Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Multifamily topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Burton ZBA denies request to allow multi‑family development in single‑family zone

2773087 · March 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A developer's request to convert a one‑acre R‑1 parcel into a 10‑unit condominium-style complex was denied unanimously by the Burton Zoning Board of Appeals amid concerns the proposal would alter neighborhood character and likely exceed lot-size norms.

The Burton Zoning Board of Appeals denied variance ZBA-25-05 after members concluded the proposed multi‑family development would not conform with the essential character of the surrounding single‑family neighborhood.

Applicant Maher Shlal sought approval to build multiple buildings (the application showed five two‑unit buildings) on a roughly one‑acre lot at 1081 South Veil Road. During the hearing Shlal described the project as his first development effort and said he had designed driveways and garages to try to meet parking and circulation needs.

City administration gave no recommendation on the application, but reminded the board that, if approved, the project would still require full site-plan approval before the planning commission and that Genesee County would have to approve surface-water management.

Board members repeatedly pointed to the city standard that a proposal must not "alter the essential character of the neighborhood." Several members said the proposed cluster of multiple two‑unit buildings was not consistent with neighboring single‑family properties. One member noted the project appears sized for about four two‑unit structures given minimum lot-size standards, while the applicant presented five two‑unit buildings (ten units total).

Public comment included a neighbor who said the design did not fit the neighborhood. After discussion a motion to approve was put to voice and the clerk recorded individual votes: Rappas — no; Smith — no; Burge — no; Richvalski — no; Fuest — no; Ward Terry — no; Welch — no. The motion failed.

The board's denial means the applicant may either revise the proposal and return for a new hearing or pursue other zoning or planning pathways. Any future iteration will require planning review and likely additional public notice.