Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies Auto 360 LLC business registration after photos show multiple unplated vehicles
Summary
Council voted 5–0 to deny Auto 360 LLC’s business-registration request for 3261 South Park Ave., citing evidence that the site is operating beyond the repair‑shop use described in the application (numerous stored, unplated vehicles and tow trucks).
The Lackawanna City Council voted unanimously to deny the business registration for Auto 360 LLC at 3261 South Park Avenue after staff and an eyewitness presented photographs showing multiple vehicles on the site that exceed the repair‑shop use listed in the application.
Staff told the council that the property had historically served as a repair shop and that the application described short‑term vehicle stays for diagnostics and testing. An eyewitness (speaker S7) told the council they visited the site about an hour earlier and took photos showing roughly 15 vehicles, several without license plates, tow trucks and a tractor‑trailer. "I just lehi there an hour ago, and I took some pictures... there was 15 vehicles there. 9 of them didn't have a plates on," the eyewitness said, describing vehicles in disarray and evidence the site was functioning as more than a basic repair operation.
City staff explained the observed conditions would require a different review than the one the applicant received; staff noted prior phone contacts with the operator and provided current photos to council members. Councilor Moreno moved to deny the registration; Anderson seconded and the motion carried 5–0 on roll call. The transcript indicates the denied action was recorded as the council's final decision on this registration at the meeting; the record does not include details of any appeal process discussed at the dais.
The applicant is recorded in the meeting notes as Anwar Al Kalai / Edward Allen Kalai in the paperwork, but the council’s action denied the registration based on nonconforming use and visible site conditions rather than the identity of the applicant. The council did not adopt any follow‑up enforcement timeline during the session.
