All right.

Well, thanks everybody for coming.

Welcome to the June 4th meeting of the City Milwaukee Board of Zoning Appeals.

I'm Eric Rollenberg.

I'm the chair.

Before we get uh much further along, let's um have our board secretary take the role.

Um board member St.

Ronald L.

Board Member Rocker here.

Board Member.

Here, Vice Chairman Smyski, and Chairman Albert.

All right, okay.

We have a quorum tonight, and as you may have just heard in the essay a few months ago to our court reporter, we're at a different room, and we have just this one omnidirectional owl microphone camera.

I think it's probably going to pick up pretty much everything, so it's gonna be extra important today to be as quiet as possible, unless we're in one person speaking at a time, so that the court reporters pick it all up.

Um, you're free to know, go out in the hall or something if you just want to get somewhere.

It's type in here.

Um, but we do have uh several blocks of our agenda.

We're gonna go through it in order.

The first part of our agenda is consent agenda.

These are items that have been we've gotten recommendations from the city departments as to how they should be disposed.

Madam Secretary is going to reach our read each item's address, what the type of appeal is and what the recommended action is.

When the consent agenda is completely read, anybody who's here who wishes for it to be moved off of the consent agenda is rescheduled for a public hearing.

In other words, if they want to have additional testimony or comment, we can do so.

So you just have to raise your hand and let us know, we'll check and see if anyone is online.

Um, but then at the end of that, if there's no objections, we'll vote on all of those items all together.

The rest of the calendar, which I suspect most of you are here for for the 215 calendar, is going to be a little bit different.

We'll call each item in order and come forward, we'll hear from the city departments.

Who will give us input?

Uh, and then the board will hear from the applicants.

We might have some questions, and then we can process those as well.

We do have uh John Schmidt from Department of Public Works, Peter Lairdson from Department of Neighborhood Services, and Ed Richardson from Department of City Development here to help us tonight give us information about each of these files.

We'll have you all sworn so that you're ready to testify when we do get to the 215 calendar.

You affirm under all of the testimony you're about to get is the truth, the whole truth would have provided.

Yeah, good.

All right, I guess we will start with the consent agenda.

Well, can you hold on to the state?

Oh, yeah, one other item.

Uh we did have a meeting last month.

Did everybody have a chance to review?

We were all here, I thought the weekend did we did everyone have a chance to review the meeting minutes from our main meeting?

Yes.

If so, is there are there any requested changes or if not, is there a motion?

Okay, okay.

All right, madam secretary, board member St.

Ronald Bell.

Aye, board member record, aye.

Board member Curran, aye.

Vice Chairman Smithy, and Chairman Wilbert.

Okay, now we'll have consent agenda.

All right, item number one, 3432 West Green Tree Road, a special use request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number two, 9220 West Silver Spring Drive, a dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number three, 64 to 35, West Capitol Drive, a special use request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number four, 8210, West Capital Drive, an extension of time request.

Staff recommends this missile without prejudice.

Item number five, 1204 South 24th Street, a dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends this missile without prejudice.

Item number six, 311 West National Avenue, a use variance request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number seven, 8425 West County Met Road, a special use request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number eight, 200 East Washington Street.

This the Metro Bearance request.

Staff recommends dismissal without prejudice.

Item number nine, 20, 6750 North 43rd Street, suite 202, the special use request.

Staff recommends approval to run in September 22nd, 2034.

Item number 11, 3820 West Forest Avenue, the special use request.

Staff recommends a 10 year approval.

Item number 12, 1012 Center Street, especially use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 13, E22 North 24th Street has been adjourned.

Item number 14, 207 East Buffalo Street, uh suite 212, special use request, staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 15, 7620 West Burleigh Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends a three-year approval.

Item number 16, 137 East Garfield Avenue, a dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends approval to run with the land.

Item number 17, 1809 West Atkinson Avenue, a special use request.

Staff recommends a five-year approval.

Item number 18, 3057 North 35th Street, a special use and dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends approval to run with the land.

Item number 19, 3144 West Greenfield Avenue, a special use request.

Staff recommends a five-year approval.

Item number 20, 3602 West Wheelhouse Road, a dimensional variance request.

Staff recommends approval to run with the land.

Item number 21, 239 West Washington Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends a 10-year approval.

Item number 22, 2544, North 22nd Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends a five-year approval.

And item number 23, 2879 North 21st Street, a special use request.

Staff recommends approval to run through January 23rd, 2055.

So we have the one item that's adjourned that we reschedule in a future hearing.

But is there anyone present who wishes for any of the other items to be rescheduled for public hearing?

Is there a motion?

Motion to approve staff recommendation.

Alright, Madam Secretary, please.

Board Member St.

Arnold Bell.

Hi.

Board Member Rocker.

Aye.

Board Member Current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Smysky.

And Chairman Womber.

Hi.

Okay.

It's 216, I think.

So we can move right along to the next item.

I think we should call 24, 25, and 26.

Together.

It's the same applicant.

We can um vote on separately if necessary, but come forward.

And you should read your punch card and your tenth of fuel is for that.

Yeah.

All right.

Item number 24, 1800 South First Street.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a light motor vehicle sales and repair facility.

Body shop and outdoor salvage facility.

Item number 25, 1825 South Connecting Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a light motor vehicle sales and repair facility, body shopping car wash, and item number 26, 1803 South Connecting Avenue, request to continue occupying the premises of the light motor vehicle seals and repair facility and body shop.

John Petree, mailing address is 1825 South Connecticut Avenue, Alwaki, Wisconsin 53204.

Okay, and then could you please raise your right hand?

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.

Let's hear from the city departments.

Nothing to that DNS, no additional comments, DC.

Just to highlight the arms, and there's even done on the site.

Your file on your speech plan is for the request of the board of industrial.

This last week item is actually the traditional key from another kind of combined with the other.

So basically there's a wooden fence, but uh according to the use of pictures of the best uh probably some requirements and some additional on that version of the I can do that.

Uh so that's for um South Persian.

Okay, for the other two sites of 1803 south KK um the second floor of the 12th and area of the driveway and uh stream, the other part is just kind of in the documentation.

Okay, I can do that.

All right, oh I'm sorry, I just wanted to add that on Alder Woman.

Did you did send out an email that she has no objection to any of this?

Oh, yes.

Yeah, and obviously it was joking, but you've been here number size, and there's been a number of things that the city's departments have asked for you to do.

Um, good about compliant, I think some of your risky that we can make it, from the last five things you did, but yeah.

We have revised plans and we'll have to um just kind of maintain that.

I should have looked up what deciduous means.

I thought it was a pine tree.

I didn't know it was a tree, but yeah, I can make those repairs and I can add the trucks.

That's good.

Um, board members have questions or concerns.

Comments, what was the last week's is it a six year approval?

1800 uh called first by who maybe the class approved.

Um, seventeen, I believe, whatever, two thousand seventy.

Or just ready to make it go ahead.

Having found that the work record and necessary grant is special use have been met based on the testimony provided today, the information in the file, and the technical review conducted by staff.

I would move to approve all three uh cases uh to um move to approve them for a period of 10 years subject to the conditions of the parents agreed.

I'll second.

All right, madam secretary board member St.

Arnold Bell.

I board member Rutgers, I board member current, aye.

Vice Chairman Smith.

And Chairman Wolverine.

I think so.

Thank you.

Thank you for the 10 years.

I'm very grateful.

Thank you.

Well, you put in a lot of work on the scrap.

I appreciate it.

The city appreciates it.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Take care.

All right, and then uh our next item item number 27, 347 East Ward Street request to occupy the premises as a community center.

Is there anyone in present or online?

Yes, I'm here.

Okay.

Anyone online that would like to speak?

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

Sure.

My name is Jenny Graf, G R O P P.

Personal mailing address?

Uh just where you'd like to receive the um 347 East Ward Street.

Milwaukee, 532.

Could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under all that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and not the button truth?

Yes.

All right.

Um, so it's sort of a standard condition, but we are requesting that you uh apply for a loading zone on board.

Um, I think you're gonna find it's useful given that area does get particularly parked up.

Right.

Other than that, nothing to add.

All right, DNS, no additional comments.

DC, nothing additional.

This is a kind of a similar, very similar uses, but it's a higher use of the space, um, which worked out well in this, in my opinion.

Um, do you have anything additionally?

We do your uh submissions in your plan of operation.

Uh do you have anything additional that you wish for us to consider?

None of the slides.

Okay, board members have any questions?

No.

Uh no questions.

I'll just say I comment, but I've had the opportunity to uh get to know um woodland pattern through various um efforts throughout Milwaukee, and uh they're great.

This is a wonderful location, so we're really excited to see you move in.

And with that, I would move to make uh an appro or a motion unless the enter comments.

Having found the criteria necessary to grant especially these have been met based on the testimony provided today, technical review by staff and the information on the file.

I move to approve this for a period of 10 years subject to the conditions of the summary second, board member Sandra.

Hi, board member rocker, hi.

Board member current, hi.

Vice Chairman's mine speech, and Chairman Wilbert.

Hi, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Item number 28, 3800 West Campbell Avenue request to occupy the premises as a motor vehicle filling space.

Is there anyone present?

Is anyone online for this item that would like to speak?

That's a fair.

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

I have just one date line for everyone.

That's that's uh P A K H A R S I N G H.

Okay.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry.

Oh, do you spell your name?

Just sleeping.

We want the core reporter to make sure your names are spelled.

Uh B-H-O-P-I-M-D-R last name is Sir Joe S-I-D-H-U.

Thank you.

Could you all please raise your right hands?

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

All right, let's go to DPW.

Okay.

So we had some questions, or I had some questions when I reviewed the plans.

So I'm gonna emphasize the first condition that we are looking for a revised site plan.

Uh that it be that a the applicant submit a revised site plan to those office for approval by the zoning administration group within 30 days.

Revised site plan must include enough details to determine and confirm that the pedestrian connection between North Hopkins Street and the main building entrance will be ABA compliant.

Must show all site features, including building entrances, and must show the location of bike parking.

Um additionally, second condition I want to emphasize is that the ramp located on the west end of the building, which is not ADA compliant, is removed within 60 days.

Any replacement ramp must be ADA compliant?

Um, and then yeah, otherwise nothing to add.

Just to clarify, so you need the a site plan that's a revision that proves that it will be ADA, and then they need to answer.

Right now, the site plan we have in the book in the in the materials.

I can't tell you what direction the ramp is going.

I can tell you there might be a ramp there.

I can't tell you what direction it's facing, uh, much less anything about grades and what have you.

So we need just a little bit more detail.

Um, and then we also need that that ramp that got built with our permit needs to be dealt with because frankly it's not usable or safe.

Um, yeah, I'm not gonna get into the logistics of it here.

I could talk into that.

You caught your comfortable though with that condition being satisfied after the board takes action today.

Or you think yes.

I mean, they're gonna have to do it.

It's required anyway.

Yes, okay, thank you, DCD.

Or I'm uh sorry, you're just very quiet over there.

We have a lot today.

Yeah, DNS, no additional comments.

BC, uh our original comments uh did not make the original um rebook, but I believe that we can have the monitor cowards we do.

We don't, but I can do that.

We have them.

They did they I think you need sent them later in this afternoon.

Um so we have them.

All right, um board members' questions relative to the just one quick question.

Has the um facility been vacant for a period of time?

For how long?

Uh, yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, have they found that the criteria necessary to implement the special use of that?

Sound the evidence in the file.

I would make motion to approve this for a period of five years conditions in the area of subordinate.

Second, secretary, board member saying I don't know.

Hi, board member rocker, hi board member current, hi.

Vice chairman, Chairman Lumber.

Hi, just make sure you meet with uh DVD number to get the site line.

Good.

Thank you very much.

All right, so item number 29, 3841 West Billard Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises of the light more vehicle sale than reviewed the cell.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 3841 West Villard Avenue?

And Mr.

Chair.

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

Stacy Kern, 3841 West Dillard Avenue, Milwaukee 53209.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Can you use the mailing addresses, please?

I think it's about the um 2525 or 13.

And then 3841 was the home.

Oh, good time.

I do low nine.

Thank you.

Could you all please raise your right hands to your farm under health, but the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth.

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

Okay, DPW.

The Department of Public Works continues to have concerns regarding the small size of the premises for the proposed uses of motor vehicle sales and repair.

The applicant is requested to increase the number of vehicles parked on the lot.

However, plans show that the additional vehicles will be parked on an area that is not within the limits of the property.

DPW does not believe that there is sufficient space for additional vehicles to be parked on the lot and does not support an increase of vehicles being parked on the dispersal.

The initial plan of operation states that clients will have the option to dispose of their own use tires if they should choose not to pay the environmental disposal fee.

Well, the applicant has stated that customers are not responsible for disposal of their own tires.

The applicant has not specified that customers will be required to pay the disposal fee and to allow the applicant to properly dispose of use tires.

DPW continues to be concerned by the policy where customers have a choice in how tires are disposed.

Will resulting customers dumping tires in other properties, such as the adjacent railroad right away.

Should the Board of Zoning Appeals choose to grant the special use, DPW requests a series of conditions.

I do want to emphasize the first condition that no more than nine vehicles be parked on the site at any time for any reason.

Thank you, DNS.

No additional comments, DC, not traditional.

So this plan of operation, this updated one.

Um it does talk about having a uh service for tire disposal.

Is this are you intending to change and not make it optional to to you know essentially taking over the tire disposal for customers?

That was to address that concern that we uh yeah, like we don't do nothing with the tires.

A lot of people come in and say, Can I change a tire?

Can you do it?

We don't do that, we send them across the street to Sam's Auto Body, which is the body repair shop.

So I don't know if there's confusion because all through the day.

I'll get people in there, got a tire for this.

No, you go across the street or down the street because we don't do that.

So I don't know if that's where the confusion is coming in.

The um plan of operation says blue box out of motive plans to operate at the second-hand used car dealership and tire repair business.

Yeah.

So it's right in the plate of operation.

Yeah, we just had a copy.

Okay, I see that here now.

Um I mean, I'm just the secretary.

But being there every day, I do a lot of people.

Could you go across to Sam's Auto Beauty?

Um, because we don't do that there.

That would all a lot of people say, can I just need to walk out the other day and had a flat tire, and Romy had to drive me around two blocks around so they could patch up my tire for me because I picked up a nail, so we don't have that to do it at this point.

We have the garage, but we don't repair in that garage or do anything with the tires.

So I guess I'm a little lost on that, but well, who prepared this plan?

Well, Romy did it, so apparently they're going to be doing it.

But I know as of right now, he's not doing anything.

And if he is, well, then I'm costing them money because I'm shooting them.

Okay.

Well, that's we gotta get this kind of cleared up.

Yeah, kind of mean problem.

Right.

So the whole thing is the tire issue, repairing tires.

Well, as a small lot, but you've been able to um function, there's worried about expanding, and it's not really in your business, can't quite grow, but the concern I believe in the city is that when most places that they're gonna do tire work, they take the old tires, the customer pays a recycling fee, you take keep the tires and then you have a tire service come and dispose of the concern is if you offer if you let customers take their type old tires with them, they end up dumped somewhere because it's a because you have to pay a disposal fee to get rid of tires, and it's people what other what else would they be doing with them if they're not gonna pay you to disposal, they're gonna dump them in a on a vacant lot or something.

That's what the city is concerned about.

There's a propensity to that.

It it does happen a lot.

I mean, I I you see it right in the side of the road.

I I don't know why people think that oh, I can dispose in a different way, that's pay the fee, but that's what happens, right?

So that's the concern.

So if there's not if you're going to be um as your plan of operation states, set doing tire repair.

I just want to make sure I understand is is this our customers going is first of all, is that true?

Going to do tire work?

No, well, I don't know if they wrote it wrong on here what they did because it's we don't we don't repair anything on the tire.

No, that's why it's kind of auto.

Well, I guess I mean who who prepared this because I mean there was correspondence from somebody from Stacy on May 13 talking about how you all dispose of old tires.

Um, so you say they are not customers are not responsible for disposal of their own tires.

There's a tire company that comes and picks up, and you have three racks that you differentiate between sales and disposed of, right?

So we just kind of understand.

They're in the garage or as racks with the old tires that are sitting there, right?

But we don't change a tire on premise.

Oh, I'm saying it's right.

We don't change tires, we don't sell tires.

So, I don't know if those tires to me, because when he's brought in cars back from the auction, there's been extra tires in there that he throws in the garage or tire route.

Okay, so just explaining us the up the operation currently.

Um, we're not buying cost.

No, I bring it back to the shop.

You can look at sometimes tires will get tanked, but no no customers have anything to do with it.

No, uh, put them in a garage.

Okay.

Yeah, I've seen him do that.

If he brings back a vehicle and the tires like balled and things popping out of it that shouldn't be, they'll change it out for the customer because we don't want nobody driving away in something that's gonna go boom, but as far as a regular tire changing place, like I said, if it is, I't costing him money, because I always shoe them across the street.

So I think this is what I would recommend for the sake of time of y'all's hand-house.

Um, what I would say is y'all figure off what the plan of operation is going to be.

What we'll do is adjourn this, which means that we'll that you all come up with a clear plan.

So when you come back, we know what we're voting because right now the testimony and what we have on record is completely different, so it's it's just confusing.

So what I would say is I would actually motion to adjourn this to give you all time to just pant out what your plan of operation is if you include tires fine.

If it doesn't, that's fine, but we need it to be clear in your plan.

Okay, and then what you can do is when you clear up that plan, we'll get you scheduled and then you all can come back.

So just call back.

Yeah, wait, wait.

You can call it Bozo.

This is probably something that can be worked out.

It's just confusing.

I don't want you to don't worry about it.

Just we need to be a clearing force.

Yeah, yeah.

What I would say is if there's no tires, then make it very clear.

If there is some work with tires, that's fine, but then I would, you know, you've heard the concern about um what can happen.

Yeah, you are not collecting those tires, so work that into the plan.

Right.

Okay, and so there's a motion.

Second, uh Madam Secretary.

Board members saying I don't know.

Hi, board member records aye, board member current.

Hi, vice chairman's nice week, and chairman other.

Hi, all right, thank you.

I just can I ask one question.

I have letters from other businesses in the area about our business.

You those if I don't know if we have those submit anything else that you want to see in the next files in the boat, there's a file.

Oh, and then we have a reading some letters that are supportive.

Okay, so thank you all.

Have a good day.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Item number 30, 9921 West Carmen Avenue has had a second.

Item number 31, 7501 West Little Avenue.

Request occupy the premises as a light motor vehicle sales facility and to continue occupying the premises of the light motor vehicle in here in the city.

And this is a new operator.

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

Jonathan Tucker, so you can 740 West B2 Avenue, Walking Wisconsin Power 323.

Jonathan Tucker, 1326 Jartson Street, racing Wisconsin.

Thank you.

Could you both please raise your right hands?

We affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to get is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but your yes.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 7501 West Villard Avenue?

Please raise your hand if you're here to speak on that case.

Yeah.

Right.

Just wanted to emphasize one condition.

Uh that no more than 13 vehicles are parked outside of the lot for any reason at any time, and otherwise it's standard conditions from DBW.

Yes, no, it should cover DCD.

Uh pictures show that several years ago the site has been decent landscaping, but uh there's been turnover in operation, but it's kind of overall and whatnot.

So our conditions basically the last week, and then we fire on the that's the time.

We're in accordance with the last week, that was the week on April 1st of which year.

Okay, um board members, we got like we can question these guys for like 40 minutes.

Okay.

Anybody have any questions?

No, you guys have anything else you want to add that we have your submissions?

Um it's pretty straightforward.

What was the uh year?

You what you guys have just taken over this site, correct?

Right.

Yeah, we're missing it.

We see three-year lease, you said something.

I have some year lease.

All right.

I'll second.

I remember recording.

Board member current.

I'm chairman.

And Chairman.

All right.

Thank you.

I think item number thirty.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah.

How do we give us a h do we give us a h do we give us a h do we give us a h do we give us a h do we give us a hug We're gonna get uh started with a three fifteen portion of the calendar.

Um, here uh, I just want to see the other one.

Karen, are you back?

I'm back.

Sorry, too.

I'm here.

Thank you.

All right, thanks, Karen.

And welcome everyone to the three fifteen uh portion of our meeting tonight.

Um, we have a different room today, a little bit different.

So be careful what you say.

No, but if you ever speak quiet, so then we can.

Um, we'll call each item in order, and if it's your item or you're here to speak on it in any capacity, come forward, considering the mailing addresses with the city departments.

Um, and then we will uh probably have some questions, or we maybe we have some additional information you'd like us to know, and then we will take action on each item.

So we don't have any adjournments that's this blocked, I don't have to leave.

So I guess let's just get started with item 33.

Item number 33, 1568 North Farwell Avenue.

Request install a projecting sign that exceeds the maximum number allowed per building.

This matter was previously adjourned from the May 7, 2026 consent agenda at the request of an interested party three.

Staff's recommendation without the benefit of any oral testimony having been taken on the matter, was for an approval to run with the land.

Um is there anyone here for 1568 in the carwell?

Okay, could you all come up?

And then is there anyone online that would like to speak on this item?

Um please uh raise your hand if you'd like to speak on 1568 North Farwell.

Okay, Mr.

Chair, I don't see anybody's hands online.

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

I'll start with you.

Tom Stacey 333 East Chicago Street.

Thank you.

Sean Stacey 1570 North Farwell.

Uh Ben Proc now Innovative Science.

And um, could you give your mailing addresses?

2170 road.

Thank you.

Can I could you please raise your right hands?

Do you affirm on your oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truthful truth and nothing but the two?

Yes.

Yeah, but nothing to add, you know that's still coming.

We see not very interesting.

I can probably streamline this a little bit.

Sent the message that you're going to be projecting light.

Those are all the complaints were about that's not what it means until we decide it sticks out on the wall.

Right.

So does anybody I not to diminish the objection?

One of them was anonymous and didn't say anything.

The other was more about light pollution.

This is not what we're talking about at all.

So I would be inclined to adopt staff's recommendations.

Anyone has any concerns?

Let's hear them.

No concerns.

I would say you didn't have to get the sign cattured on your armor.

You're committed.

Uh I would make motion to approve status recommendations about the second.

Board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Hi, board member record.

Hi.

Board member Curran.

Hi.

Vice Chairman Smithski.

Chairman Lambert.

Hi.

Sorry.

Yeah, I don't came all prepared, but it was some of it's it gets confusing.

I think we've cleared it up.

So, thank you for your time.

Thanks.

All right.

So item item number 34.

2315, inside the role place.

Request to add an addition or sunroom to the single family dwelling that does not meet the minimum rear setback required.

Um, popping up, is there anyone online that would like to speak on 2315 these hyphen home place?

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

Okay.

And again, I'm not seeing any where you stands.

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

Can you call 2315 East Ivan Hall Place?

Keith Barnes, KCB Architects 400 East Wisconsin Avenue and Milan.

Thank you.

Could you both please raise your right hand?

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

Yes.

Nothing right, DNS.

So comment.

Um I'm trying to find a way to make this meeting more interesting.

But is there anything that you want us to know about the plan?

It's a very detailed plan.

Looks like it will be a really nice addition.

Um, other than just to mention it's a it's a unique lot in that it's a shallower lot that's the same depth as the adjacent corner lot, but this one is an interior lot, and so with the corner lot, the rear yard setback is 25 feet with an interior lot, it's 20 feet.

Which um this is because this lot is shallower, the same depth as the adjacent corner lot, and there's a precedent in the neighborhood, which we provided um as an exhibit on sheet a zero nine um, including properties directly across the street that are also interior lots that have less than a 20-foot rear yard setback um we felt like it was in keeping with the context for the neighborhood and a good um a good consideration for a variance or an exception and I think it's also distinguishable from addition to fronts properties where it's like really changes the character of the street in front of you adjacent properties the board members have concerns with the application else the criteria necessary to grant those conventional variants have based on the evidence of focus to make motion to grant those with any conditions from the European slide.

Yes I'll second board member saying on the ball hi board member hi board member current by chairman's my chairman over thank you very much to care good luck with the project item number 35 929 northwater street request and stall a changeable message wall sign and a free standing sign that exceeds the maximum display area allowed um and then I'll just talk is there anyone that is online for 929 Northwater Street that would like to speak um please raise your hand okay and I'm not seeing any range online give us your names and mailing addresses please sure uh Robert Concord at 333 East Erie Street Grant Bikes 929 Northwater Street would you go please raise your right hands the affirmative that the testimony are about to give is the treat the whole two to nothing but I do okay so I just wanted to emphasize one of our conditions that the sign will not rotate well either any changeable message sign that the sign will not rotate advertisements or messages more frequently than every eight seconds and will not incorporate video or any other motion display.

Can you clarify what videos we were talking about then um are you concerned about checking live video or if there's motion motion in general motion.

So static so we're aiming for static okay so if you're either transitioning from one screen to another display can there be any motion and or like a sweep or something yeah yeah it just needs like live video I'll be honest I'm not gonna get to be that big of a stickler about it.

The goal is to avoid uh distraction of drivers and is to avoid uh you know these people like me get nauseous if you move things around um you know when and frankly I don't we need to not have people distracted any worse than they already are especially um you know when people are blocking their way to the PAC on the logic so I think we will just looking for clarification ideally I mean ideally my ideal would be like think like a billboard where you're going from one image to the next image to the next image you're not sweeping across per se okay um again it might get to be a stickler sitting out there you know camp with a with the chair and camping out to watch this probably not but um and yeah we can agree to this yeah that's not a problem for us you know uh do you see me nothing on your um board members like they're simply modernizing the existing signage, nothing sentence.

Do you want to make it?

Okay.

So I guess I'll make it.

Having found that the criteria necessary to grant the uh special use have that meant based on the testimony provided today, the technical review by staff.

I would make motion to approve this for a period of 15 years.

This is going to be considered in the forward conventional special use.

I didn't know which way he was going to do that.

I would make a motion to approve it to run with the land.

Subject to the conditions of the hearing summary.

Board member saying I don't know about.

Hi.

Board Member Rockford.

Aye.

Board Member Current.

Hi.

Vice Chairman Sumisky.

Right.

And Chairman Wilbert.

Hi.

Alright.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item number 36.

818 East Mason Street.

Request and stall a wall sign mounted to Vision Glass.

And see if some people walking up.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 818 EC as well?

Please raise your hand.

Okay.

Could you please give us your next slide?

Well, there's people on there, but no one can.

Could you give us your names of your hand addresses, please?

Sure.

Tracy Litterman, 720 East Wisconsin.

Thank you.

Could you uh please raise your right hands?

You affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth to hold 2005.

Yes.

DPW, nothing to that, yes, the comment.

DC.

All right.

This is a little bit of an unusual meeting so far.

It's sort of straightforward.

But anybody have any concerns or questions?

I think you said the word though.

It's your fault.

No questions.

Okay.

Well, is there a motion?

Uh I'll make a motion.

Mr.

Chair having found that the criteria for this dimensional variance have been met based upon the information that we have in our file.

And the technical review by staff.

I will make a motion to approve this to run with the land.

Board member Saint Ronald Bell.

Hi.

Board Member Offer.

Hi.

Board Member Current.

Hi.

Hi.

And Chairman Rover.

Hi.

Thank you.

Item number 37.

7822 West Capitol Drive.

Request to allow an automatic changeable message for the standing sign letting seats and maximum display area allowed.

This matter has been enjoyed on two separate occasions.

Initially it was adjourned from the September 11, 2025 public hearing agenda.

The applicant submitted materials on May 18, 2026 in an effort to comply with this request.

And I do see Alderman Westmoreland.

Yes.

And then is there anyone else online here for subme 22 West Capital Drive?

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

Okay.

I don't see any other raised hands.

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

Sure.

Um I guess you have a not one four five last five roads.

I'll be shaking sounding to the list of capital there.

And you can say that 325125 union rule based on something.

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 a truthful old truth and nothing but just wanting to uh emphasize the condition that we're asking for that the sign will not rotate advertisements or messages more frequently than every eight seconds and will not incorporate video or other motion display?

Yes, no comment DC.

The original request was for a 144 square foot sign because we do sit down with the reduced 64.

Uh at that size, you see, which is not opposing.

Alright, um, I do remember we had some testimony about this item already.

Other than Wes Merlin, I think you were also present at the last one, or at least we've had correspondence from your office.

Do you have any if you had a chance to review the revised sign plan?

And do you have any additional?

What else do you have for us on this file, please?

No, uh, and it's it is hard to hear.

I know you guys are in a different room.

Um, can you tell me the difference in measurement or sizing uh would which would be allowed versus what they're requesting?

This type of sign uh would be permitted up to 50 square feet.

Okay, and question for the applicant.

Why does the sign have to be larger than what's allowed?

Well, the situation here is we bought the property and those weren't existent signs that it's already in there.

Um at least the uh the previous owner uh when they pulled the permit, uh it was um they submitted the wrong drawings, and the actual sign was a little bit bigger than what it was submitted.

So that's the situation we deal with there, you know, right now.

And maybe this is a peak question, but can you tell me um why there's a sign uh max size requirement, and why are we considering uh ignoring that?

Well, yeah, there was a structure out there with the sign on it.

They made significant changes so that it's moving way, way, way towards conformity.

They originally proposed 144 square feet, um, and they're trying to modify an existing sign structure, and uh, you do not object to the getting a little bit over and trying to find the square, which you hear that, Alderman.

No, it's it's everybody's gonna use their outdoor.

Yeah, it's essentially.

Yes, wait, this is the call reporter, and I'll ask that that be repeated as well.

I'm not getting it clear, which is too far away.

I think from the microphone.

There are no microphones.

Sorry, I'm struggling with the other.

So what Mr.

Richardson says said was uh this was an existing structure that was out that was much larger, and then this applicant has taken steps to bring it much, much, much closer to conformity.

It was like almost three times larger than the allowed site is before.

Now it's just 14 square feet larger.

Um, for those reasons because when these situations exist, DCD uh generally uh will will be a little bit relaxed more relaxed in its um comments when the effort is being made to bring it much much closer to conformity.

Is that fairly state what you're doing, though?

Okay.

So I think it's it's a matter of just is are the efforts that they have taken not being the ones that erected this sign in the first place to bring it into conformity, uh, you know, is does that warrant a variance to um you know given that they didn't cause this problem to be getting like is essentially what the applicant I think is is arguing.

Yes.

Does the applicant question for the applicant do you consider this an invest an investment or an upgrade?

I mean, um at the moment um we're just not trying to take the signs.

I mean, we're trying to uh adjust it as much as we can so we don't have to redo this whole project again.

Are you interested in any other building investments?

Because if I'm being completely honest, I don't want to support this because I'm sick and tired of driving past this property in the grasses up to my thigh.

Um, I'm sick and tired of the condition of the fence at the alley.

Um, I'm sick and tired of the way the property looks if I'm being frank.

Um it's frustrating.

You own the building, um, and you're you're you're collecting rent from your um your tenants, but this has been a constant eyesore along Capitol Drive.

And I've I've gone back and forth with the tenants there, I've gone back and forth with you guys, and I have not seen anything change for the first time this season.

The grass was cut two days ago.

That is frustrating.

That is unacceptable.

So with that said, I I I'm I'm not willing to support this.

I am not willing to support this because you're may honestly you're making my job harder because I've got a babysit your location.

Now you want support here, but I can't get you to work with me on maintaining this property.

That is frustrating.

Yeah, that's understandable.

Well, we can try to keep up more with the property.

I believe the fence was fixed um before, and some some smart truck ran into it, so we have to fix it again.

But that's that was taken care of, and somebody ran into it.

Have you seen it recently?

Um it sounds like you have not seen the fence recently.

That's a problem that's frustrating.

I need you guys to be present.

I need you guys to look at the property.

I need you guys to maintain.

I see you smiling, it's really not funny, it's frustrating.

Well, I think he said Alderman, I think he said that the fence was just recently damaged again.

Yeah, so I think I think the it was damaged by someone on the world.

We fixed it and spent a lot of money on it and fixed it like two days later, it's a my truck running, I had to go to the alley, so they break again.

So we fixed the game right away.

My question is my question is when was the last time you've seen the fence?

I've seen it this morning.

When did you see it last?

Today.

And there's nothing wrong with nothing wrong with the fence as you've seen it today.

We have pictures with the two.

Well, we're we're I think the point here, the point that the alderman is making is you're asking for, you know, to be free from some of the constraints of the code.

And this is related to signage, right?

It's not related to the use, it's not related to, but uh what he's frustrated by is that it seems like there's been some discussions about maintaining this property and other things, and I think the expectation is reasonable that all property owners maintain and and then to the extent that it's the tenants' responsibility, maintain properties uh so that they are looking at they contribute positively to the neighborhood.

We, you know, we what we have to consider is that we have we have the ability to if we were to approve something like this, even though it's it's it's the sign and not you know the use.

Um to shorten the um, you know, make it not make it it's a dimensional variance that would run with the land, you could choose to shorten it and have some accountability.

And also there are other enforcement mechanisms.

Uh you know, if you have grass that's too tall, you need it cited for that and things like that.

Fences and this but there's other issues, but I think that Alderman is asking um, you know, for you to be better, better neighbors, and I don't know.

We are looking at a photograph of the fence that at least what I'm seeing.

Um I can't, I don't see anything wrong with the fence.

This is from the applicant's phone.

But I think that the fence is sort of a separate issue.

But it's it's a part of the general concept that being better neighbors and better stewards of the property manager over the city of Milwaukee.

Um, that we can come back to you.

Alderman, I just lazy has your hand up.

Like it's class.

Well, you want to talk one at a time.

I know it's I would like to hear more about why.

I mean, I heard that this is a sign that you inherited.

I'm looking at the pictures of the property.

We have signage on the building, and you have some static signage at the top of the um structure that it advertises the two the two businesses that are in the building.

Um, why do you need four?

Like, I I don't feel like I heard that the structure was already there, but the structure is clearly situated in such a manner that you could easily accommodate a 50 square foot sign or or a sign that falls within the code requirements.

Why do you need additional things?

Are there tenants that aren't in there that like you anticipate new tenants?

Are there messages that you're trying to share related to the businesses that like help me understand that?

Yes.

Well, the building has a three path.

So one of the tenants does not have a sign, so they will have to be losing the screen.

That's what all the way to the carries.

Um, so I mean, maybe it's just because of three patches and there's not enough space for it would be a better idea.

You get louder, please.

Um, the it said it's a three tenants building.

Um so one of the tenants uh does not have uh uh a space to put their sign in there, so that's the the screen, uh that the LED screen is their only way to to advertise their business, so when you fill the third tenant space, that LED sign will be a static sign for that tenant.

Oh, I mean it's it's been used by by all three tenants, but one of the tenants that's their only the only sign they they use.

Yes, but it's it's been being it's been used by all three tenants because it changes slides for all three of them, they all share.

I mean, I don't really looking at the building.

There's no shortage of signage here, right?

It's pretty easy to see.

Looking at historical photos, it looks like there is a box portion of the sign on the upper, the changeable message on the lower, the structure itself seems sound.

I think there are ways that this could be modified to really be aligned with code.

I I'm not, you know, I I think you could either do away with the static box or do away with the changeable message, you know, kind of swap one or the other, and you'd still have really effective signage at this location.

I think the combination of the two, not only is it much larger, but it it isn't clear to me that it provides any additional value that isn't already being provided by the signage on the building, and couldn't be accomplished within the confines of the code.

So that is my it's a with the outdoor sign, you have to read the changeable message sign, the monument sign.

You have to redesign the sign.

This is not built.

I mean, I know it exists, but your real plan is gonna require modifying it.

Um, that's what's existed for it.

So this where it's eight feet to 40, 4 feet, plus the triangle that is existing.

And what were we considering before the plans were changed?

I think it also does the sign of the building.

The sign on the building, we've made that smaller.

That was huge.

Yeah, maybe there could be some clarification from DC.

Is it the combined square footage of the two signs we're talking about here?

My recollection of the referral letter was that they were speaking about it.

Total signage.

Because eight four eight by eight is not uh they don't combine, they don't combine the wall of the free standard is a little bit.

So we're talking about the 64 square feet of the monument sign that exists, and that's it.

The signage that was the changes made to the signage on the building are just acceptable at this point.

It's I think they were also still five times building.

Right.

Like we've still didn't use the building sign, so that makes no difference.

And then they modified this sign.

But it's not modified.

So you were you gonna build, were you wanting to replace where just I want to make sure nothing got lost here in the transmission of this file to us?

Where do the 144 square feet come from?

That's I believe that's the previous wall sign on the building.

On the building, but that got reduced to 64.

Now for for the pre-standing sign, um, very sure it's not 50 square.

Um I'm not really sure what's the what's the minimum for that, but um I believe that's the the the 50s for this for the wall sign.

So speaks of uh 64 square foot type of change and that's which free standard sign, allowed the 15 square foot index of 14.

Yeah, but so the wall signage, like that's above the door entry.

No, it's a changeable.

I know, I understand that that we're considering the free standing.

That's what you're at, but it's over.

Was that ever part of it?

I see sign plans in here for it, but it's not cited on the when this came to us.

My recollection is that when this came to us months ago, they were also seeking approval for excessive wall signage.

Right.

It's my understanding that they've now met the wall signage.

Yes, okay.

Perhaps agreed to beat the wall sign, right?

But they haven't actually done it.

That may be the case.

Anyway, go ahead.

Um the previous referral letter said that the wall sign was 131 square feet.

Um, so that was also over.

They've reduced it so that it meets code.

So that meets code.

We're not talking about the wall sign.

We are simply, I just don't understand what 145.

So this the 144 was also a sided for the freestanding sign, it's now been reduced to the 64.

Which what makes me uh bring back my confusion is that if the sign that exists today right now is approximately 64 square feet, we're used to.

No, it's not uh the the plans we've submitted as I mean, it's hard to send, but it's it it might vote for the for the screen and another addition to it also.

So that would be more than six and four.

So what you're telling us is that sign that currently exists now.

We drove up there, it would be larger than the sign that you are proposing in the in the no.

My drawings, the drawings, I don't know if you guys can see them, but that's what I said right there.

That's what's existing there.

Okay.

The original uh pattern showed something that was 16 by 16.

Now it shows up the fact that it was basically.

But I mean, I I feel like I'm in the twilight side.

If where did this 16 but you you have an existing structure that you just want to keep, correct?

Yes.

So where was this?

Was there a thought to build a larger monument sign in the planning lot?

Or where is this?

Someone just screwed something up.

Okay, so I mean, the whole story with this.

Um the the initial uh drawings was submitted by a different contractor that after we took over, we did more accurate drawings of what's existed there.

So I believe that's that's where the difference comes from.

So it's it's it's really always it's already measured wrong.

It's the same sign, yeah.

Corrected the wall sign, that is conforming, and now you are simply seeking a variance to maintain the monument sign that exists.

Yeah, I believe that's probably still over.

But I'm not sure.

Well, yeah, it's ordered by Bob Proc.

It's at the angle at the top but like the rough square footage in fact that arguably makes it even a little bit closer because you have to slice out that pie uh so it's not quite 64 square feet but um I've got to well so that so the question is um are we going to approve they want us to approve the sign as it exists or if they if they're gonna make modifications that have that sign has to come down but the the steps taken to bring signage and as a whole in the conformity was making the wall sign on the building legal the first place now it's just one variance.

Is that is that your guys's yeah that I look the the measurements the initial one that it was submitted by a year ago those were wrong so we we took more accurate measurements.

So now that we're clear in Alderman uh Westmore did you have any additional comments but I'm assuming your comments are not going to change.

The only thing I'll say is that I've I've addressed the concerns today multiple times previously and what I've seen today was a smirk on the face from an applicant that is seeking approval that is the attitude of many of our real estate owners around this city.

I'll leave it at that and I'm okay whatever the whatever the board chooses to do.

Right well thank you for your comments um and I and regardless of what the board chooses to do for the applicants you know even if this even if the sign is not approved you're still gonna be property owners and you know just I would encourage you to try to work more closely with the elected officials in your district to be you know good neighbors you know you know okay well Lindsay back to you you have a clear I I am clear now I was not before I'm clear yes do you have additional comments or you kind of you still I don't know that I can film everything right on that I kind of this is an applicant that I believe has worked in good phase to modify the plan to be in more conformance with the uh the statutes that set the stage for the um signage size the size of the site uh based on that I would be supportive of short term here to make sure that the signages and uh property is going to be uh taken care of as the authors are uh pointed out so I would make motion to approve this for a period of two years with any conditions in the hearing so right is there a second you know I I'm willing to speculate this and the reason is if we deny this they have they can do nothing and get fined or whatever and make a business decision and um then it's out of our hands right but or if we're gonna grant an approval which by the way if this came in with the proper measurements in the first place may not have been uh raised a lot as many heckles um however still make the property conditions can always be an issue um if if it's not well kept and this is an opportunity to see how things go and if it comes back you know and there's still the same problems then we have to vote at it again it's unusual for a sign but you're you're no worse for the rare you get a you know if you become good stays uh maintain your properties appropriately then you know consider making it so long-term or permanent approval.

If not, you're gonna have to make the investment that we could make you make right now, right so um thank you.

That's kind of my thought i i seconded the motion, uh, but that means we have to vote on it, so madam secretary.

Um board member St.

Arnold Bell, no.

Board number record, no.

Board number current.

Um, yeah.

All right, is there a second?

Is that motion fails?

Is there a different motion?

I think motion to uh deny the request um for the request before us.

I'll second board members and Arnold Bell.

Hi, board member up here.

Hi.

Board member current, vice chairman's nice week.

Chairman Albert.

No, but it does not ask tonight, so we have to fix that sign.

Oh, good.

All right, thank you.

Thank you, I think you appreciate it.

Item number 38, 8210 West Capital Drive.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a motor vehicle filling station.

Um is there anyone online that was here to speak on 8210 West Capital Drive?

Please raise your hand.

I'm not seeing any raised hands, and this is still an Alderman Westmoreland's district.

Um could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

It's my name is Sartre Windows.

And I don't want to see and uh my address is 3380,000 or something.

I think it's a five.

Okay.

Karen, did you catch that?

Not perfectly.

Could you I'm sorry, could you repeat it again?

Yes, my name is Sat Windows, and my address is 3380, but it will repeat the sponsor 5305.

Okay.

Was that better?

Better that's better.

Thank you.

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 nothing but the truth?

Yes.

All right, DPW.

Nothing to add yes.

The department is not opposed to the renewal of the gas station occupancy.

It must be put on record that over $8,000 in reinspection fees have been issued over the last two years, enforcing an order for the gas station to submit a revised and approvable landscape plan and to then install the landscaping.

The plan has now been submitted and approved.

The department recommends a short period of approval so the report can be presented by neighborhood services that the property is in compliance with the board of zoning appeals conditions of approval, and then I have standard gas station conditions of approval.

Alright, uh DCE.

I believe uh, be able to verify the pictures were taken recently.

May 31st.

So the pictures show that some landscaping has been installed.

Um, we have a condition that landscaping must be installed like such and such a date.

Um, obviously, can't tell from the findings that are out there as to what is there actually needs to be pretty small.

It is insufficient versus the approved plan.

So I was stick with our um original condition, which we had the last week plan that was submitted on the 2026.

Wanted that planet installed within 90 days of the board approval discussion.

Okay, thank you.

Um Alderman Westmoreland, this is also in your district.

Are you still there?

Yes, I'm here.

I have no issues with this one.

Okay, thank you.

Um board members.

I mean, we have no issues, but I am very curious why you would rack up eight thousand dollars in lines.

I mean, the cost of those lines, you could have probably installed two landscaping places.

Yeah, so what happened?

Uh uh we met with the bad contractor.

So you told us he all simply uh you know with BOSA and uh working with them, and uh he didn't got the approval, but he we pay him to do all the landscaping and uh the inspector came and we thought everything is okay, but uh inspector E plus writing it on that uh landscaping is there, but where is the approval?

So that due to that bad contractor, we ran up with this problem, so now we get rid of him.

Uh I had another one.

He submitted the plan again, and now we are putting more plans and uh building.

Okay, thank you for that.

So sometimes you've got a bit of back.

Well that's a pretty satisfactory explanation.

It's already it seemed like it was already in the works, new engagement with new architecture, that's the architecture would put uh the new landscape union, correct?

Yes, it won't be replacing the plan.

Yes, yes, it means that we are putting a little pencil there, you know, so that the letter will not go beyond upper lot, you know.

Yeah, okay.

Board members, any other questions?

Not is there a motion?

The criteria necessary to write those special use have the met uh based on the evidence and file testimony received.

But make motion for a period of uh three years with any conditions in the hearing summary.

I'll second, uh, and secretary.

Board member St.

Arnold.

I board member record, I board member current, I vice chairmanski, and Chairman Momber.

Hi.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Item number 39, 405 West Center Street.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a restaurant with a drive-through facility.

Is there anyone online here to speak on 405 West Center Street?

Um, if you're online and you'd like to speak on this matter, please raise your hand.

Okay.

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

Same a yacht, 8215 South Park Bay Port, Oak Creek, Wisconsin, 5315.

My Hera Yacht, L155 S7660 Ray Tree Court, Mosquito, Wisconsin.

Thank you.

Could you both please raise your right hands?

You affirm under all of the testimony we're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes.

Uh DPW.

Nothing but DS, no additional colour, DCD, nothing in your small.

Um, this is just a renewal.

Is it uh three?

Is it three years last time?

10 years.

I think the restaurant has been closed for a long time.

We were approved, but uh, never opened up, so it's still kind of for the upper at least to watch in the most recent futures.

So it's never been operating since 2022.

It's it was operating, we had issues with the foundation, we fixed it.

Um for the past couple of years, it's been broken into like multiple times, costs us thousands of dollars.

You know, we're trying to get it back open again.

So we're wearing all of them when do you think you can open?

I can open in a couple of weeks.

Okay, board members.

I have no posters, can make a motion.

Having found the uh criteria necessary to grant especially used have a met based on the testimony provided today, uh, information in the file.

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

I'll second.

Board member St.

Ronald Bell.

Hi.

Board member record.

Hi.

Board member current.

Hi.

Vice Chairman Smith speaker.

Chairman Walbert.

Hi, all right, good luck.

It was purposely uh approved for 10 years.

I think that the well, I'm not gonna speak for board members in our belly.

I think it's just because it hadn't really.

Because it was closed for a period of time.

But if it comes, if you guys are open from that, so it's great.

We know I'll probably give you all on the next time.

Okay, thank you.

Yep, thanks, guys.

Item number number 40.

4344 West Capital Drive.

Request to have a light motor vehicle sales facility and to continue occupying the contents of the light motor vehicle here.

Is there anyone that is online that would like to speak on this one?

Again, that's for 4344 West Capital Drive.

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

And nobody is online raising their hand.

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

Yeah, Wesley Bryant, 12351 West Beloit Road, Greenfield, Wisconsin.

That would have been bright.

One too five one West Bully Road.

And please raise your right hands.

Yes.

Yes.

All right.

Okay, just wanting to emphasize a couple conditions.

So this this building has two parking areas.

They are separated by the building.

And we are requesting that no more than six vehicles are parked outside on the lot, located east of the building for any reason at any time.

We're also requesting that no more than four vehicles are parked outside of the lot located on the west side of the building for any reason at any time.

Okay.

And then we have our standard conditions as well.

All right.

Uh DNS.

No additional comment.

DC, nothing additional.

There was a if you had been able to speak with Alderman Jackson.

Yes, I spoke with uh the assistant for uh Alderman Jackson yesterday.

Okay.

Because he there was a letter that came in just in the end of May with some concern.

Um what was your conversation with the assistant?

I never I never met this new alderman, so we just went to introduce ourselves and let them know uh what we were what we were having a hearing today, and we didn't really have any kind of other uh discussion besides just an introduction.

Okay.

Um there was a a uh neighbor, a constituent of the elder who wrote a um letter.

Actually, this is came in just yesterday, I think.

Okay, um, but there was the elder had some the staff has some photos of like there's like a grill and tires and stuff for like a blue tote, just kind of screwed about the yard.

Honestly, at that photograph, yeah.

I'm not even sure these are the same buildings, but okay.

You do you know, do you know what I'm talking about?

Well, there's like a red lettering that says Mr.

or something, is that say Mr.

Stereo?

Is that on your building?

Yeah, so what are these other pictures?

It's a totally different looking building.

Can I see the pictures?

Yeah, it looks like it's the base side of your building.

Do you want to how can I see?

That is the west side of the building.

Um, and I do have to say that I have a bit concerned because that photo shows if that is the way that those tires are stacked, those are blocking the public side.

Right.

Can I see what you're talking about?

Can you can you show them to?

I just want to get so it makes sense because there is a little uh there's like a printed sign on the door or something.

Has your company here in the photos that are in your submissions?

There's no Mr.

Stereo that is a we don't see that part of the building, okay in your photo.

So that was the concern that the elder has is that tires and stuff in the yard.

So what can you tell us about that and how you're gonna prevent that from happening?

Yeah, well, uh, because we have a tire shop, we get tires in from a couple times a week, and we know we don't have any outdoor storage, so before we close, if we did have tires that we took off of a truck and we're gonna load in the building, we make sure that the tires are in the building before we close at night.

And then there was one more thing I wanted to add.

I know there was some debris on the side of the building, too.

Uh Mr.

Stereo just got an occupancy to be in the front of the building, but some of that debris was from them, and they just ordered another uh trash bin to put the debris in.

But as far as the used tires, we understand we do not have outdoor storage, and those tires.

If we have tires that come in on the same day, we'll take them in the building.

And he so those tires in that photo that she showed you, those that was by the other stuff back, those were yours, or those were in the building that Mr.

Stereo leased and empty.

No, those those are my tires.

There's multiple cuts in the book.

Well, right, I get it, right?

I just wanted to be sure.

And then the other concern that um that the alderman had was that there's just no place for the cars to be sold, the parked cars to go, right?

The sale cars.

Okay.

Um, which the alderman?

Yeah, so so we're but you know, DPWs didn't identify.

Well, CBW now has concerns because I'm looking at the photos that the gentleman has submitted.

Um, and I have to say that there is a photo, there's a couple photos actually.

You see it from different angles where there are cars parked on the driveway approach.

That is not an acceptable part way of parking.

In fact, those vehicles are blocking the public sidewalk.

Uh, and I would request a short duration if you approve this.

Um, I'd ask for a short duration just to show because we also are seeing I'm seeing Google Street View now that I'm looking a little bit more carefully than I probably should have earlier.

I'm sorry.

Um, where I'm seeing tires that are stored outside, and it did pop in the Google, um, which means that you know what are the chances, right?

Um, and we have the the photo from the alderman with all of the tires strewn across the sidewalk in stacks.

Um, so I do not have concerns.

So, and so where are how many sales cars would you be thinking about?

A small amount, basically no more than three cars, and where are they gonna be parked for them on display for sale on the on the east side of the building, and there's about 15 spaces on that side of the building.

But that's for the that's what your diagram says.

So I'm just it's just customer cartoon.

It's part of it, and then yeah, it's 45 feet long and about 25 feet wide.

So the property is that legal parking line on that side.

Is that something from which side?

The east side would be legal, okay.

The east side is not public right of life, that's it's paved, the surface.

Um, I think I estimated it's like a little bit about 20 feet wide, actually a little bit wider than that.

I take that back because I was looking at you know, you know, helping you angle park it, um, which I don't think they're gonna do, but that's why we said you could fit six cars about there.

Let me ask you a question about disposal.

So you do get a lot of tires, right?

Because that showcase is how often um do you have them disposed?

Actually, I have a generator license and a transporter license, and uh uh I've been transporting tires since 2005.

So I do I transport tires for a lot of other people too.

Okay, yeah.

So there's never an issue with bad tires.

I'm I'm one of the tire good guys, right?

So you so you basically for those like let's say the GDL huge flow inventory, because I'm just trying to understand, right?

You'll have cars, right?

So you you lose some storage things.

So I'm just saying, how do you remove or keep those tires circulating so that you don't need that build up outside?

Um, we have trucks and we remove the tires regularly.

Okay, we like regularly, but you can't ever have tires.

I mean, I mean, yeah, it's outside.

You're talking about waste tires, right?

Tires that aren't any good, right?

Yeah, we we don't have any type of any time.

Oh any tires.

But it doesn't sound like you're playing, you have new tires inside, right?

Yeah, so and then we have used tires, but everything is inside.

Like I said, if we had a batch of good used tires that came in before the end of the day, they're in the building.

And if it's a concern that they're on the sidewalk, I can make sure that they're never on the sidewalk again.

I mean, it's it's you know, it's a practical situation, right?

Like, of course, there's not gonna be someone sitting out there all day long and seeing how many hours you have tires waiting in the delivery.

So it's kind of like what what I think Don is saying is shorting, you know, just let's if we're gonna approve it, you know, let's give you a chance to operate it when there's no complaints and we don't have pictures or done as a Google images of tires stacked outside your each time the car drives by, which is you know true, right?

What are the odds?

When it drives by, it catches this, you know, tire stance.

So that's right.

So we can't really like you know get exact details about what you're gonna do and how many minutes they can sit outside.

This is practically.

I understood.

Exactly.

But the big thing is that the through public sidewalk is not blocked by anything.

I don't want parked cars, I don't want tires, I don't care what status the tires are.

Okay, you know, no parts, what have you, that sidewalk needs to be clear, um, so that pedestrians can get through.

Um, you know, so and I would request that we add another condition to the the DBW request that you know no cars are parked on the driveway approach as well, and I will send the language more specifically to India.

All right, um, I just want to look quickly back at this uh letter that came.

I mean, this this new letter that came in was about parking, and it's your you know, you have parking.

Um it seems to me that the parking you have available, even if you have a couple of spots occupied as sales vehicles is gonna be ample to service your customers and whatever display vehicles you have.

That seems to be the conclusion of BPW as well.

So seems like we've kind of addressed the issues.

Board members, any other concerns or questions?

We could have a question for um C D uh the area of the site that's listed on cars for sale, uh there is a guardrail between property line and the building.

Is there any screening that's required to the adjacent property?

Or is the guardrail the screen?

Give me a second to uh get my Google map up so I can see this.

I kind of have the answer, but I want to go.

If I click so basically your um is next to the uh gas station, separating just like on the gas station?

Yes, there's no screening refinement, and that's thank you.

Okay, anything else, anyone?

Is there a motion?

Mr.

Chairman make motion here.

Having conduct the criteria necessary to grant the special use happen that's uh based on the evidence of the testimony you see, then make motion to approve this for a period of three years with any conditions in the hearing summary.

I'll second.

And secondary, board member St.

Arnold, oh board member record, board number current, vice chairman's nice.

Okay, Chairman Albert.

All right.

All right, thank you guys.

Thank you, G8.

Item number 41, 2825 North 46th Street.

Is that group home for five occupants?

Um, is there anyone online here to speak on 2825 North 46th Street?

Uh if you're online and you'd like to speak, please raise your hand.

Okay, I'm not getting any raised hands.

Hi, can you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Crystal McLean, one one two three five West Meadow Creek Drive, Milwaukee, 53225.

Thank you.

And could you please raise your right hand?

Do you affirm under both of the testimony you're about to give it the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do.

Hello.

Um good evening, GPW, nothing to have DNS, no additional comments.

DCD, not a digital.

All right.

Isn't the crazy you have additional submissions for us to review?

I don't think we'll be gotten our final.

No, board members, any concerns or questions for this applicant.

What was the um last people period?

Five years, for the uh, don't you have any concerns?

I have a motion, please do.

Having found that the grade period and this is the rent special use of the method based on the testimony provided today, the technical review by staff.

I'd move to approve this for a period of ten years, subject to the conditions of the hearing.

Board member St.

Ronald.

I board member Rucker.

Hi.

Board Member Herman, aye, Vice Chairman Smith.

And Chairman Wilbert.

Hi.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Take care.

That's the end of our uh 315 security.

Do you want to move forward?

If everyone is willing to continue, that's what we should do.

Karen, you're still okay.

Yes, go ahead.

All right.

Item number 42, 2201 South 20th Street.

Request increase the days and hours of operation from Monday through Friday from 6 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

and Saturday through Sunday from 6 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

to Sunday through Saturday from 6 a.m.

to 11 p.m.

And to continue occupying the premises of the daycare center for 30 children per ship if it's a third 13 years of age.

Um and then I'll just check.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 2201 South 20th Street?

Um please raise your hand.

Okay.

No raised hands.

Hi, could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

PR sending PL box 2504 stick and two both Wisconsin 5325.

Thank you.

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?

Alright, thank you, PPW.

All right, just to emphasize the condition, we are requesting that the applicant obtain services for a private trash caller within 30 days.

Okay, that means you're you're gonna need the dumpster probably.

All right.

Yes, no additional comments.

DC DCD does not object, but we do note that uh tomorrow place space is kind of questionable.

Uh, submitted that over 900 square feet, but uh books really tight.

Probably put the state that determination.

Um, that was a concern about our site of previously gone for 16 children that's it's never got a few children before.

Oh, speak, yeah.

Uh so I don't know how the last uh lady measured picture, she is like a whole ill shape, so I do have the L shape part cleaned out.

I do have photos as well.

I had a cleaned out and I had um the rubber moth lay down or the keys to play over in that area, so it's the side area and then the other size.

So is the big L shape and I'd be resubmit measurements and everything.

And with Mr.

Richardson, I mean, I don't think he was saying that we have the city is affirmatively gone out and measured it to you know to refute the measurements that have been submitted, and moreover, it is regulated by the state agency, right?

So if you don't have the adequate plate placepace, you will not get your license in the state.

So I think that's it's kind of a self-it's kind of policed by a different agency.

Um, but we'll if you've measured it and you've purchased material to cover this, yeah, we so I'll take it recently development.

Do you have anything that we don't have at our file you're gonna maybe you could send?

I can pull it out.

Okay, so I'm familiar with what you're talking about.

I am not sure if we use multiple based on solving all, if I have the dimensions and whatnot, but again, um, if that's so basically what what all we're getting at is we can approve this, but if some the state when they come out to give you your final permit and they say we don't have enough placepace for 30 kids, even though we said it was okay, you can't do it because of people.

Right.

So if you want if that's what it means, if that's what the case is, that's not our thing.

And you um are you in the child?

Do you have a different location or is it something you're speaking about?

Okay.

Um and the the Bo's answer to this case said was that there's been approval for fewer children, but this is important.

Well, board members.

Mr.

Chair having found that the criteria for this session is in that basically information that we have before us, any discussion that we've had.

Uh I will make a motion to approve this for um two years with any conditions in here in summary.

Board member St.

Arnold.

I board member records, board member current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Swansky, Chairman Wolfer.

I, okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item number 43, 8225 North 100 subwook street.

Request to continue occupying the premises of a community living arrangement for 16 occupants.

This matter was previously adjourned for the May 7, 2026 consent agenda at the request of the district's Alderwoman.

Staff's recommendation without the benefit of any oral testimony having been taken on the matter was for a 10-year approval.

Um, I see Alderwoman Taylor is online, I believe.

Alderwoman Taylor, did you want to speak on this item?

Yes, hi, thank you so much.

Uh yes, I I would like to say that uh Miss Christine Cunningham.

Um we've had uh another conversation and we've had um another visit, and I saw that um she had put new furniture outside and had gotten rid of the old stuff.

Um she showed us that she had made um some updates.

Um so we we were happy that she had put uh some effort into um the conditions under which the residents were living, and so we uh told her that we would be uh we would support her uh getting her occupancy renewal at this time.

Thank you for that Alderman Jill and I'm glad you're the you know you had preventive meeting and um took some of the concerns seriously, and um that's a that's wonderful to hear.

So we do have to use one area, and we have to use the city departments.

I'd be able to do it quick.

Mr.

Chairman, just also ask if anyone else is online for this item.

Is anyone else online to speak on 82 25 107?

Uh please raise your hand.

Use your name and mailing address, please.

Thank you.

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

Yes.

Nothing to bad DNS, no additional comments.

DCD, nothing additional.

Um board members.

I just have a technical question for um probably one.

Um the application permit only gives her eight.

Is that because she doesn't have 16?

Like I know she has to go get another one increase the number, but the advocacy permit is for 16, but the state license is for is for okay.

So state license would have to be changed.

Well, I'm in the process of going to uh I have to fill the firewall.

Okay, and so that's where we are now.

Okay, and then in the firewall, so that's the right now.

Similar to the last I don't know, the week and say 16, if you don't get the approval from the state.

If we say, well, this is an adequate, you only get eight, you still can only have eight, you're strictly by that, not by us.

Right.

Okay.

Uh anyone else?

No questions.

Then I will take a motion, please.

Sure.

Sir Chair, having found the criteria for discussion.

You can have been there based upon the um information that we have and the discussion.

I would motion to adopt staff recommendations and your approval.

Second.

All right, board member St.

Arnold Bell.

I'm board member or board member current.

Hi.

Hi.

Chairman.

Hi.

Next item, item number 44.

7830 West Hill Road.

Sorry, get the noise.

Is that all the material?

You are somewhere else.

I look like I'm I was muted.

I'm sorry.

Well, that's okay.

This is we have one single microphone in here.

We're in a different room, and it's it's just a little bit more challenging than normal, but uh okay.

Sorry, go ahead and do.

Um item number 44, 7830 West Good Hill Road.

Request to decrease the number of children from 40 to 35 per shift to increase the hours of operation from 5 a.m.

to 6 pm through 6 p.m.

to 6 a.m.

through 10 p.m.

and to continue occupying a portion of the premises as a daycare center for children, ages infant to 13 years operating Monday through Friday, and this is a new option.

Yeah.

Um is anyone online?

Well, yes, this is very grant.

Thank you.

Could you give us your uh mailing address as well, please?

5135 West Keith Avenue, Milwaukee 53206.

Thank you.

And is there anyone else online for 7830 West Good Hill Road that would like to speak?

Please raise your hand.

Hi.

Uh I am um online.

This is Annette from Ottawa Taylor's office.

Oh, thank you.

John E.

You also have your hand raised.

Are you here to speak on 7830 West Gundle Road?

Yes, I am.

I'm with GAG to Granville Havenwood's advisory council.

Got it, thank you.

Um could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

John Erdman 6930 North 76th Street Malacca, Wisconsin.

Oh, uh, do we need to square in on that?

Yes, yes, okay, and that could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Um it's Annette Jackson, and I'm using the city addresses 200 East Wales.

Um could all of you please raise your right hands.

And then I'm gonna store you all in at the same time.

Uh, 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.

There's more than yeah, there is another person.

John, did you did you say yes?

Yes.

Oh, okay.

All right, DPW.

Nothing to add DNS, no additional comments.

DC, nothing additional, and then um, if we could hear from the from Alderman Taylor's office, I don't know if you're still there.

Also, Alder Woman Taylor, whoever wants to start, and then we'll hear from um Mr.

Erdman and then go from there.

Yes, I I am still on.

That's my assistant.

She is on because she was on the meeting yesterday.

And so she was able to record um comments and different aspects of the meeting, and so she's on to testify to that.

Um I am uh not in support of this um child care facility being open in our district right now.

Um sorry, I don't know what that is.

What was that?

Somebody had this if you're not speaking, you just just make the stay muted so that Alderman Taylor can speak with an uninterrupted line, and then the next person can unmute because it as I said we it's a little bit the technology is different than normal, and I think it's more challenging to hear for uh our court report.

So sorry about that.

Go ahead.

Okay, um, I so I was saying that I was not in support of this license.

Um it has been um a difficult time in working along with this uh individual for this license.

Um it has been um I'm concerned that if there is a lack of um respect for um the alder person or representative of the district and um a display of uh lack of respect for the entity that is also put in place to vet businesses.

I am concerned about how children will be cared for and how parents will be um dealt with because we we strive to to bring excellence to our district, we strive to um encourage businesses to be an asset to the district, uh not a liability, and so um when we vet businesses and uh we work with individuals, it is to ensure that we are getting individuals who are supportive of things that we do in the district uh and that we can communicate those those uh things that we are doing with individuals.

But if we cannot do that, then it pose a difficulty, and then that becomes a liability.

If you are um if you are not uh uh carrying a positive um positive demeanor, uh and negative, and that is going to bring about negativity, and so we we are I am not I'm not ready or um in favor of allowing someone who has uh displayed this public disrespect for the representative and for the gap um to be a business owner in our district, and I'll let the others speak now.

Thank you, Alderman.

Whoever wants to go ahead.

Uh this is the business owner.

Um we can have the mighty be easier.

I just just for your management, frankly.

If there are other people that are gonna have concerns, do you want to hear from them first and then you can address everyone?

Um, sure, yes.

We can hear from you, but I just it might be better if we would hear everything first, and then we can then you have a chance to respond to everything, is that okay?

Yes.

Okay, okay, very good.

Uh so we had Alderman Taylor's representative or legislative assistant, I should say, and then uh a member of the gap um committee.

Did both did either one of you want to add anything?

Um I will.

Uh this is a net I'll go first.

Uh, and part of the conversation that was uh recorded yesterday.

Um Miss Grant did express the being upset about the length of the time of the process that it took, and she wanted to know that why um she the difficult was make the department was making it so difficult for her to get to this point.

Um so she was very concerned about that, and she said it's not happening in other districts, so she wanted to know why it was actually happening in district nine, okay.

Okay.

And this application was from February.

Is that accurate?

Initial submission.

Um, March 2nd, March 2nd.

The referral letter, referral letters, okay.

All right, and then um was it Mr.

Erdman?

Is that correct?

Or did I just make that name up?

Yes, I am here.

Go ahead.

What did you want to tell us?

Um I just were here to confirm that the conversation and everything that happened on the GAG board.

Uh, if you guys had questions and how the comments went or where we are at this stage with the applicants, I'm here to answer any questions for you guys.

Okay.

So okay, why don't you go ahead um Miss Grant?

I want to hear your, you know, what do you have to say about these concerns, and then I also really want to hear, you know, about the four criteria we have to consider to predetermination on the special use.

Yes, thank you so much.

So as it relates to the meeting that occurred on yesterday, the um the bid did give approval for um for the business, and my concern, which um I like to think as a taxpaying citizen, is it should have just been received as a concern was what was the process?

And my question was, what is the process for businesses coming before the bid?

I think I might have asked it exactly like that.

Um, and I did state that um in other spaces that the process is not so cumbersome.

Um, it is expensive.

Another thing that I expressed during the call because I'm I'm incurring, you know, I'm paying lease costs.

Um the order woman stated to me that I did not have to go through the bid process, and um I reached out to her office.

I I sent emails, I didn't get any response back from the email.

So I I did share that I was disappointed in the level of communication.

Um I'm really even disappointed to hear the order woman speak now because it's retaliatory conversation that she just articulated um because I did express on my um social media again my disappointment for the lack of understanding.

I was being able to provide.

I mean, I haven't gone through this process before, so I had hoped that the order person was able to articulate to me what the process was.

I had asked her about it again.

She stated to me that I would be exempt.

Um, and and so it was my expectation that last month we would have been um on the books for uh Boza again.

I paid another month of lease costs, uh, which it is an expensive process to become a business when you are paying lease and you're waiting on a board of approval um to happen, and and those were the concerns that I expressed um to to um to receive this type of retaliatory uh treatment because I expressed that um that that I did not receive accurate information from the bus the author person for this district is not fair.

Um, so I'm really really disappointed.

I did reach out to the order woman's office several times in hopes to get some time.

I never received the follow-up.

Um, and so as a business owner, I how do I move?

And and if the bid is in place to ask to be available to ask questions about the process, that is all that I did.

I would be curious to know if the order woman in her office were willing to share that recording um with the big committee here for the purposes of just verifying what the conversation um consisted of.

Well, I'll tell you, I feel kind of caught in the middle of something that's not part of what we consider and evaluating the criteria for special use.

There are big there are districts uh all around the city that have bids.

Um, all the material's district has a unique as a unique committee and advisory committee um that you did appear in front of and apparently uh is it is it accurate that the grandville havens were advisory committee did recommend or did did uh what what's the opinion of gap i mean i want to be very clear this is not we are making a decision not but it's helpful to have valuable it's helpful to have information from always from the elder of the district and uh if there's a bid or a different committee that certainly can be useful but the the decision makers on this is this committee so and we have to evaluate based on criteria but i i do i would like to get to the bottom of since you've gone through the process what did gap include after the meeting but for what advice does gap have or recommendations to BOZA since we've gone through this on this application John is on the line the the the B and D approved my application what did this can you confirm that Mr.

Urban so um the conversation that we had on the CAC interview did go as how Ms.

Taylor uh presented it she did ask about the process of how we get our information um and when they're called up and why it was delayed and I took over that question myself um and let her know that we are supplied the information by city hall to when we actually people come up in front of us so she did express her displeasure of the delay um as far as our recommendation at that particular time we did approve her um for that particular location um but there has come to light that there has been some um unpleasantries that have come after that has been brought to our attention which I think BOSA needs to you know get with the elder woman's office and you guys need to look at that and obviously I'm not privileged that information but um at the time of the hearing we did approve her this is the bottom line okay um thank you so looking at the um you know statement of special use we have a multi-use building that has uh church is it a community center too church community center and the so there's a daycare it's it's I'd be hard pressed to with the large the size of this building especially it seems that this use is not going to uh negatively impact the the enjoyment of the adjacent neighbors of this property um there haven't been any uh concerns raised with respect to traffic and pedestrian safety um and I'm not hearing any of any evidence or testimony about how this would be harmful to the protection of the public health safety and welfare or that it's not consistent with the comprehensive plan.

It's unfortunate you know it's it's always difficult when you have uh business owners uh not having good relationships with the elected official in the district that that they would it's it's a bad way to exist uh both for the elected person and for the business owner um and I you know hope that whether or not this goes forward here or whether you uh open up or attempt another business in another area of the city of Milwaukee that you um are able to forge a good relationship with the elder.

But we're limited here to these four criteria.

This is a it's very fairly standard use for this space, in my opinion.

Board members, questions or other comments or concerns or questions of the elder or the applicant?

No comments, but I can make motion um I have found that the uh all the all the criteria for the special use have been met by the applicant.

I believe that the uh plan of operation is as uh pointed out is it's enforceable.

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

I'll second board member St.

Arnold Bell.

Hi.

Board Member Rocker, aye, board member current, Vice Chairman Snyski, Chairman Wilbert.

Hi.

Okay, thank you.

And I really encourage uh maybe now that this portion is over, uh, reaching out an olive branch and trying to forge a better relationship going forward.

Um, thank you.

Thank you, committee members.

Item number 45, 9175 North 76th Street.

Request to occupy the premises as an assembly hall.

Um is there anyone online that is here to speak on 9175 North 76th Street?

Um, this is okay.

We have Brittany Jones.

Um Brittany, are you the applicant?

Yes, I am.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone else that I know this isn't also an older woman Taylor's district?

Is there anyone else online that would like to speak on this case?

Okay, so I'm not seeing any other raised hands.

Brittany, could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Oh, Brittany Jones, Mellon addresses 8105 West Colfax Court, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 53218.

Thank you.

And then can you please raise your right hand?

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

It's a truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, thank you.

All right.

Uh nothing to uh DNS, no additional comments, DC, not ambitional.

Um, and Alderman Jailer, thank you again for being here.

Do you have comments on uh 9175 or 76?

Yes.

Um so I did meet with her.

Um she presented her business plan, uh, and it looks like um she's going to uh be workable, you know, that she's going to adhere to expectations of the district uh and not having um the one thing was to be mindful of cleanliness and how she presents her business and being careful about um having unsupervised team activity in her space, and she has agreed to those things, so we are happy to um welcome her into our district in hopes that she will be an asset as she has expressed.

Thank you very much.

Um that's a very positive uh thing to hear.

Uh so board members.

No questions, motion, or how do we phone that the criteria is necessary to grant the special years have been that based on the evidence in the file testimony?

So you have to make motion to approve this for a period of three years with any conditions in the hearing summary.

Second, board member St.

Arnold Bell, aye board member rocker, aye, board member current, aye, vice chairman Smithy.

Chairman Wilbert.

Hi, thank you uh to the applicant, and thank you again, Alderman Taylor, for your contributions this evening for the set.

Thank you.

We just I know we only have a couple left.

We just have a request for a very short break.

Okay, we'll do that and then we can start again or finish.

How do we give us a hug Hey y'all.

All right.

All right.

Uh Karen, you back?

Sure.

Maybe you never left.

Ready here.

Okay.

We've got the last three items.

They are all in the woman Morris District.

She is here.

Okay.

So our next item, item number 46, 6300 West Blue Mound Road.

Request to allow two wall signs that exceed the maximum display area allowed.

And a permit window sign that exceeds the maximum allowed coverage on the place area.

And I believe the applicant is online.

Is anybody else online for this item?

Again, it's sixty three hundred West Blue Mount Road.

Please raise your hand if you're here to speak.

And I've not seen any racing.

Melissa, could you give us your name and mailing address, please?

Uh Melissa Stankey, sixty-three hundred West Blue Mount Road in the Latin, Wisconsin, five three two one three.

Thank you.

And do you affirm under oath that the testimony you're about to give is a truth?

Sorry, I should say, please raise your right hand.

Then I'll ask that question again.

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

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh DBW.

Sorry.

I'm just going to emphasize that we have a condition that the QR code window sign on the Luman Road building facade is removed within 30 days.

Okay, DNS.

No comment.

DC.

But how is a passing driver going to be able to scan that if it's not that big in that window?

I can do it on Google.

That's all I care about.

Oh, you don't want that.

Correct.

Right, right.

That's the thing.

Someone's driving.

Yeah.

They're like, oh, and then there's a great idea.

Everyone uses QR code.

That's the safety.

Correct.

Thank you.

I have no objections.

I've had a chance to talk with Melissa.

And it looks like a great opportunity for the district to you know have signage on their building.

So no objection.

Okay.

And uh Ms.

Andy, I heard I think I heard you say no problem with removing that QR code sign.

No problem at all.

Board member you.

Having found that the criteria necessary to grant the conventional area's head, then that based on the test movie provided today.

Or uh to run with the link.

Subject to the conditions in the hearing summer.

Second.

Board member St.

Ronald Bell.

Board Member Rockard.

Board member Current.

Aye.

Vice Chairman Summit speaker.

Chairman Lauber.

All right.

Thank you.

Next slide.

Next item.

Uh item number 47.

5900 West North Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a restaurant with a drive-through facility, and this is a new operator.

This matter was adjourned from the May 7th, 2026 public hearing by the board.

And it's motion to adjourn.

The board requested that the applicant work with Alderwoman's office and the bid to schedule a community meeting to discuss the proposed project.

The requested community meeting took place on May 26, 2026.

Um and I'll just check.

Is there anyone online that would like to speak on 5900 West North Avenue?

Please raise your hand.

Okay, we do have a tenius there.

There you are.

Okay.

All right.

And then so we'll have swear everyone and at the same time.

Could you two please give us your name and mailing addresses, please?

Sure, Sam.

Oh Sam Gleichman, 857 East Lake Forest, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Steve Golber, 828 Data Street.

Thank you.

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

So I was fine.

Why don't we call them on that?

These guys were in.

We do have the update in our file from the bid.

Then when everything's situated, we can get in too if you want to add it.

Okay.

It's a couple of people, nothing about it.

Yes.

All right.

Well, DPW.

So we are requested that the applicant applies for living zone of Nord 59th Street.

That is primarily to account for deliveries.

Frankly, I've no objection to seating.

It's just that the way that the purple lands that sort of creates a pinch point for entrance into or what to access to what should be the main entrance of the facility.

Yes, no initial comments from DC, nothing, there's no.

Well, thank you very much for putting in the effort that we had pre-linked the discussion, the last meeting, very thoughtful commentary from both the applicants and the leader of the president of the bid.

Um why don't we if your minds what your opinions are or your what information you want us to know from?

You know, after having gotten more information participating in the discussion at the community meeting.

Absolutely.

Thank you, board chair committee members.

Um, thank you for holding this over just so that we had an opportunity to connect with the community.

I think that's always the most important thing, especially when folks have concerns or questions.

Um we did have an opportunity to um connect at the location on May 26th, which was last week.

Um, and uh we probably had about um, I didn't do a sign in sheet, but we probably have about six, five or six people um in attendance, including Mark Fabius, who I just gave the um dial-in number and access code.

So hopefully he's able to um call in and he's able to share his um shared uh his reflections.

But I thought it was a good community.

I thought it was a good meeting.

Um, the team that is here uh was able to um share their plans, answer any additional questions.

Um, and uh since then I have um also received communication from just a few residents that shared uh that they are in favor.

Um I know that the bid is not in favor of it, as well as maybe maybe one or two residents that might have been there that wasn't in favor of it, uh, just because the primary concern was the driveway or the drive through.

And so this was an opportunity to um again uh none of our city uh and and I'm very careful as to you know when adhering to city rules and policies that um the city says hey, you know, it served as a drive-thru before, it is okay as a drive-thru um in this instance, uh, and just have um from the communication that we're seeing from residents.

They just want something, they want the space activated, and so um I know that uh the partner before um had tried really really hard um to keep that space afloat, but um, that particular space because of the lack of it, you know, it's pretty much aside from the few parking spots that are that are there, it's totally relying heavily on um street street parking and neighborhood parking, especially when um events or other businesses are there.

So it's gonna need a strong partner um to be there, and from um what I've heard with some of the other spaces that could be activated.

Um, I really did like uh, you know, some of the things that they were proposing to partner with another, I think it was uh another university, and they'll talk a little bit about that.

Uh, but to just really use it at also as a community space, um, but to just really activate the space.

So I have no objections.

Well, thank you for those comments.

Um, Mr.

Johnson, you are you able to get out of we'll I want to hear from you again because we put a lot of effort and time.

We've read your second submission, but uh, we'll go to the applicants unless you're able to uh say anything now so that we can give them a chance to respond to everything.

Okay, let's just go to come back.

Yeah, yeah.

So I'm Sam Gleichman.

I'm with I I work with uh the applicant as his representative.

I've been involved um with this process on this site from the start.

Um, and I have read Montabius' objections.

I was at the meeting that I helped organize last week, and we we sort of understand his concerns, but we don't necessarily find them to be uh reasonable.

We I mean there's a couple things that I could point out that the municipal agencies uh that reviewed the file, you know, all surmised the same thing that there is no traffic concern, there is no safety concern.

The applicant will abide by taking the pergola down.

I mean, I can go through sort of line by line on the objection and offer some counters, but in general, the what we're proposing to do on a building and a site plan that was specifically designed for the use that we're using it for.

Um, we think that it's reasonable, it's we're proposing to only use a portion of the building.

We're proposing to reactivate and give opportunity to other neighborhood business owners to take tenancy in the building.

We've gone as far as to spend $30,000 on our new towns, which is a University of Wisconsin services agreement, which is going to focus on trying to find local tenants and up-and-coming entrepreneurs to be tenants in the building as well.

Um at the meeting, uh, not to speak like directly like verbatim on something that you know I sort of disagree with in his letter, but we did offer at the community meeting some alternatives to help alleviate Montavius' concerns.

We've offered to put a uh a right-only uh a right-only sign on the egress to the drive-thru for westbound traffic to help alleviate his concerns that cars would be turning eastbound across traffic.

I would point out that some of his concerns around the traffic flow.

We're not anticipating uh increased vehicles per day in the corridor.

The business model of Duncan is to capture neighborhood traffic.

So our business we don't think is going to increase traffic that's already existing in the corridor.

I would point out that there's a fully signalized uh intersection, 135 feet from the ingress and egress to the property, which you know, as the engineer can speak to is sort of uh is helpful in the in this instance to alleviate people's concerns about traffic and safety concerns, it serves as a natural buffer to traffic flow.

Um there's cars that are stopped at a red light, it creates gaps.

If you try to say they call it gap traffic, stop, there's a gap, so it helps uh mitigate the issues of people waiting for a more long backup because there's naturally because of signalized uh intersection.

There's a there's going to be a gap.

So cars can do the perception.

This the stacking plan that we've proposed is totally is would suffice the amount of customers that we anticipate coming.

The main traffic flow to the site is from 6 30 to 9 in the morning.

I was at the site every day last week in front of the building.

There's very few pedestrian traffic there whatsoever, walking by during normal you know, during that period in the morning.

I literally sat there.

Um the site line concern, the site was literally designed to take into account those concerns.

Um the pergola, I think is actually a good idea to take down and improves the site lines to the street.

We're not eliminating any pedestrian accessibility whatsoever.

The queuing line is on the applicant's parcel.

So there is no queuing obstructing the sidewalk.

So I think that we've tried to eliminate any concerns over safety.

I don't know if they're I don't we just wanted to point out of all the reasons that we think that it's a totally safe environment.

We wanted to point out that I spoke with the mayor who's on board with the project, all of the safety and uh traffic, governmental agencies that need to review the site for safety, and no concern about what we're attempting to do.

Um, so I guess it just in general, we wanted to point all those things out.

This is a good operator, it's a beautiful building.

We're looking to reactivate it, uh, be a good steward in the community.

Um we've dealt with other business improvement districts in the city.

This advocate has listened to the feedback, implemented them and open up the store that hasn't had issues.

Um, so we see it as you know, an uncontroversial use for selling coffee, it's not alcohol or nefarious uses.

Um, sort of for that litany of reasons, we think it's a it's a safe business to operate and a use that's totally logical and reasonable in the location.

Thank you for that.

Mr.

Jones, I just want to come back one more time and just see if there's anything you add in again.

We have both you submitted two well thought out uh letters, one was the one that we had discussed last time, and then we responded to you.

Can you guys hear me?

Yeah, yeah.

So if we can get you sworn in, then you can we do want to hear again from you.

Go ahead.

Okay.

We need emailing address.

You need my mailing address, you said.

Yeah, just your name.

I know we're you we know your job, but just give it to say it and then where do you want to be mailed from the boat's office, and then India will swear you in.

Okay, uh, Montavia Jones, 5525 West Notre Dame Court, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53208.

Thank you.

And could you please raise your right hand?

Do you have right hand is raised?

Thank you.

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

Yes.

All right, thank you, sir.

Uh sorry about the technical difficulties.

What else?

What else do you have for us?

Yeah, so I want to start by saying I appreciate the the applicant uh came up from Chicago to meet with us um and was very accommodating to our schedule.

So we do a appreciate being able to get that on the schedule.

Um I will I will say at the at the meeting, we we I didn't feel like we learned a lot about the operations of the drive-thru that we didn't already know.

So our concerns remain the same.

Um that the proposed drive-thru use is not compatible.

One with the West Side area plan or our um plan commission adopted um uptown crossing thread that updates the um west side area plan that says do not encourage or discourage um auto-oriented uses that um infringe upon the pedestrian environment.

A drive-thru does exactly that, so to approve another drive-thru in our corridor will go against what has already been approved and updated and the comprehensive plan as far as not uh encouraging these uses.

Uh I will also say that um we don't believe that the argument that once a drive-through, always a drive-thru, uh, is valid because if that was the case, no drive-thous would ever go before Bose after the first one got approved.

The reason they have to go through BOSA is because not all drive-throughs are created the same when this building was built.

It was built as a bank branch that has a completely different user profile, um, frequency, number of users, uh, time of day people are using it than uh other uses, uh, including uh a dunk and donuts.

So, uh we don't believe that just because there is a drive-through existing there doesn't mean every user who comes throughout throughout through the building throughout the years uh should be um awarded um the ability to uh to use that drive-thru.

And this is one of those drive-throughs that we do now believe are is compatible with this corridor.

Um we've laid out most of our or all of our objections in the letter.

Um we we continue to uh want to find uh better use for the site that does not require drive-through.

We have not opposed the Dunkin' Donuts um per se only the drive-through portion if the applicant wanted to open a uh dunk and without the drive-thru we would not stand in a way of that but um the drive-thru is just a non-starter for us for all the reasons we laid out um we appreciate the the couple of changes that the applicant has proposed uh as far as um putting up a mirror getting rid of the program we believe all that is um is is good and well but uh the the issues remain um as we stated um given this is the high traffic corridor leading to a highway um in the morning so this uh lot of rush hour traffic at the same time that the applicant told us is his busiest hour to the day between seven and eight that's exactly when everybody's using North Avenue to get to one seventy five at North and Lisbon so where the applicants asking hey my busiest hour is also gonna match the busiest hour for traffic on this corridor that just that does not seem to be a good um might be a good business model I don't know I don't know his business model but it's not good for the operation of uh a walkable main street district like North Avenue is here um so for for these reasons we uh continue to to not support if uh the applicant wants to move forward without a drive through we wouldn't stand in the way of that um so those are those are our comments and uh we'll we'll ask the board to uh to not approve this use.

Thank you Mr.

Jones appreciate again all the work that you've put in on behalf of the band um my initial thought last time was I was I just wasn't sure I didn't I didn't ask questions and you I thought it was like you know in the giggle with the how are you how is this even going to work in your business on your answers and and the clarification this time with respect to the the gaps and how there is the traffic might be relaxed you know uh at certain times I think helps I do think that when we're evaluating you know the criteria you have we do have uh you know the applicant we have an engineer on behalf of the app we have a city engineer uh who's analyzed this site and does not believe that there would be an adverse traffic impact and I think during the some more of the real testimony about any business model and I know that the the bid is concerned about it keeps kind of referring to as a is an increase during the scene of traffic during the same time that traffic is already at its highest point in the North Avenue corridor in this spot but what the applicant has been consistent uh with about is that those are the people that are driving down the road at those times are the people that they're gonna have that they're expected to dip off and drive through the drive through and get a cup of coffee um I'm not saying blindly trust you know corporations who want to build uh you know a restaurant but it would I it does I don't I guess I would not understand why they would be seeking to make an investment in this because this is a terrible location and they're not gonna be it's not even profitable for them.

If if there's a huge queuing line on queuing line out under the street it would that's not a coffee shop I would call it to I would go to the next one that's more convenient I guess.

And I do think you know I know it's a different totally totally different business but a bank you know there's actually two arguable peak maybe three right but first thing in the morning highway work lunch hour and then after right and there's seems to be one peak hour.

So I do think just from hearing everything that the I I think this the whole thing the whole objection here is really squarely rooted in the comprehensive plan.

But now I have the other of the districts here sitting in front of us saying that they want this space activated and that's what a lot of the neighbors are saying what the comedy council drafts these plans.

They're aspirational to be sure um but sometimes people there's an interest in creating something in a space rather than having it vacant and and not generating any tax revenue and being a blighted property.

I mean there will be improvements made to the site by virtue of opening a new business which in and of itself could be good.

I get it but it it does the drive through nature does seem to um to cut against some of the tenants of the local plan um but i don't I don't think that can be the sole basis to hold up an application that otherwise meets all the other criteria um well i i yeah go ahead i wasn't here when you heard this last okay um so i just want a quick clarification and maybe this is a question for both dpw and the um applicant i'm very familiar with this corridor i live in the area um and you know a few blocks west maybe 10 blocks west or so uh there's mcdonald's on the south side of the and i have personally witnessed the kinds of um uh drive through backups that have occurred um from that business and i guess i'm wondering dw or to the applicant you know is this a site that you're familiar with that you've seen uh it how have how have restaurants mitigated backups in the past i i think it is i would agree that you know i this could probably function but that i have some concerns about you know if people are traveling east on north avenue to get to highway 175 in the morning and they're trying to make a left hand turn into a drive-thru queue that might be backed up are we going to be creating some uh some traffic nightmares i i could speak just for the operation because we we work with the applicant uh on many of these locations um and a duncan and the national uh trend or about a monolie go bytes 90 seconds from the menu board to the window because the big morning rush is coffee and maybe a donut or breakfast sandwich the coffee unlike the Starbucks it's not a barista in there that everything's operating machines pushing buttons I always joke it's a teenage kids push buttons you know but the idea it is speed and that's that's how we're able to accommodate no real backups at a dunk Starbucks they back out to the wall yeah but a Duncan does not do that because the operation and how they do it and their menu offerings are it's really fast to around some people yeah I would just add the site is literally designed for the plan of operation that we're proposing so the how we're intending to operate and how many cars that we're projecting to come through per hour and the stacking plan is all been taken into consideration to have it you know be usable have have it have that be successful I would add you add in the worst case scenario the car the last car was at or that we backed up that's eight cars and I I would design an eight car to for dunking anywhere development you just know how they move you don't you don't have that kind of backup that you get eight cars the car plan would suffice on a traffic a vehicle traffic count in front of the store at maybe two three four times the amount of cars and it would still suffice to work I think it's like a 10,500 vehicles per day on North Avenue in front of the subject so are you familiar with the McDonald's that she's talking about yes I am so okay how many um what's this like how if you how many cars can fit off the street in their queue I don't know what their stack plan is there but I would just point out that their stack I don't I would just point out their different businesses that have different operations uh and you know hours of service and servicing people I don't know how late they open at night or what time of day their traffic issue was you know I would just focus on our application is for the building to use the drive-thru for our use that the municipality reviewed our plan of operation our site plan uh and found no issue with it so um well I get it I I under I I'm with you guys on that.

I just I'm just trying to understand because this was this was my thought and we can't go on like what we think could possibly happen.

I mean, yes, you can we're humans we have experiences.

I mean, you know, you bring our knowledge and our experiences to the this table to make decisions.

But I want to just tell me you said it's a different business model.

Explain why you think that McDonald's site, for example, differs from your site with respect to me you know, yeah, I mean I could look at it online and try to describe to you from.

Yeah, all right.

So I'm staring at Google Street.

And the first thing I'm noticing is that the McDonald's at 66 north is under size.

Oh, that's right, that's most McDonald's these days are are set up to have dueling, yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

Menu boards.

Sure.

Um, and dueling, you know, the pay window, and then also the the sling of through that window.

Um, sex culture, right?

Um, and McDonald's tends to be um this one has the dueling windows, they only have the one menu board.

They tend to be the of the fast food carriers, they tend to be one of the ones that have a higher um rate of traffic in them.

Um so like I said, that it looks this one particularly looks undersized to me for a traffic that you would expect at McDonald's, which is why you're probably seeing the backups into this the street.

Um, they have more points of ingress and egress, they have additional parking.

It's a different business with a different traffic flow, a bigger building.

I understand.

I you know, I think for me, I'm you know, I'm not trying to attack this plan.

I'm just simply trying to understand things that I personally witnessed and and how this will be different.

So, at this at the same time, I'm also like I did the aerial view of a couple of at least one other Duncan's, and and they are comparable for queuing.

Um, and at least in my experience, the one that's like near second and latent.

Um the issue there is where the deliveries go, and which is why we put the second board.

Um but the stacking for vehicles between where the menu board is and the road, it's about a hundred feet, so we're not talking eight cars.

Can I ask one more question?

Do you have any recommendations about like right turn only or anything exiting the uh it probably would be the best to put to have them install a you know no left turn signs per you know peak hours?

That said, keep in mind signage doesn't stop people from doing creative like at a McDonald's or a Starbucks or whatever, yeah.

I know Marjorie has her hand of that sort of thing for one thing in the point.

Do you chair?

Yeah.

Um, Davis again.

So I I want to make uh at least.

Hold on one quick second.

I want to clarify something like Tom said.

Sure, sure.

You're referring to the you're the hundred feet, you're talking about the latent.

Yeah, you're saying that's smaller, and there were identifiable cue problems at that dungeon.

No, the only identifiable cue problem that I have at that dungeon is when they do deliver right, right?

But but you're saying that's a small one, that's a busy corridor, and that correct.

Okay.

You want to hear from you.

I'm thinking you can go again on the lack of you.

All right, go ahead.

Okay, uh I want to make at least two points.

One, um, I Mr.

Gleichman stated that you know city staff has has to add DPWDCD that there would be no concerns uh about this use.

Um, but the those same entities also approved, which is um one of one of my main points is that this has been approved.

These type of uses have been called out as do not encourage in the comprehensive plan, which has to go through um a number of community meetings, has to go to the planning commission, then it has to go to ZD or CD 301, uh then has to get approved by the common council.

So all the way up to the common council level, this type of youth has said or has been disapproved or said do not use these, do not approve these type of uses.

So then we get Afghanist says I would like to use this type of use, and then we're we're having a conversation about maybe we should use type use, even though it says in our plans that V C D help curate or crafting curate, and that the community has approved that common accounts have approved.

We're gonna say we're gonna ignore that so we can use or approve this use.

I find that uh to be problematic because why do the comprehensive plans and get those approved by the common council if we're not going to adhere to those guidelines?

Now, um, so that's one, and I don't want to uh be mistaken.

That my biggest concern is the queuing.

My bigger concern is the interruption to pedestrian traffic on the corridor.

Um, accidents don't happen in queue lines, have accidents happen when cars are moving.

So it's the crossing of the pedestrian threshold, that is my bigger safety concern.

Cars sitting idle do not cause a safety concern, might be environmental concern, but not a safety concern.

It's crossing the pedestrian um threshold.

That's the bigger safety concern.

That is not addressed um by having a bigger parking lot or smaller parking lot, you still are gonna have cars crossing that threshold.

That's the bigger safety concern.

That is not addressed by anything that the applicant has um said they're gonna do.

Um, so that that still is a concern which has not been addressed.

So I I don't think we we've heard anything that's gonna make it safer.

Move slower moving cars is actually safer than the faster movement cars.

So a queuing is less of a concern for me uh than the interrupting the pedestrian threshold, which uh the comprehensive plan says do not do in this area.

Okay, then you the blood is drained for Marjorie's fingertips.

So I just want to first thank you all for doing the community in possession because they are the residents that are going to be affected most, right?

So that's why I wanted to give them the opportunity to come out to hear the plan from you all and to really understand it so that they can give their support or you know, say no, we don't want this.

But that being said, I also feel like in addition to the points that you know Montavius has made or whatnot, and BPW spoke to it as well.

There's two things, you guys are caught in the cross here, but it's not your fault, and it's basically the way that people operate, right?

So even though you're gonna have great signage that says only turn right, we know our drivers in the city are gonna try to turn left, and it's just gonna be bam, right?

Um, and so I say that to say I, you know, I'm fine giving this an approval even in the shorter term, just to try it out, um, and to see what actually happens because that's the only way that we're going to know, right?

We can sit here until you know we don't want to leave, which is we do want to leave you.

Um, but at the end of the day, it's not your fault the way that the city operates, right?

And the other thing is you would be the first time that would be simply located in the city.

We need it's accessible to people that are driving through the city.

You all know based on your research that North Avenue is one of the major grids of the city.

There are also no other dunkins that are in the city proper.

So you can say that's 27th Street, yeah.

But 27, but I'm I'm talking about in the like New York, right?

Um, so you know it's going to create the buzz that you want, right?

It's going to be great over time.

Yes, traffic will do what you anticipated to do, but initially there is gonna be some issues that we're going to have to meet.

And if I may uh the two things when the dungeon first opens is that learning curve, right?

Yeah, it's the it's the commuters that are on their way that are the bulk of the dunking business, and it might be a little funky the first week or so a lot of people figure out, and certain people say it's not worth it.

I'm going to the next one, but also uh to Mr.

Jones' comment, the nature of the drive-thru as slower traffic, it's stop and go.

It's not like a thoroughfare and someone's whipping around.

There it stops, stop, stop, stop.

At the window, you stop no one's picking up any speed, and it's really worse for being curable for pedestrians because it's not like you're coming to an old blind corner, driving through it.

You're already at the window stopping and then you're moving up 10 feet.

So there's nowhere to go except through the queue in there.

And we we we designed these drive-throughs in many instances because of weird shape.

You know, we have pedestrian traffic crossing right through the drive-thru, and it and it's just the way it works, it always works out because the cars are just inching along once you're in that queue.

So I what we're saying is that I understand the concern of pedestrian traffic, but it is very slow-moving.

Yeah.

And you would have signage, right?

That would say, like, you know, sound bump approaching or something that hopefully people will stop and do it right before they go out, you know, to try to get into the street again.

You guys can't control the behavior.

Um, and again, we're we're just talking about our experiences living in the city, but I think that, you know, we and that's the one thing that I've struggled with personally, right?

Because I was like, well, I I know the corridor well, I avoid the corridor for the reason stated, right?

Um, but at the same time, it you know, it shouldn't take away from a business being able to come in and make an investment and operate, um, even if it's a shorter term, and so while we figured the kinks out, right?

Um, so with that said, um, is there anything else anybody has?

Yeah, I just want to reiterate one thing I said earlier is with respect to the competence and plan we're not as we sit here today.

I'm hearing after a community engagement, the alder women of the district sitting saying that uh activation of that space is gonna be a benefit to the district, and I know you're you're correct, Mr.

Jones.

That goes all the way up to the common council, but here's the representative from the county council in this district telling us that they um that she is in favor for I I guess I I don't want to mischaracterize you're not objecting uh to the application CMF to the activation of the space, correct.

Okay, um it is tricky, but um, as I indicated these these comprehensive plans are aspirational, and if we um what would be the the detriment of strict adherence to every letter of the comprehensive plan and that being the only barrier to advancing a use permit, is that things would sit vacant for a long long time.

Um we hope to edge toward that, but this is where we are today with this application.

Uh anybody was there anything else that's I mean, this is not just like straightforward, you know, this is something that I've thought a lot about, and I continue to think about it.

I appreciate all the thought that's been put into it.

Mr.

Chairman, yes, and I it you know, and I know the concern is just volume, but regardless of what entity is there, so let's just take Duncan out of it.

It's still a parking lot, so people still have to go in and out of the parking lot.

Um, I've been in that parking lot multiple times, and typically I try to just go right instead of left because it takes you know, it can take some time, right?

Um, but like the stoplights are definitely that what was shared, definitely helpful.

Um, getting um getting time to go go eastbound.

But regardless of what it is, the parking lot is still going to be activated where people still have to come in and out of it.

I just really want a strong partner to be there to activate the neighborhood.

I hate for vacant buildings to just it's beautiful space um to just sit vacant.

And so if there's an operator that's willing to come in, and and again, if they make no money, they would have to close down Duncan because I'm assuming a business coming in, you know, the goal is to make money, and if it just doesn't work, you know, for their business operation, I'm sure they'll make that decision.

But um, you know, just for what our city departments have um have just shared, I I do want to give it a chance.

So I agree with um Commissioner Um Brucker.

I'll just I don't want not to belabor, but like one more comment.

I was thinking about you know, you this is anecdotal, but you're entering into a drive-thru, you're kind of like focus, it's a queue, you're going on, you're getting behind the car, you're turning off the street, you're following the car.

Any attention, you know, slam into the car ahead, you and we stop and go and whatever's happening.

A regular parking lot, there's a lot more going on.

Uh, just not necessarily one way in, one way out.

You know the angle parking, people are back in the angle parking.

So I've never understood my IP with my own, but anyway, I digress.

If Dr.

Kevin Word just over up here without a drive through, we're just having these few spaces, people are going in and oven 90 seconds or whatever.

I mean, I just think that could be way worse, right?

So I I I think this is thought out, and part of the business model does contemplate, you know, how it works with traffic and and we can you know, pedestrian safety and liability that is associated with a mismanaged um your drive-thru.

But anyway, I think we've really belabored this rightfully so, deserves attention and consideration, but I'm done with comments and questions.

Does anyone else have anything?

I don't know.

Uh board member recorded I think we're going to make a motion.

Yes, yes, I was.

So having found that the requirements for a special use have been made.

Right there.

Um I would motion to um approve this for a period of three years, um, subject to any conditions that are in the next.

I'll start with the motion.

Board member St.

Arnold.

Hi.

Board member Rocker, aye.

Board Member Kern, opposed.

Vice Chairman's speaker.

Chairman Wilbert.

Okay, good luck.

Hope this does work out because it would be a proven uh the benefit of the code is not uh you guys already granted it and we have listened to Joe.

Okay.

All right, thank you for the time and consideration.

Okay, so item number 48.

Item number 48, 2720 West St.

Paul Avenue.

Request to continue occupying the premises as a light-colored vehicle repair facility and with a new operator.

Um, is there anyone online that wants to speak on 2720 West St.

Paul Avenue?

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

I think the person that's online we'll just be listed on that.

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

Uh, say, um, and the address is for 4484 South Pete Street.

Okay, have it divide by 3207.

Uh name it, uh, the only address is 4484 South Fifth Place.

Uh, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 5207.

Karen, did you go to that?

No, I would ask that.

Miss, please repeat.

Uh name, uh 4484 South 5th Place, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 53207.

Perfect, thank you.

Please raise your right hands.

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

Yes.

Only want to emphasize one condition of the notification of additions that we have that no more than six vehicles be parked outside of the law for any reason at any time.

And that's no additional comments.

You feeling all right?

No comments today.

The AGT vote.

All right, all right.

DC, nothing additional.

Okay, uh, uh, I have no um objections.

This is actually located right um in my neighborhood.

Uh, and so I've I haven't had any, I don't know if you're never had you guys haven't yet any issues, but yeah, um, have not had any um negative uh calls or emails in regards to this location.

The one thing I would note is it's proximity to the on rim for I-94, which it hasn't been a problem in the past, and obviously with that closed isn't an issue now, but uh just something to keep in mind is that project continues and and as you do your business, that there can sometimes be a lot of traffic in the market.

The plan of operation did say 10 parking spaces, and obviously the PW thinks only six.

So we misunderstood the question, so it said 10.

We thought that it was like for the indoor in outside, but six for the outside, and that's for for the indoor.

Okay, well, all right.

Should we adjourn this and think about it?

No, absolutely not.

I'll make it loaded.

Having found that the criteria necessary to grant special use have been that based on the testimony provided, uh the information on the file and the technical review by staff, I would move to approve this for a period of ten years.

Okay.

I think that's what I don't know why I got it for me, right?

I think that motion.

Board member saying around theye.

Board member Arthur.

Hi.

Board member current.

Hi.

Vice Chairman Sunski.

Hi.

Chairman Long.

Hi.

Thank you guys for your patience and good luck.

Thank you for this.

I'll move thank you.

Is that a unanimous uh consent to adjourn?

I don't know.

I like you guys.

Yeah.

Oh