it limiting it to an event assembly facility um i think i think you would be fine since that is
intended for private functions thank you what about uh is there alcohol
vincent um you do not have a liquor license we don't we don't have alcohol lessons no we don't
serve alcohol nor do you have any intent to serve alcohol correct yes we don't thank you
under this uh under this could people bring their own alcohol like you know they have these sort of
new event spaces where people
bring your own
bottle or whatever?
Basically, what we're doing
is about mind games. If you are
drunk, you can't play.
I like that.
I like that.
Was there
any thought of maybe having
some kind of
agreement with the
community? No.
So I personally don't drink, so I hate drinks.
No, I don't mean that.
I mean, is there any, not about the drinking part, but about the gaming and what have you,
that that's what's going to go on there and that, you know, I mean, the RCO did approve,
but was there any thought of maybe having some other kind of, like, agreement with them to make sure that...
When we met with the RCO, because they've been aware of this space since it's been operating, some of the neighbors and RCO members have actually been inside.
They didn't seem to have a concern to do that.
I mean, I understand that sometimes a community agreement would be thought by RCO, but in this case, they did not.
Does the lounge operate any other space besides the first floor?
Like the basement, second floor?
only the first floor okay so the basement is not utilized or if there is a basement
there is a basement but the basement needs to be renovation like very hard yeah so it's
like basically not using questions from our attorney um i just wanted to clarify on the
because the refusal wasn't um totally clear um i noticed this previously had approval for
dwelling units on the second floor and then the lease indicated that the space the space being
leased was the first floor and partial second floor you able to clarify yes the second floor
is for residential okay all right so there's still residential up there and you're yes it's
still residential okay and you are not using any of the residential as part of the business no okay
all right thank you do we have a proviso for this what are what do we what are where do we stand
um so if we could do a proviso limiting the use to an event assembly facility
okay questions or comments from the uh audience virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair
planning commission amy boyd with the planning commission
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from the current CMX 2 commercial mixed use to CMX 2.5.
The plan has demonstrated that the proposed use will not cause such a bunch of impacts beyond what would reasonably be expected.
The planning commission recommended the board grant this special exception for assembly and entertainment.
MI-2025-004-485-3617-23 Lancaster Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Event, assembly, facility only, and first floor only.
Michael John, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes with proviso.
I win. My vote is yes with provisors. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Number 11, MI 2025-004-600-1302-204-Ruscombe Street. Eileen Quigley is the attorney. There's unanimous support from the Logan Civic Association. 20 votes in favor.
we were going to hold a vote on this over the taxes yep eileen quickly will be rejoining us
We're going to hold the vote.
as a panelist okay
Good morning, Chair Bergman, members of the board.
Good morning, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Eileen Quigley, E-I-L-E-E-N.
Quigley, Q-U-I-G-L-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
So, as I said, my name is Eileen Quigley.
I'm here with my colleague, Pooja Patel.
we're here on behalf of logan hope school and jim sovacool the head of the school as well as
christine firman from atkin ocean shade architects the design professional are also here to present
or answer questions as the board may request our vice chair has a few questions good morning
good morning um submitted your documents and exhibits five days in advance of this hearing
yes we have and you have several reviews here so do you waive the reading other
refusals and stipulate to their accuracy i do okay thank you you can you can share your screen
and proceed with your case can everybody see that
okay just um as a clarifying point the a tax-exempt application a real estate tax
exempt application was filed on behalf of this property because part of the
application for these improvements for the expansion of the school included a consolidation
of 1302-04 ruscom with 1328 which is the adjacent property the exemption was denied
by the city timely appealed in 2025 and a hearing has been scheduled for march 11th 2026 so
we haven't submitted the tax clearance we're working with the city with regard to those
to the exemption and any potential taxes it may be owed but this has been a school for many years
So, as Ms. Graham said, we have quite a few refusals. We also have a lot of exhibits of the deed, the affidavit of posting, as you noted, the unanimous support of the community, and that letter support is at Exhibit 14.
We have the neighbor notice letters we sent out with the certificates of mailing at Exhibit 16, as well as the project information form at Exhibit 17 and the approved consolidation plan at Exhibit 18.
That was approved by the City Survey District and Board of Surveyors.
The site, as we noted, is 1302 to 04 Ruscom Street to be consolidated with 1328 Ruscom Street, which is the adjacent vacant lot you're looking at.
here's an aerial view this is an existing building this was the
educational use was permitted at this site back in 2010 and so this
application is essentially for the natural expand natural expansion of an
already permitted use as you can see the site lies in the RM1 zoning
district and it abuts the rta zoning district as well as the cmx2 zoning district to the rear on
albanus so the refusal there are four separate refusals the first of which is um the on-site
landscape and tree requirements uh while we do meet all of the interior on-site landscape
requirements we were refused because the species of tree so under the planning commission planting
list there is an acer rubrum red sunset tree species we are proposing i know i hope i said
I know. I hope I said that right. In our landscape plan, we are proposing an Acer rubrum, but it's a Armstrong Gold. So it's a different cultivar. And the reason why it was proposed was because it's more columnar. So it's actually more fitting for the restricted space in the urban setting.
that right in our
we did submit a letter requesting waiver of the tree type to the planning commission along with a
landscape architect plant selection memo the planning commission denied that waiver
so we are here now asking for a variance to allow this armstrong gold instead of the red sunset but
again it's still acer rubrum it's just two different types of cultivars
it's still what we're planting will still meet the intention the role and the purpose of the
trees to be planted anyway so that is the first refusal the second refusal was for an eight foot
wide buffer an eight foot wide landscape buffer between the zoning district so between the rm
in the rta there was an eight foot wide buffer and just so for you to recall this building here
at 1302 to 04 is an existing building it's been around for many many years the buffer would be
along this area right here we don't even meet the eight foot deep dimension so we wouldn't be able
to provide that eight foot wide buffer anyway but besides that there are steps here there's an
egress here out of the rear of the building any type of buffer along here for these existing
conditions would create a hardship and logan hope does own these two properties to the rear the only
property that isn't owned adjacent on those adjacent property lines is this property back here
the third is the rear yard so we have a gym and an all multi-purpose room as part of the expansion
and this multi-purpose room gym is about 32 feet by 62 39 feet by 62 feet if we provided a nine
foot deep yard rear yard which is adjacent to the cmx2 property you would be cutting this
nine feet off you'd have a 30 foot deep building or for extracurricular and interior activities for
the students so you would be greatly limiting what they can do here which causes another hardship
and uh finally the parking there are two spaces based on this development
that are required and we are providing one because it was it's more beneficial to provide
and a handicapped van parking space which would take up all of the room instead of providing two
regular vehicle passenger cars here because this allows handicapped students to access the van
directly from the school and then they can go to outside activities so not having that right on
site actually presents hardship to those students who are handicapped and would have to go or wait
for the van come down through the steps so this is actually more beneficial to those students
i'm going to go to the rendering so you can see what the plan is you can see this is the
multi-purpose gym area this is the in interior of the site but it's outside
play area an outdoor classroom garden area this is where the ADA van will be
parked this is the extension of the existing building you'll have the lobby
they'll have additional classrooms and there will be a connection from the
existing building to the gym area as well as this addition will connect to the existing building
here's a rendering of the expansion of the existing school
so again not allowing the natural expansion of a use that has been permitted would create
a hardship for this school they have a small student body they don't anticipate a great
increase in student body it would really just be very minimal and would likely more so be siblings
of existing students there's no anticipated increase in teachers it's really to provide
teachers it's really to provide more amenity space for the students larger
more amenity space for the students.
educational facility spaces and classrooms there were some photographs
of the site again the landscape waiver request and landscape architect memo at
11 and 12.
I don't know if the board has any questions with regard to what we're proposing here.
Well, why don't we do this?
Why don't we have your client come on, adopt your testimony, and then do you have an architect
with you too?
Right.
So if there's questions relative to the architect, then we'll bring the architect on.
So to move it forward, bring on your client, adopt your testimony.
Okay, Jim, can you—
I understand also, Eileen, we're not voting on this today.
Am I correct?
If you're waiting for the tax clearance certificate—
Right.
Well, I guess if you need to withhold the decision until we get the tax clearance—
Yeah, that's right.
That's right.
All right.
But we wouldn't have to appear.
Is that accurate?
It would just be in—
You will not have to appear.
Closed-door session?
I don't know if it's a closed-door session, but we'll—
all right i understand right you would yeah you would announce it publicly
right yes the vote might be announced but there's no need for you to appear okay
so we have jim sovacool
jim sovacool has been promoted to panelists he's only hi jim could you please state your
name it's spelled for the stenographer name james sobacool j-a-m-e-s last name sobacool s-o-v-e-z and
victor o-c-o-o-l do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do counsel mr sobacool you heard my presentation to the board yes and would you
testify that that presentation was accurate as to what is happening at the site? Yes, I would.
And if you were to testify, would you adopt my presentation as your testimony?
Yes, I would. Thank you. Questions from the board. Yes, I have a question. You have the
van accessible parking space, but I'm trying to figure out how does one in a wheelchair
stair get to that upper level. I see the elevator, but I only see stairs up from the lobby. So how
does one traverse this site since a lot of it is sort of raised and the elevator doesn't appear
to go down to the lobby? Yes, the van parking space would be at street level. And so if there's
someone that could exit out the front doors of the building, take a left and turn over
to the the parking space at street level yeah i get how they i get out there i see the vestibule
i see i see how the van parking space is there i'm trying to get from the vestibule up to this
upper level because all i see are stairs i see stairs that say up to a landing right to an
elevator i'm still trying to figure out how you get to that upper level um yes the the elevator
if we're looking in the the welcome space um there's there's an elevator just past the the
vegetable fuel uh that would go up to the landing that is in um so the elevator so the elevator
does open up at the lobby area correct it goes to the from the lobby and then it goes to to
each of the three floors of the building the uh the the second floor would be the
area that could go out to the um the yard space area okay because it's not clear on the on the
plan that it opens it shows that it opens up to that landing space but it doesn't it doesn't it's
not clear that it opens up to the lobby space yes it does it does open up to the lobby space
okay all the questions
questions from our attorney hillary hillary emerson not at this time mr
there's your comments from the virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair planning
commission amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change in
zoning at this location from the current rm1 residential multifamily the appellant is subject
to the landscaping and tree code and the appellate refused to comply with the requirements for
landscape buffering from a residential district and plant species selection from a pre-approved list
In this situation, Planning Commission staff could consider a waiver from both with a fee in lieu of providing six trees.
with a fee in lieu of providing six trees for this application this is calculated to be six