Grosse Ile zoning board pauses appeal of West Shore golf-cart barn, grants appellant more time to show standing

Grosse Ile Township Board of Zoning Appeals members voted on June 24, 2025, to pause an appeal of a site-plan approval for a proposed golf-cart barn at West Shore Golf and Country Club and to give the appellant additional time to establish legal standing.

Dr. Margaret Lutzik, the appellant, said the appeal challenges the April 7, 2025, site-plan approval “based on multiple violations of the Grosse Ile Township zoning ordinance and other governing legal standards. These include the absence of required variances, permits, failure to conduct mandatory procedures, unlawful land use expansions, and noncompliance with safety, drainage, accessibility, and screening provisions.” She told the board a memorandum prepared by counsel dated May 5, 2025, outlining the legal and factual basis had been entered into the record.

The board first asked Lutzik to establish standing before it would consider the merits of her claims. Under a Michigan Supreme Court test the board cited, an appellant must show (1) participation in the challenged proceedings, (2) a legally protected interest likely to be affected by the decision, and (3) evidence of special damages or a burden distinct from the general public. The chair told Lutzik the panel has up to 120 days to decide whether she meets those requirements and, if so, to address the appeal itself.

Lutzik said she has participated in the prior planning commission proceedings and that she lives at 22799 West River Road, adjacent to the club’s property at 22843 West River Road. She told the board she has cared for the neighboring property for about 20 years and raised concerns in her filing and in oral remarks about flooding, noise, drainage, screening and other consequences if the structure is built.

Board members asked questions about whether the facts Lutzik cited in her memorandum and in her remarks would satisfy the second and third standing factors. One member said maintenance of another property alone may be insufficient proof of a legally protected interest; another said the appellant had not previously been given the three-factor standard and could request more time to prepare. Several members emphasized procedural fairness and the need for the board and the appellant to have adequate time and records to make the standing determination.

A board motion to grant the appellant additional time to provide the information required for the standing determination passed by roll call. The board recorded unanimous aye votes and placed the appeal on hold pending submission of additional materials. The chair said township staff would provide Lutzik with the three-factor guidance and that the board must resolve standing within 120 days of the vote.

No public comments were offered after the standing vote. The board then adjourned for the evening.