

I have had my location for three and a half years just down the street.

We're just looking for a little more space.

How long is your lease?

Um we have five years with the option to to go to ten, yes.

What kind like is how much is going to be involved with getting this new space ready?

Like when would you be able to open for business and transfer everything up?

Sure, pretty simple.

We're a CrossFit gym, so we we just need some ads and the only thing we do need is um to build some bathrooms in our in our space.

So we're waiting to do that until we had approval, but we have architects with plans ready to go.

Right.

I'll make a motion.

Go ahead.

So having found that the conditions for special use have been met.

Um I motion to approve this for a period of five years with any conditions in the conditions here.

Second, Madam Secretary.

Board Member Rucker.

Aye.

Board member Current, aye.

Vice Chairman Smithy.

And Chairman Lomberg.

Aye.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much.

Take care.

Item number 44, 2420 West Chambers Street.

Request to occupy the premises as a group home for six occupants.

Is there anyone online?

Did I remember?

Sorry.

My papers are out of order.

Matt, you are not gonna let that happen.

No, my papers were switched around.

Mine were two.

I was like this forty-three.

Item number 43, 2851 North Holton Street.

Request to construct and occupy the premises as a social service facility with an accessory use parking lot that does not meet the minimum required landscaping.

This is a renewal of a previous case, BCZA-24-00443.

And then we'll just check is there anyone online for 2851 North Holton that would like to speak?

We do have one person, Makita Brown.

Are you here for 2051 North Holton?

No.

Sorry.

Okay.

No problem.

Thank you.

All right.

I don't see anyone else with raised hands.

Could you give us your names and mailing addresses, please?

Lisa Oker, L Y S S A O L K E R.

And the address is 4521 North Kramer Street, Whitefish Bay, 53211.

Vincent North V I N C E N T N O T H.

My personal address or the address of kinship.

Just where you can receive mail.

I'm gonna give kinship's address, which is 2610 North Martin Luther King Drive.

I three two one two.

Thank you.

And both of you please read your hands.

You affirm under all that the testimony you're about to give is a truth behold truth and nothing but the truth.

I do.

Thank you.

All right.

DPW.

Nothing to add.

DNS.

No additional comments.

DCD.

This is another case that was initially approved back in December of 2024 for a period of 25 years.

And unfortunately, they were not able to get their permits in time.

So it's just kind of a reapproval of the previous case, and we do also recommend that they be granted uh allowed uh two years in order to get their permits.

And what was the date of the what would have been the prior expiration date?

Uh just a moment, Mr.

Square.

Or does it does that really not matter in this instance?

The case was heard on December 5th.

Um I just didn't know if there was a to keep the consistency of the prior approval, just kind of they were granted 20 years to expire on December 12, 2044.

Okay.

Any concerns with the recommendations by DCD?

Yeah, we had so if if you wanted to, yeah, I think it would make sense to just grant it to expired December 12th, 2044, a two-year window this time.

I think that's what we yeah, I think that's what had happened.

What we did on that one, and permits.

Two years, Mr.

Chair.

I believe the dimensional variance was to run with the land, the spot I use was to fire.

That makes sense.

Do them, however, if you want them together, you want to do one at a time, doesn't matter.

Okay, whatever, whatever you want, finding that the conditions for dimensional variance have been met.

Um, I motion to have it run with the land.

I'll do them separate.

Second.

Board member rocker, aye.

Board member current.

Aye, vice chairman smice, and chairman lumber.

Okay, and then finding that the conditions for special use have been met.

Um, I motion to have it run through December 12th of 2044, um, with any conditions in the conditions with any conditions in the summary.

And are you also just gonna ask?

They have two years, and that would be also for the dimensional variance, dimensional various as well, which is questioning that.

Well, I think that both of them.

I think it has to be on both.

Okay, and then a two-year um term for permits for the dimensional variance and special use.

Second, board member rocker.

Aye.

Board member current, vice chairman spysky.

Sorry.

Chairman Mulbert.

Aye.

And just to be clear, I think all board members heard, board member Rutgers.

Um addition that both the dimensional variance and the special use.

There will be a two-year window so that we can avoid uh an additional trip back so you can have plenty of time to get your occupancy and begin this project.

So thank you and good luck.

Thank you.

Now we're gonna call item number 44.

Uh 2420 West Chamber Street.

Refus to occupy the premises as a group home.

Yeah.

Right.

Okay.

Item number 44.

2420 West Chamber Street.

Request to occupy the premises as a group home for six occupants.

Is there anyone online for 2420 West Chambers Street?

Um Miss Brown.

Are you here for this item?

Okay.

Is there anyone else for for 2420 West Chambers?

Okay.

And Miss Brown, could you just give us your name and mailing address, please?

Makisha Brown, 2420 West Chamber Street, Milwaukee West Pass and 53206.

Thank you.

And can you please raise your right hand?

Sure.

You affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh DPW.

The evidence.

No digital cabinet.

DCD.

Nothing additional.

Just taking a second to look at this letter.

Sort of had the approval of umani united leadership.

Their endorsement, I guess.

Yes.

And that was sent to us by Alderman Jackson's office.

So communication from the Alder that there's community support, which is a good thing.

Do board members have specific questions for Ms.

Brown.

Ms.

Brown, are you do you currently operate a group home anywhere?

Um no.

Was there um I just nobody has raised any concerns, but I just want to be clear because we don't have a hazards letter from the um state.

As you do you are you service serving any children who are under delinquency orders, or is this for all I know you've mentioned all the other reasons, but I just wanted to make sure I understood fully who the client cell would be.

So we have to submit the application to receive the hazard um document, and I'm still just waiting.

So we're just trying to see is this gonna pass the board.

Okay, because just because they the residences you've described are from RAP, BCF, CPS, safe and sound, CLTS.

We're not you're not see you're not going to be seeking or are you gonna be seeking to have delinquent children under delinquent order delinquency orders?

It's it's I just want to know.

I'm not may not be a problem.

I'm just trying to make it clear.

No, okay, all right.

Very good.

Um board members.

I'm sure I'll make motion here.

Having found that the criteria necessary to grant the special use having that based on the evidence and the file testimony received, I'd make a motion to approve this for a period of three years with conditions in the hearing summary.

I'll second.

Board member rucker, aye, board member Current, aye, vice Chairman Smyski.

Hi.

And Chairman Oliver.

Hi.

All right.

Thank you.

Congratulations good luck.

Thank you.

All right.

Got a little bit back on track.

It's seven o'clock, we're gonna start our 615 calendar now.

Okay.

Item number 45.

1115 South 34th Street.

Request to allow three parking spaces located within the front yard.

Is there anyone online for this item?

Again, this is 1115 South 34th Street.

Okay, and I don't see any raised hands online.

Could you give us your names and mailing addresses, please?

Yes, my name is one of these.

This uh my address, this uh 11 feet, uh Salos 34 street.

Okay, thank you.

And then your uh name and mailing address, please.

Okay.

And it able can done it.

Okay, thank you.

Are you and you're here in support?

Okay, okay.

Uh well, well, yeah, go ahead and get them sworn.

Can you both please raise your right hands?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Okay, we this is you know, we've kind of familiar with this, we've been back a few times.

Let's just hear from the city departments because I know you've made some revisions, so let's hear from BPW.

Does recognize that the applicant does have hardship due to the placement of the house at the back of the property?

PPW does not agree that the hardship is sufficient to allow more than two off street parking spaces in similar circumstances at other properties.

DPW has been supportive of allowing up to two parking spaces within a front yard, so long as the spaces do not encroach onto neighboring properties and vehicles are parked wholly on private property.

DPW notes that the applicant applied for a publicly driveway permit on August 15, 2024.

The EWBR was denied, and they pose a review on August 23rd, 254.

While it is not clear when the concrete parking sled was constructed, TPW knows that the applicant has been using the parking sled prior to obtaining necessary controls.

Vehicles jumped the street curve and drive up at the tree border to access the parking sled, it processed vehicles have been damaging the tree border and tracking mud over the public sidewalk creating a hazard for pedestrians.

These actions are not protective of public safety and our detriment.

DNS reiterate as policy, the Department of Neighborhood Services does not support requests for parking in the front yard, noise, fumes, headlights, and vibrations associated with motor vehicles in close proximity to neighboring property windows, poses a detriment to the neighboring properties.

We do have a couple conditions to the board approval.

Okay, and DCD.

Nothing additional.

One was I think your neighbor, I don't know which direction, but if you're looking at your driveway to the left, was concerned about how close it was to his steroid retaining wall, and then there was this utility or light pole or whatever that was like in the middle kind of of the driveway on the right side, and then there's no curb cut.

So I just want to be what did and then we we asked for you to kind of make some changes.

Essentially, there's still DNS will still have an objection to front yard parking, but if that driveway was narrowed out, narrowed enough so it's one car, two cars stacked, not too wide, and there's a you'd have to get this you'd have to get the herb cut permit to do that.

Um and it was maybe brought in one of the ways you can narrow it is taking it out so it's not so that ball isn't in the way and taking it a little bit away from your neighbor's house.

I guess I maybe I just didn't look at this clearly, but I wasn't clear from the the new plan submitted.

Did you do those things?

Did you did you narrow it?

Have you changed it at all from when it was previously in front of us, or did you just was that drawing just what you would do if we approved it?

Does that make sense?

Maybe one of the departments has any is the NS been out there.

Is it the same exact driveway as before?

Uh we've not been back uh since the October 24 photos.

Uh I think for Mr.

Chairman, if without putting words in the applicant's mouth, what I'm seeing on a thing dated 128 2026, a drawing, I should say, right?

Give me it's saying 10 foot wide.

The uh the photos I took in 24, that is a at least 20 foot wide right.

So I guess the question is it uh have they have they in fact reduced that 20 foot wide to 10 foot?

I don't have an answer.

Okay, so so you just you didn't want to cut concrete and do anything until you found out what we were gonna say.

Is that right?

So your drawing, if we approve this, you would go out and you would make this, you would cut the concrete on and do this for your driveway.

Yes.

Yeah, this these uh people for for the contractor that stuck me.

There's not borrow.

Um, there's nothing to change.

There's port for the approach.

Um, this yeah, this put it in the middle for two cars.

There's one and uh in the front and one in the back.

So they don't have to pour any new concrete, they're gonna do the approach and then they're gonna cut the sides off and take the concrete out from the sides.

Yes.

I mean, from my perspective, board members, this is what we were trying to.

We're we're trying to seek this.

I think that he's made significant efforts, and I I understand why he didn't want to make any actual changes until he came back.

So I would say that we've gotten we're almost there.

Go ahead.

All right, so one thing that I do have concern is that I mean we have a 40 foot deep slab.

However, he's measuring public sidewalk, that's not the actual property line, so that is a concern from PPW.

So the property line is from the face of the street curve back 15 feet.

He's missing five feet.

You think he's not gonna be able to do two cars?

Isn't it?

Well, that's the concern.

Is he gonna be in the brighter five?

That would be a DPW concern.

So I feel like we would want to be sure that you understand that where you're where this edge of your sidewalk that's closest to your house.

Yeah, that's 10 feet from the street, right?

Yeah, you have to make sure any cars you park in your driveway are five or another five feet close to your house.

There, there's nothing in the uh driveway inside.

There's not if you pull that microphone closer, sir.

Pull the microphone closer, please.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, this there's me as the parking for the the car in the post.

There's it's not just on the approach, it's not just not on the sidewalk, it's for a five more feet.

Yeah, does that make sense?

You understand?

Yes, okay.

Well then, I mean, I don't know if it sounds like it sounds like you're you you've made the changes.

We certainly appreciate it.

Um well, right, right.

You've made a design that will be that will fit the spirit and intent and allow you to have parking in your front yard because you don't it's just you have the setback house.

So we we appreciated it.

I think your neighbor uh appreciate probably appreciates it too that you've made some efforts to pull away from his um walkway.

So board members.

I'll make a motion here having found that the criteria necessary to grant this dimensional variance have been met uh based by uh especially on the revised plan that was submitted uh on January uh 28th, uh 2026.

I would make motion to uh grant this to run with all hand.

Second, board member Acker?

Aye.

Board member current, aye.

Vice Chairman Smyski.

Aye.

And Chairman Rollin.

Aye.

Okay, thank you guys.

Take care.

Thanks.

And item number 46, 2932 West Forest Holm Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a contractor's yard that does not meet the minimum required landscaping.

This matter was previously adjourned from the April 2nd, 2026 consent agenda at the request of the applicant.

Staff's recommendation without the benefit of any oral testimony having been taken on the matter was for a five-year approval.

Um I just want to check.

Is there anyone online that is here to speak on 2932 West Forest Home Avenue?

Okay.

Don't see any raised hands.

Are you the applicant, sir?

I am.

Okay.

Could you please give us your name and mailing address?

Thank you.

And can you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Thank you.

Mr.

Bowman, um, well, we know it was already there not gonna be any objections to the actual application, but we'll have you go through the spiel DPW, uh ENS No additional DCE.

Nothing additional.

Okay.

Um so you just wanted to see if you can get more time, basically.

This I I gotta say, I've never seen this before.

Lots to come back.

It's like okay.

But yeah, go ahead.

You I get it, you've been there a long, long time.

And there's I don't have any plans on going here.

Really haven't changed what we've been doing or how we're doing it.

Yeah, and so we'd like to have a permanent occupants.

Understand.

Um look, I don't have generally when you're talking about uses permits, it's there we there usually is a time limit on it, just it could be long, but um that's just just because those things can change.

You somebody, you know, you won't be there forever.

Um I don't know.

What do board members think about a longer approval?

I mean, when is the last you you how many times have you come back?

Like four or five times for renewals?

My notes go back to um probably the early 2000s, uh yeah.

They came in actually around uh 2012, I believe.

Um there were some issues uh a number of years ago, but uh I haven't seen any issues probably since 2018.

And I do remember this case going back to 2012, and it was somewhat of a mess back then, and he's corrected himself very nicely over the years, he's improved the building and the site.

Uh I don't have any uh qualms approving this for another period of five years.

If I may, in 2012, we've been there I think 13 years uh with one occupancy, and from what I bought the building from the city of Milwaukee.

Yeah, and I think I mean the question is this would have been approved for likely would have been approved for five years anyway, is on consent agenda.

Is there any does anyone have an objection to doing longer?

I generally I wouldn't I don't we wouldn't approve something like this the dimensional variance perhaps, but not the special use to run with the land, which is what he's requested.

But uh there's a long history and like you said, he's improved it.

I don't have an objection to longer, but he wants it to be the last time he ever has to come in front of the role, not on the special use.

What do you I can I can grant the dimensional variance to run with the land?

Uh but the special use I believe needs to stay at at least uh reviewable period in this case five years, not proposing five years, Mr.

Chair.

Uh there is kind of an issue of making sure there's landscape maintenance and whatnot.

So I would recommend against a run of the land on that.

I mean, it's obviously gonna need some kind of um, you know, something to work with this, but it could very easily get out of shape really quickly.

Okay, so I'm modifying my motion for both the dimensional variance and the special use to be uh uh approved for a period of five years with conditions in the hearing summary.

Second, all right, board member Rucker, aye, board member current.

Well, yes, is there what is there?

Is there a do you have an issue with that motion you want to address?

I mean, I'm personally I'm okay with it going a little bit longer.

I think I mean there's a motion, so I I'll say no to the motion.

But then that's well, we hit less unless Henry wants to make it longer.

If if if I say no, then he's stuck and he's really screwed.

So I'm not gonna do that.

But there's a motion on the table and we're in the middle of voting.

Five years and seconded.

Um you s you seconded it, Marjorie.

Yeah, second.

All right, Chairman Lomber.

Aye.

Um, okay.

Well, five years.

We'll see you again.

Take care.

Okay.

Item number 47.

1911 West Mitchell Street.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a light motor vehicle sales and light motor vehicle route air facility.

This is a new operator.

Um, is there anyone online here to speak on 1911 West Mitchell Street?

Okay, and I'm not seeing any raised hands.

Um, could both of you please give your names and mailing addresses?

Oh, do you bring the mic close?

Um Dallas, 7502 is now 75th Street, Frank.

That was done.

You guys just spell your names.

We have a court reporter.

We want to make sure they're at they're right in the R.

Okay, thank you.

H-A-M-E-A-L-L-A-A.

Last name is R A H M-A-N.

Thank you very much, guys.

Um, okay.

And then could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Thank you.

Um DPW.

All right, just a couple of conditions that I'd like to emphasize.

Uh one that no more than 10 vehicles are parked outside on the lot for any reason at any time.

Um we are requesting that the ND paraphys on Mitchell Street be removed and restored within a year, and finally that the applicant installs barrier between the public sidewalk and the parking lot within 60 days.

Um there's more detail on that in the hearing summary.

And then the other three conditions are standard DPW conditions, all right.

Thank you, DNS.

Notice DCD.

Nothing additional.

I just want to be clear.

So I know it says new operator, but then on the on the notice of appeal and application for review, it says there is previous bonus A3.

The use is changing and it's not a new operator.

Is that just a mistake?

Because it seems like it's not changing and it is a new operator.

And you guys knew are you new out?

Have you been there or you knew I knew we're a new tenant?

New tenant.

I was already occupied to say, was we can go.

That's that's what I thought, but I just want to make sure I understood that correctly.

Um, board members, questions or concerns.

This is like a yeah, what was the um with keeping that BOSA history in mind?

It says Bose the previous record was from 2022.

Do we know what the last time we approved this use of this property, what the length of time was?

April 6, 2023 for three years.

Three years, okay.

Board members, um, Mr.

Chair, haven't we found that the sorry does anyone have any other comments?

Having come that the criteria for a special use have been met based upon the um information that's in our case file.

I'll make a motion to approve this for a period of two years with any conditions in the hearing summary.

I'll second.

Board member Rucker?

Uh board member current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Selensky.

And Chairman Maulberg.

Aye.

It's a real quick question.

If they want to resume using that car wash, they need to come back and get a I think that car wash is a big deal.

We okay.

I just want to make sure if you guys wanted to, if you fixed it and thought you wanted to add it, you probably are gonna need uh approval to do that.

So just just so you know.

I know you said you're not gonna use it, so but you think it's an approval.

That's what the motion was.

Did we call it Ruby or two years?

By the time we get to apply for that, it's another uh one school.

We've been paying rent for six months now in that place.

When are when are you gonna be able to if you're got your occupancy?

When would you start being able to start operating?

Maybe another two months because of the state age time now.

Not two.

Do you want do you want to reopen it and have more time?

It was three years.

I think all you gotta do is come back and get the number of proofs.

Yeah, I mean, I think that it's just new operator at this location.

I mean, I don't think it's gonna hurt.

I think you can you'll be able to start, then you can come back and just uh renew it for longer.

It's not that you know, I get it, but the state line is probably not see you don't want to come up with your occupancy permit will be approved as soon as the formal letter of conditions is signed.

And I I am assuming that you have your municipal uh used dealer license in the pipeline with city clerk?

Yes, we can okay.

So if that's ready to go, this one it could be a matter of days.

So okay.

Thanks, guys.

Take care.

Item number 48, 52 25 West Mill Road.

Request to increase the number of number from 21 to 35 children per ship to increase the ages from infant to 12 years of age to infant to 14 years to increase the days of operation from Monday to Friday to Sunday to Saturday, and to continue occupying the premises as a daycare center operating from 5 30 a.m.

to midnight.

This is a new operator.

Um is there anyone online that would like to speak on this item?

I see Alder Woman Taylor is online.

Is there anyone else that's here for 5225 West Mill Road?

And I don't see any raised hands.

Um could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Okay, and then could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Thank you.

All right, the PW.

Nothing too bad, the uh the NX.

No additional comments DCD.

Nothing additional.

Okay.

Um Alder Woman Taylor, did you have comments on this one now, or did you want to hear from the applicant first or what?

Yeah, we we don't have any comments either.

So you can go ahead.

Uh-huh.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um it's funny that you're called the growing zone and you want to grow the flowers, you want to grow the amount of kids.

Um do you have do you operate in another location?

No.

So this is your for starting up this daycare up uh business?

Yes.

So but it was a previously a day.

Yeah, right.

I just wanted to know what heard.

And how um, so it's like kind of the the building, it's the it's ready to to operate.

You don't need much time after you get an occupancy permit to start having customers come in.

It's just licensing.

Okay.

You don't have to do any work and get do a bathroom or any kind of maintenance or anything like that on the building to get ready.

No, just bring the things in.

Because it's not set up.

Right, right.

Yeah.

And that place space, I I must, you know, you've got your state has the state has looked at it and and determined that there's adequate space.

It just looked small in the pictures, but is that is that right?

Yes.

Okay.

I know it's kind of a big yard, and that might make it look smaller.

Yes, it's a huge yard.

Um, any the snow fencing's coming down.

Are you putting up a new?

Were you planning to put up a new fence to enclose the entire yard or just take the snow fencing out.

The orange okay so the only reason why the orange basin is up is because when the kids are the one the boss right now my grandkids play in a yard.

So when I do the ball it go into the street.

So it's just to prevent the boss from going into the street.

That's a condition then how long is your lease for my lease is for three years with the option to extend or buy.

All right.

Board members your chair will make motion having found that the criteria necessary to grant this special use have been met based on the evidence in the file testimony received I would make motion to approve this for a period of three years with conditions in the hearing summary.

I'll second board member Rocker aye board member current aye vice chairman Smyce and Chairman Lomberg aye all right thank you.

Take care.

Item number 49 6408 North 49th street request to occupy the premises as a 24 hour family daycare home for eight children for shift up into 13 years of age operating Monday through Friday is there anyone online that would like to speak on this item again that's 6408 North 49th Street.

Okay.

Could you give us your name and mailing address please?

Yes excuse me I'm sorry Chantel Walton 6408 North 49th Street Milwaukee Wisconsin 5323.

Thank you and can you please raise your right hand to you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you.

DPW nothing to add DNS uh Mr Chairman as our policy we don't support 24 hour family home daycares uh due to the uh possible problems of noise problems with late night early morning drop off and pickup uh we do have our standard conditions okay thank you DCD and just want to amend our condition requiring submittal of Wisconsin state care daycare license because petitioner does have a a license to operate currently from 6 a.m to 10 11 30 p.m.

we're requesting that you submit the revised uh state care license when it's issued that includes the expanded hours so that she's proposing all right thank you and alderwoman taylor this is also in your district do you have anything for us on this file?

No we don't have anything but um I guess if there are some questions about the 24 hours uh and she needs to satisfy some things we'll support um as long as she satisfy what needs to be satisfied with um DCD and um what was the other one DPW?

Okay yeah that and then there's that and that's um yeah that makes sense because your your state license that you have now being on file doesn't reflect what you're seeking to do which is add the extra shift so that's all he wants you to do is make sure that our file actually accurately reflects what the licensing you have from the state.

And I do know that there are some letters of support in here from some of your clients and you flexed and said that there's a police officer who wants us to approve this so noted anyway.

Yeah and it's a you know again just to comment that there's there's a kind of an always a concern that operating a daycare a home daycare that is turning your house into a business that operates it during the nighttime hours can potentially be disruptive valid concern but we just haven't experienced as a board a lot of complaints about people that do this and we do repeatedly hear that there's a need from um residentially residents that people that run daycares out of their residence that they have clients that that need they need to serve in that third shift window and during the time the kids are sleeping anyway.

So if you continue to operate as you have you probably will not have any issues with your neighbors so um I don't see a problem with this application and um board members make motion having found that the criteria necessary to grant the special use happen that based on the evidence in the file testimony received I'd make motion to approve this for a period of three years with conditions in the hearing summary i'll second board member rocker aye board member current aye vice chairman same sky and chairman lumber aye thank you thank you good luck congratulations thank you all the material item number 50 6300 west blue mound road has been adjourned next item is item number 51 5900 west north avenue request to continue occupying the premises as a restaurant with a drive through facility and this is a new operator is there anyone either in the audience or online that would like to speak on this matter are you the applicant okay could you just come up and then I see all the women more we just have all of you please give your names and mailing addresses all the women more of course my name's Steven Colver uh the address is 828 Davis Street Evanston Illinois you can just grab this yeah Montavia Jones address 5525 West Notre Dame Court Milwaukee Wisconsin thank you could you both please raise your right hands do you affirm under oath that the testimony are about to have a truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes all right DPW.

So we are a number of specific um conditions uh a we're asking for a loading zone on North 59th street to help facilitate deliveries to the site we don't uh we've had other dungeon donuts locations where deliveries have been weird and number of them and sometimes I create interesting equations with traffic that we don't like interesting DPW does not like in terms of traffic um and then finally additionally um had some concerns regarding the existing pergola um because of the way that this building is is uh changing use um it used to be one big facility with the main entrance um here now their area with percolate was sort of patio for the rest of the facility well there was sort of a what appeared to be a pinch point between the building face and the edge of the pergola the applicant has agreed to remove the pergola and we are requesting that that be uh within 60 days um to in order to allow for free uh in and out of uh customers to the what will become the new main entrance to this this part of the building um yeah all right you know that's no additional comments bcd just to clarify i wouldn't think of this as a continue to occupy uh this was the food hall and one of the food hall tenants had um the drive-thru window now this is dunk and donuts uh taking over that space but not kind of in the food hall sense and um i don't believe it's really connected to the remaining space in the building okay thank you uh oh no go ahead yeah my question was going to be so are you just occupying that space with the drive-thru or are you occupying other spaces in the bill the Duncan will take up just what was kind of the coffee shop for that uses the drive-thru yeah okay and then any plans for the remainder of the space i i understand that the uh the uh my con my uh uh client who's the contract purchaser of the property and his broker are looking to find you know they said actually local neighborhood type tenants to go into the rest of it and they'll develop the building accordingly.

So it'll be a multi-tenant building, just they're with the feelers out there, but they wanted to get past this riddle first mr jones I know we have your um your letter submission, but do you want to tell us more uh some elaborate on your position?

Sure.

Go ahead um you bear with me.

I have prepared notes.

Um, but first I will say uh Montavia Jones, I'm a executive director of the Uptown crossing Business Fruitman District.

Uh our corridor runs from 60th to Sherman, roughly along North Avenue, a small portion of Lisbon.

Um here today representing the entire board, uh in opposition to this proposed use uh specifically uh related to the drive-thru uh as an issue for developing our corridor in the way we want it to be developed.

Um so I'll get to the issues with the drive-thru um uh shortly, but first I want to say we have we've heard from the current property owner in EDC um several times about this property.

We've met with the I don't know if it's owner or Duncan proposed Duncan or we met with somebody's broker.

Um we have not have had a conversation with the Dunkin' Donut operator yet.

Um we have not seen any community engagement uh from this end user, and that that presents issue for us um outside of the drive-thru issue, or excuse me, the drive-thru uh concern.

So to not have any um communication for such an important site in our corridor uh is really an issue for us.

So now as it relates to drive-thru, um currently, yeah, there's a drive-thru on the site, but this was an old bank.

It made sense maybe when it was a bank to have the drive-thru here when there are certainly less cars uh using it.

It didn't really make sense when North Avenue Market Hall used in a drive-thru anyway.

Um, it's not appropriate for the future of this corridor.

Uh, if you read in the West Um West Side area plan, it calls for preventing automobiles from further encroaching into pedestrian-friendly areas and uh improve the right of way to include space for pedestrians and bicycles.

This proposal uh moves us in the opposite direction.

The design itself presents serious operational safety concerns.

Um both the entrance and the exit of the drive-thru are on North Avenue.

So you enter in onto North Avenue and exit the property on North Avenue.

The two driveways are 20 feet apart, so um that creates two um conflict points for um pedestrians, bicyclists.

There's parking currently on the street, so there is a um sight line issue coming in or out of this driveway onto North Avenue.

Uh North Avenue is a one-way street, one way in both directions.

Um, so anybody turning left on North Avenue into the property would queue up uh as they wait for oncoming traffic to get into the property.

Uh anyone exiting the property would have to um try to cross two lanes of traffic uh with uh limited vision because of parked cars.

Um we believe this operation is uh fundamentally designed around continuous or excuse me, um the design of the current drive-thru uh creates these traffic concerns.

Um, and we know Dunkin' Donuts is not a low value user of cars or they attract lots of cars, and if there are limited to no indoor seating options, that means all their customers are driving through here.

So we're asking tons of cars to come through this very poorly designed um what really is a parking lot uh converted to a driveway uh throughout the day, especially morning rush hour having traffic backed up into the street, uh potentially into the intersection.

Uh really does not gel well with uh vision we have for the corridor.

Last year we created our strategic plan uh that called for more walkability, uh more pedestrian-friendly amenities, and this goes against that.

Um it goes against uh adopted uh west side area plan, which includes the uptown crossing charrette, which was done in oh, was that 2019?

Uh, that call for um having locally owned uh businesses that are focused on uh having shoppers that can frequent neighboring businesses.

Um, people driving through in their cars does not uh lend itself well to encouraging uh people to stop at other other places along the corridor.

Um this site's an opportunity move towards a more walkable, productive people-oriented corridor.

Uh approving another intense drive-thru use would uh move us backwards.

So for these reasons, we are opposed uh an acts that uh the board would uh deny the drive thru use of this property okay thank you um alderman and more um thank you so much mr chair and um commission members um i do not have a position on this um one way or the other um i value um you know our bid executive director uh and his statements um and i also you know value that um we have an empty building um that has been empty for quite some time um the the the area is very um interesting because the building itself doesn't have a ton of parking and so you know when you're thinking about what it was used for prior hey I'm gonna go to dinner you gotta find more than likely you gotta park on the street it's you know it's a busy you know it's a busy corridor um the statement that was made in reference to the in to the driveway is absolutely correct um especially if you know how I how it is um there's a few parking spots and so even if I don't even know how people would come in and park if the driveways if folks coming in the driveway if it's filled um or if folks are lined up to get into um the driveway how those individuals would get out just because of the proximity of it um again uh I would love you know something in that space that would be um um an asset um to the neighborhood but it's gonna be you know it's just it's they're they're gonna have to be very creative as to what is done um in this space of you know for many of you may know there are other coffee shops and other stores um other restaurants um type places that are along um north avenue it's uh you know very you know robust um corridor um but the insight that was brought today is is definitely um a mood point to um to consider but again you know I I I want that space to be activated as well um instead of being a vacant building that has sat um for multiple you know uh multiple months and so um again I don't have um a position on either side I allow the board to you know use their area of expertise um to make a decision thank you thank you how long has it that we can if whoever whichever do you know four yeah it's it is and I want to you know you can elaborate on the plan I look that's kind of what I was thinking looking at is it's you've got you can have people trying to enter try to people trying to exit the drive through and then people that are traveling north to try to enter I don't know if it's north I'm just looking it up on the thing.

Um you know feeding in the traffic that way and then people coming through and then there's the parking spots that aren't accessible.

It's just kind of this loop that could be in people you know I I've seen you know Duncan Starbucks big long queues um but I also understand that you know it's a it is a unique little space and it's kind of lends itself to I when I looked at I was like this must have been a bank so you said that but uh uh so it's tricky it's tough so if you want to I guess and and we didn't hear anything from DPW expressing a concern about the traffic problems the the pedestrian issues but I mean what you're saying makes perfect sense the sidewalk having two two points it's gonna be very busy in that loop but anyway why don't you if you just want to address some of these issues that have been raised.

Well I can say this is that the it for a Duncan itself it it is the drive-thru's gonna be busy, but it'll be busy at most from 8 to 9 a.m.

And then that's it.

It's not a basket and the evening uh use of the Duncan is next to nothing.

The busiest hours for and we do a ton of Duncan's and this particular operator, just you know, I'm supposed to have to reach out to you.

He has 23 stores in the area.

So this is this is his you know neck of the woods.

But the typical Duncan's, you know, uh those those are the the busy hours, and it doesn't hit too much after that in terms of drive.

Um the the the average wait for there's 90 seconds from menu board to window, so it moves pretty smoothly, there's not a lot of backup.

We feel very comfortable with the queue that's there.

As a matter of fact, 22 out of the 23 stores that the operator has are drive-throughs, and they at their peak times between eight and nine, they never see more than six cars because they they run them really well, and six cars works well on the drive-through that we have there, and it isn't a unique little drive-thru, but we've worked in weirder ones, you know, to be honest with you.

Another thing to remember is that the reason why there's 23 stores is its location is targeted for who's already there.

You know, a lot of times when you think about a dunk and donuts, it's not a destination that people's coming from across town.

They're saying there's traffic on North Avenue already, those people that are already traveling and already have been traveling, we want them just to pull in, grab a cup of coffee and go on their way.

So in terms of generating more traffic that's on North Avenue, certainly there's some, but it's not exponential because it's more directed to who's there, and it's all convenience because there's another Duncan not too far, you know.

They'll go to the next one if it's too hard to get into this one.

So cars backing up, unlike a Starbucks where it's a barista and all that kind of stuff.

I always feel that it's uh a bunch of teenagers pushing pushing buttons, you know, because it's all mechanical and they move very fast.

So we try to make sure that that's understood that a drive-thru that you see with cars backing up against Starbucks or those other types of specialty places or food service, that's not something that happens at a Duncan regularly.

And uh the operator is really good at what he does and he's familiar with the area.

So like we just 27th, he just opened one up at 27th just recently.

Um, and in terms of what the rest of the building's gonna be.

Like I said, though they are working to see how they can fill that up, you know, originally what as the food hall technically a multi-tenant building.

And we're just doing the same thing.

We're just trying to carve out what's gonna be the Duncan portion as you see on the plan, you know, a very small piece on that first floor, and the rest of it's gonna be up to uh the the broker and the developer to say, how can we fill in the rest of the space?

But we feel that that the traffic patterns that are generated by a Duncan, it it's not as terrible as it looks.

And in this site, we have plenty of space on site to handle the queue for that.

So we feel comfortable with it.

And you know, we have to go through Duncan store planning and all that kind of stuff to get that kind of sign-off as well.

So at the corporate level, you know, we go through all those hoops to make sure that we're comfortable with what we're showing here, and knowing that a track record of six to seven cars tops on the busiest hour, which is eight to nine, is regular for this franchisee in this area.

You know, we feel very comfortable with the size that's there and how it'll work.

Mr.

Chair, yeah.

Um, one of the things that I do wanna um share is that um I usually move on public meetings with constituents if I get a lot of um pushback.

Um I did not receive any emails.

Um, you know, I got constituents that are look, they they know when agendas come out, and so I didn't get any emails um of concerns.

I usually use that as a leverage, um, even if I get a few, um, I usually use that as leverage to have a community forum.

Um, and so uh I I didn't think to you know, just engage in one.

Um, and I should have worked with the bid, and so I want to, you know, chuck that up as you know, you know, just on me um for not doing that, but I did not uh we have not in our in my office have not received any um negative feedback about the establishment that is um coming to the district.

Um and I don't know what they have done in in regards to just community engagement or if they've you know connected with residents, whatnot.

I'm not sure what um I've done, but I could say this.

There was one letter that was presented that was sent to us that was uh given to sure you guys had that in your packet, and there's a neighbor that was concerned about traffic in the alley, and we intend no traffic to go through the alley.

They're gonna do the loop and get out.

So we feel good that that's we've allayed that concern.

But in terms of um engagement with the community, I can say that one of the big sticking points of this deal was to make sure that a drive this drive, this this special use could have.

The closing of the deal will happen like next week, you know, if we're with a favorable uh approvals here.

Um, and and upon that, you know, that there'll be I'm I'm uh Daniela at uh Carton, do you mean Daniela?

Yeah.

Not yet?

I'm not yet.

Okay, okay.

So Cardo, you know, so Carlo who's Nicardo Rosha, who's the the franchise, he's got a team of people that work in the area.

Like I said, he's he's representing he's got a ton of stores in the area, so I can make sure that I'll pass the word along that uh have Danielle reach out to you guys.

But the big concern was is this a viable?

Could we make this happen?

And we understood the hoops that we had to jump through to show the paperwork and come meet uh and and and present to you people.

I have a question from Tabius.

So based on the bids' position, and we know that they oppose it because of traffic, right?

And pedestrian safety, um, what were the main things?

Um, but if it were to go through, is it workable, or do you or do you think that the cars parking is going to create more traffic or or accidents?

Well, hopefully they won't create create any accidents, but we do think they are gonna create traffic problems.

Um, and I don't only think in terms of uh cars.

I also have to uh worry about people biking through our corridor and people walking our corridor.

It is uh active foot traffic area, um, several restaurants.

Um we just opened a gym across the street, um, several um salons and uh there's office building next door, uh, none of which have any parking, um, they have no drive-thru, no curb cuts.

Uh, all that said, this is an active corridor for pedestrians uh as well.

So to have uh introduction of uh not the introduction, but uh active use of two driveways um within 20 feet of each other um going into traffic uh does concern us.

Um that's just on the physical logistics of the building.

We also have concerns uh one that we haven't heard from the um proposed owner.

We have seen their um Dunkin' Donuts and other places in the city where they did do active community engagement, met with community members several times, met with the bid.

Um we didn't get that uh that same uh care and concern.

That's a that's an issue for us.

Um and given that this is a really important building for our district.

Um it's the most recently renovated building in our corridor.

Um the city itself um poured um lots of money into this for it to sit vacant with no real plan.

Besides, we hope we can find other users.

Um I'm uh my background development, I like to find users before I would close on the building.

Um, so if you can close on a building and not have any users in it, that means you don't have to have any user, so there's no incentive to um if you it's it'd be nice to get other users in it, but they don't have to.

Um their thing is you know, having the drive-thru, uh, and they get a great building with tons of equipment at a low cost because um the the lender's taking it back in um in lieu of foreclosure.

Um so they're getting a great deal on the building that they're gonna use a very small sliver of and use that small sliver in a way that detracts from what we're trying to do with our corridor.

I will say, if I may, I will say, you know, it well the spike space that we're taking up in the building was coffee shop before.

I mean, that's what it was used for.

And and I we're not I I there's a lot of great equipment that the gentleman put in there, but none of it applies to what we're doing, unfortunately.

I wish I wish that was the case.

Um, but that's why once we feel a little confident about this offering is that it it was a coffee shop before for for the area that we're taking up.

The drive-thru was centered around our coffee concern, and so we feel comfortable with that.

And uh, and it's I'm sorry that Mr.

Rosha and his team hasn't reached out to you about it.

They they do and they will, and again, uh we knew that this was something that we wanted to get through these uh entitlements first so that you can close on the property.

I don't I don't know the deal on it, but I know this is something that we had to get done first.

So my question is if we adjourn this so that they can give the same care concern for community out, you know, for outreach, having the meetings, etc.

Will that delay closing?

Um, and if so, is he okay with that?

I don't think he this the closing's been pushed off for quite some time.

So they they want to get that done.

But we can I can certainly speak to my experience with Mr.

Rosh and his team that they will be, why they haven't reached out yet.

I think it was more the logistics of getting this done first.

Uh, but but they'd have shown the the the ability and the the likelihood and the the the uh willingness to participate in local uh activities and and you know being involved with them with the neighborhoods, and I I don't see any reason why that would change here.

Particularly since this is one of a big network of stores that he has in the area already.

I have a question about that.

Um, this location only works with a drive-thru.

That's no, yeah.

Because you have he has at least one that does not have a drive-thru.

So I'm curious about supposed our older stores are knowing knowing Mr.

Rush, those stores will be going away soon, or the new Duncan models, it uh you you would rarely see a Duncan not be a drive-through these days, ever since particularly since pandemic.

It's very rare that a drunken will open up without a drive-thru.

Yes, please go ahead.

So that that exactly is our concern.

They're the business model that is predicated on having the more traffic they can generate, the better it is for their business.

So they have incentive to try to attract more and more drivers through this um through this drive-thru.

So that again, that goes against what we're trying to do with our core to make it a walkable um pedestrian-friendly um pop from business to business, uh, park once, walk to other businesses, um, uh, frequent those businesses and one trip.

The difference between this use and the previous coffee user was the coffee user or the coffee shop that was in there before also used they had indoor seating.

So not all of their business was um through the drive-thru.

They also had people walking in off the street and using uh facilities and inside.

So that's different.

So while there was a drive-thru there, it wasn't used as much as this drive-thru would be.

Um, and the owner, potential owner, had to go through the same process.

They had to go to Boza for other um Duncan donuts that they they operate.

So and they did the community engagement before then.

So I I don't trust that we're gonna get community engagement after the boza process.

They had to do that because um the local um bit demanded it, they had residents who knew about it.

Um so we do have some letters of like um they they don't want it, right?

Like we do have a file built here, even if they haven't communicated with the with the Alder Woman.

So I would motion to adjourn this.

And I'm sorry to put more work on your desk alder woman um more.

Um, but you know, I know you'll work with uptown to do a community meeting.

If Mr.

Rosh does not want to close on his property, could because this deal doesn't go through, um, then it would prove Montavius' case, which is it's all about the bottom of the neighborhood that you're locating in, and what um I I have to do in good conscience for my neighbors and my community is to make sure that they are okay and that they're at least aware, and I don't feel like that due diligence has been done and I understand and respect the logistics of trying to get this done, but I also respect my community enough to know that they they need to be given the the same care and they also need to have input because they are going to be the ones that's impacted while Mr.

Rosh is sitting in Chicago with his nice wherever it is.

And so just when you were you said 90 seconds from ordering to and then eight cars in the queue, so 12 minutes for every eight cars, peak hours from for one hour, and it's not that many customers.

It just doesn't seem like it no, but uh what I'm saying is it doesn't seem like you're making any money then.

Well that's not that many, you know, and so I'm a little concerned about I get it.

I I mean look, I would just make a couple but good presentations.

I uh the the diagram or the the chart the the plan of operation, I get it.

It's a well-oiled machine.

Then you this is maybe one of the better uh represent presentations from a bid that I've seen in a long time, as far as really nailing and addressing concerns specifically related to criteria.

I'm in I'm having a hard time, and I'm in I mean I think I'm in Marjorie's shoes, too.

And I know frankly, Alderman and more coming in here and saying, look, I didn't really I feel like you're not quite in the position you want to be either.

I I know it's not good uh to have to push this stuff.

I get it, but I'm I don't know what I would I don't know what that I feel comfortable I don't know what I would want to stand in, right?

I can't say though that when it's trying to push more and more business to one location, there's a reason why the gentleman has 23 stores, right?

Because there is the peak hour of operation is how every Duncan in the country operates.

If it really is.

And so the morning will be busy, certainly, right?

But in mid-afternoons and it's not as busy at all two cars an hour maybe that go through the drive-thru so in terms of oh you know being a hazard it's it's morning traffic is morning traffic that is what it is we are it's part of the model though is in the plan show you it's gonna be a full like built out Duncan on the interior too it's not just a drive through machine right there's gonna be a full brand new I think there's 12 seats all in or something like that.

It's not a lot of seats inside but it did and and we were we did want to keep use the outside and we still use the outside as a patio but the pergolo for DPW we're getting rid of the burgular there.

So engaging you know everyday pedestrian use into this store is something that you know you know we'd certainly want to promote and again the store itself is I mean there's drive through only Duncan's this is not a drive-thru only duncan this is a fully operational full you know full blown Duncan donuts so it's it's a full store for walking traffic as much as it is for the drive thru.

I mean it'd be pretty foolish to endeavor on a plan where you're not making any money and with the eight cars every 12 minutes you're like talking about hundreds of dollars of reference it's not gonna cut it I know there's more there's like I think I would like to see some conversation with the bid and and some community engagement.

I know I get it I and I'm that's a consideration and I know it's a business decision you want to close but I perhaps the you may have win the support of the bid based on this being more aligned with the previous use.

I don't know you you may not agree but I do like I would like to see community engagement and have a better understanding of whether this use is going to be um worthwhile for the community and the public uh and and supporting the um you know comprehensive plan as well um or if it's worth it to wait a little bit and see if some more further developments come I don't know what what do you think I mean if I was voting today I would not vote in favor of this plain and simple I do I know this corridor pretty well a drive through I mean primarily I'm gonna say 90% of the business as a drive through it just doesn't seem to make sense.

There are other sort of um big big box businesses I'll call them on the corridor but they have much bigger lots there's parking there's like ample room to maneuver like I've been to the talk about been to McDonald's I know the space there um it just it doesn't feel to me like it is what belongs here as this sort of just fast paced kind of um car circuit really so I think I know that there are Duncans that are operable without drive throughs.

There's one on Silver Spring for example that's just fine.

Um and I know because my kid goes and gets grilled cheeses after school there.

Um so I know that there's you know afternoon traffic and foot traffic and I I feel like foot traffic um or kind of a pedestrian oriented restaurant or you know whatever on this corner is actually what's appropriate.

A drive-thru just does not feel right to me based on my personal knowledge of the corridor.

Mr.

Chair I just wanted to say really really quick um that I would perhaps agree with um the adjournment so that there's an opportunity for some community engagements and conversations with the bid um I've been in that parking lot several times I've had my you know um I've had my campaign you know I I love the space uh and so I've been there several times um coming and and I've pulled in and hold out and have uh because of the busyness so you know when you talk about you know so when we think about even the 90 seconds that it you know that it takes to order and pick up whatnot you're still stuck at the entrance.

So people are still not going to be able to come through as quickly as possible because especially if you're going to go back east so if you're turning left no yes if you're turning left with where you have to go through two tra you know two rows of traffic versus you know waiting till it clears up to just you know turn right um it it it's going to it's just it's going to be busy.

It's a very very busy area particularly during those peak hours.

So um I would be in agreement I mean you all can vote however you want but I would be in agreement to the adjournment just so that we can get a little bit more input and insight um and then come be able to come back to the tape.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Anything from you is there a motion then I'll make a motion to adjourn.

I don't know if we need to be specific I mean I think how community outreach we just think you've heard I think we just I think we all this understand but I don't I but sometimes we give specific instructions but I think you understand understanding so uh is there a second I'll second that motion all right madam secretary board member rocker aye board member current aye vice chairmansky and Chairman I thank you guys appreciate and shout out to the our last year yeah now it's gonna be like it's gonna be like yeah we got my last last one they might be fighting but it's not it's not like so item number 52 3770 south 52nd street request to allow front porch that does not meet the minimum front setback required is there anyone online that's here to speak on this item again that's 3770 south 52nd street if you'd like to speak please raise your hand okay one six minutes one offline okay I don't think that there's anyone online um could you please give us your name and mailing address my name is Darwin but I use a lot of mainly on this is uh three seven seven zero southeast is saying the street or what it was called C Code is five three twenty two zero okay and then can you please raise your right hand do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Thank you.

Thank you DPW nothing to uh neighborhood services finds the criteria for a variance under 295311 of the city code has not been met there's no unusual circumstance or topographical hardship the lot is a standard size and shape uh we do have an order on the property uh I want to say this is not a from a complaint this was a referral from me based on the earlier front yard setback variance application uh on the same street to the north uh this property was brought up as part of that testimony so we will that's why the owner is here before you very briefly there was a variance for as he describes in his statement of variance there was a variance to add a layer of decking on top of an existing original construction stoop um he has expanded that the it should be noted the expansion in width is not before you but only the expansion in depth so while this deck is bigger uh and I apologize I didn't have a chance to get out uh to try to find the the original foundation based on my pictures I'm thinking that this is an expansion of possibly uh two feet um deeper than the stoop was uh so it definitely is an expansion uh the other item that I wanted to and again we don't find that there's a criteria here but I want to give all of the observations uh the prior application was for front edition with a roof this has no roof uh so the altitude is the same uh width is not a factor to to consider uh and depth we're talking probably about two feet so thank you was was there a prior approval for uh cl enclosed porches that we're saying is that was just a prior application that was withdrawn with withdrawn no up with regard to there was a if you recall a few months back there was a uh uh application up the street oh yeah okay up the street north for a front for a front neighbor for a front porch addition that one included a roof right and at least in in our opinion that's a significant difference that here this has no roof uh or walls but it has no roof um but yes it's a standard rectangular lot um there's no you know the there's no topographical there's no slope that would uh he has a large backyard um but with that said we're talking about a couple feet okay thank you uh B C D nothing additional well you know the deck looks nice um I get it but couldn't you couldn't you have just had it be two feet shorter and we'd be alright game one like I don't know how that house the house is really old so when I was doing the demolition to set the new for it to build it like you walk before I found like it was like another stoop there.

So I had to like go over it because I think the last permit for that house was pulled up to 73.

And then I had to tear down like uh the stairs you see that goes to the sidewall I had to tear it down that sale of the stairs and then I had to go to the stoop and then I found another stairs which was I think from the beginning the house have no stoop no thinking at all it was just the stairs all the way to the street and that was the reason I had to go yield because I don't know what it is underground.

And I was just finding like the stones rolls everything like from old sidewall going coming straight from uh the main door all the way to the house the front so there used to be a s from the pedestrian right away sidewalk a straight path up to the front door with a stoop I would step in something like that because when I wasn't even get everything out I found like you know this is a style wall call say I mean it wasn't uncommon to build a house with steps just small small small porch landing outside the table and your steps and then you would have to walk to the walk and yard walk as we envisioning.

Yeah we would totally suppose it's stubborn covered with grass is from 1936 I looked at the historical aerials and unfortunately I couldn't decipher much the resolution uh beyond the 80s uh and yes that variance was in this in the early 70s so I couldn't give you more information but uh the applicant has made his his statement yeah it's kind of like a deck that you would see on the back of your house on the front of your house that's the thing it does look out of place.

My problem with it is that it does stick out so far into and close to the sidewalk compared to any other uh property on that on that street.

I mean the photographs that we have in the file here show this so far even the house itself is so far out in front of the other homes and then to add this additional bulk out in front is a little troublesome I do notice there's a letter in the file from the alder who's doesn't seem to be supportive of the application.

Yeah it's just the unfortunate thing is when what you decided to do made sense at the time because of what conditions you saw in the yard and trying to make a pleasant walkway up to your house.

It was a good idea except that when you do something this you have to have you know to get permission you have to meet these criteria and the variance criteria are are in order to be able to do this you have to show like that there's no other there's nothing else you can do.

Yeah otherwise you can't even go into your front door and we you if you wanted to you could tear this down and you could rebuild that stoop and have a walk but you could have a a uh port like more of a wraparound porch that's that's closer to the house just a couple feet in closer there's a number of different designs you could do to kind of keep the spirit of this but that would be you know the word a lot of that came in uh um the ones can I have the applicant closer to the mic please you just use the mic yeah uh so when I was uh getting all uh all the information for that house about the setback the setback is right on front of the door so even though the only thing possible for me was just to build stairs right which at the at the moment like you said it didn't make sense because how the old porch was built and it wasn't like honestly it wasn't optical.

Well and I think that that's what Henry is saying too your house is a little bit further anyway and and there's it would be absurd for us to say you can't use your front door unless you climb a little ladder because you're the setback.

So you can do something right you can have a stoop or something but this is like a like I get it you're like hey why don't I have a nice little deck and that's kind of what you ended up doing is having a deck and I don't think that how do you you can't really justify that extra space because it wasn't necessary to get to be the getting your house you could like a smaller variance would probably be we you would definitely be able to convince uh convince this I think convince this board of why you would need some ability to have some relief from the setback if it is as you say right up to your house right but this is kind of too big that's just I don't know I don't I don't like these kinds of cases because you've put this is nice craftsmanship you've put effort into it and it's gonna sting quite a bit if you have to tear it down.

I get it I just I don't like being in this position.

Yeah for me too I know you don't even yeah I miss my house and I put I put a lot of effort doing that and like I know that house is not like other similar on the street the whole block and pretty much like the whole uh logs around it there is one standard size of the houses and at the moment I just well went like base to the neighbor what he was taking from the yard and that's pretty much it.

Because the house like that is close to me occupies like the same spot of the yard so that was pretty much I was just guiding myself how you yeah.

Yeah but when the moment when I came to the CD they just told me like the setback is right on my front doorway.

And the hide from the ground the door is like four feet pretty much I mean the question is case if this is denied then he's gonna have and then what does he do?

He's gonna need some kind of variants.

There's there already one that's been right he has nothing well the way it's written up it looks like the permit center's not giving him any credit uh for the prior variants because he tore the whole stoop down uh that's my right so that's right so yes yeah it uh it would be um it's hard to I I believe we have some documentation of the size of the stoop from the 73 variants um but that's sketchy um but uh you know we could do our best i what I'm concerned about is there's basically three things we can prove this which no one seems I don't people don't quite seem comfortable doing if we deny it then you can reapply it with a different plan but you we could just be creating huge mess for him and having he he has to be able to have some way of having some variance here to get into his house.

So I'm I'm almost inclined to it adjourn this and let you revisit your plan and see if you can shrink that down I I get it it's gonna sting and you're gonna have to spend money to do it and see if you can come up with something that's that's closer to what Mr Lairdon said was kind of before over the the profile of the stoop and then and then you get that because I it it's a bunch of hoops you have to jump through through the city to get to get these permits, and I don't want to make it harder on you to try to bring in the company.

Well what is set back the old course.

They don't have uh, I'm sorry.

They don't have record of the old stoop or the course which was built on from on top of the stool.

What board member current was just saying is the stairs that lead up under your deck?

If you have like a little space, a little landing on the top of the stairs in front of your door, that's kind of like probably closer to what the student was.

Maybe even less because that still looks like a little bit more than two feet.

What were you gonna say?

And forgive me, I'm working at so this, you know, that the applicant possibly could request an adjournment.

That's what I and a revised plan with a smaller uh shaved back deck um that keeps some of this construction, still would need a variance.

We wouldn't have to recreate, you know, exactly what was in 1973.

Uh, you know, I'm comfortable that I can probably vouch fairly closely uh based on the pictures and doing some site visits.

Um if that's pleases the board.

Are those posts set?

Are they like do they in those are they in brackets that are set on top of concrete footers or are they sunk?

I had to do the foodies because I I can't put the footings closer to the house because I don't know what's what's underneath.

That's the thing, and that's the reason I had to build.

I mean, that's the footings, they are like literally like one feet for where the old porch and the old stuff that is still in there because I didn't do it all of that.

It's a lot of stuff, and like that enclosed porch that is in front of the house when uh when I was I was just doing that with the sledgehammer because I thought it was just gonna be like you know, empty.

Then I have to hire a bobcat to take that out, and then I use how to stall because it was kind of hitting like the main structure of the house.

So I have to build the the footings right on front of I'll say the old stoop was built or the old structure of the stairs, whatever it was.

This is like nine feet.

Like you really think it was nine feet.

He's just home, like actually it was like the stoop was like five five, six feet, but then when I was just leaving to start doing the uh footings on that list and I start founding out like a lot of roads and I finally make the footies there because they gotta be like four feet on the ground.

Are you do there he's not gonna get order?

There's you're not gonna do any enforcement while we figure this out.

Is he does he have active orders on this?

Yeah, there's an order.

I mean, again, uh we don't have a neighborhood complaint, and we can certainly certainly talk about extensions.

Yeah, it's been here for at least probably a year.

Um I just don't want this gentleman to th there may be a situation where there is a hardship because there's this whatever this condition underneath the ground makes it or I don't know.

I don't have enough I think we just need to have some more time unless any of the board members did just disagree and want to make a motion to approve.

I don't do not want to just deny this.

I think that's not reasonable or fair under the circumstances.

Um, if we DNS, you know, is not that you can work with DNS and avoid getting you know fined and stuff.

If you can explore the possibility of revising it or at least bring us additional information about why that's not possible, I would I really would prefer to do that um and not create, you know, not create a financial mess for you.

It's uh we want to give you the option here to figure out your best course.

Yeah, uh if I can just if I shrink the the minimum I can shrink that course for for my experience doing that kind of work and everything the ground, how it is, it will be at least one feet or one feet and a half.

That's pretty much it.

And after that, I I won't be able to to make any like after two feet.

It will be a lot of people.

Well, that and that might be and that might be okay.

I just but just before you do anything, before we say, all right, we're gonna reduce this the setback by one and a half feet.

No, go.

That's your that's your that's the approval, and then you have to do that, and then you start to do your reconstruction and you have a huge problem, that's not the right way to do this.

Let's let's adjourn, you can figure it out.

And if your plan, if you decide it's what you're seeking is to reduce the size this by one and a half feet, come back and explain it.

Or if you have a different alternative plan, I just don't I don't want to just take action on this, so they need some more information is easier to what are you like it is there are no dumb questions.

That's the porch the ang yeah how far back are your posts from the front because you have a little bit that's candile or over it's like one feet okay so he's saying he's got about one foot of play you're saying you're not moving the posts you can you can post alone if you leave the posts alone so you can you you might want to confirm that is that right so you leave your post in the ground you can you can move your deck back one or maybe one and a half feet is that what you're saying if I can use that that will be possible to do it.

Do we know the measurements one foot I think if it's the board I'd recommend that you're I think so and let me I I'm certainly happy to work with the applicant second yeah just give it to Marjorie Board member rocker I board member current I vice chairman chairman lumber so look at your plan come back if that's your new plan great talk to give talk to P contact the bo's office we'll solve this one way or the other I don't know if you have to back a couple of years the technical twice prior to the school we get that submitted to our it's in your package that's the I've got a I've got a 24 I didn't realize I thought that was just the same thing.

Well why didn't you say something sir thank you very much just contact us thanks for being patient yeah have a good rest of your evening this week is there a motion to adjourn second call a roll all you want to call it board member rocker aye board member current aye nice chairman's nice chairman are not the same right now but it