Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variances for Foreign Auto Connect lot after debate over landscaping and fencing
Summary
The Board approved four variances for a proposed vehicle-sales operation, accepting petitioners' alternative designs and findings after extended technical questioning, with board members emphasizing redevelopment and maintenance of a privacy fence as mitigation.
The Board of Zoning Appeals approved requested variances that will allow Foreign Auto Connect to operate vehicle sales on a previously vacant, 2.21-acre site off West Bloomfield Road, permitting encroachments into front-yard setback areas and relief from some landscaping requirements.
Jamie Kreindler, senior zoning planner, recommended approval of a front-yard setback variance along South Peachtree Lane but recommended denial of the variance requests for front parking setbacks along West Bloomfield Road and for parking-lot perimeter trees, shrubs and landscape islands. Staff cited pedestrian and bicyclist safety and the goals of the UDO and the city’s climate-action plan in urging those denials.
The petitioner’s representative argued the site is uniquely configured, that most display vehicles would be located behind an existing privacy fence and that standard landscaping elements (especially large canopy trees in perimeter islands) would unduly reduce inventory space and could damage display vehicles. The petitioner also said the plan includes planting 77 trees elsewhere on the site and that the proposed layout would keep impervious area below UDO maximums.
Board members questioned ADA grab and grade constraints for accessible parking, whether a sidewalk exists on the south side of Bloomfield Road, and how a future replacement of the fence could affect screening; staff recommended, and the board discussed, a condition that the privacy fence be maintained if the board relied on it for finding compatibility. Several members noted the tension between strict UDO language and the city’s desire to encourage redevelopment of long-vacant lots. After debate, the board approved the petitioner’s four requested variances and adopted the petitioner-prepared findings of fact, with the motion passing by recorded vote.
