DEARBORN – After much deliberation and suspense, the City Council unanimously voted March 27 to deny the rezoning of a parcel of land that would have allowed for the development of a Holiday Inn Express within a few hundred feet from schools, a handful of churches and Dearborn’s largest mosque.

The hospitality chain sought to construct a business-geared hotel in place of a church that has been vacant for three years, on a triangular block of land that’s home to the Islamic Center of America (ICA), two charter schools, a handful of churches, a community center and a retirement complex.

According to developers, the planned four-star hotel would have 107 rooms and sit on a three-acre plot of land where the now-closed Mother of The Savior Church currently sits. The hotel would not include a restaurant or bar and would only serve breakfast. It would also employ about 50 individuals and the city would generate about $250,000 annually in property tax revenue.

However, concerned residents, congregants at the Islamic Center of America and two neighboring churches and parents with children enrolled at the Muslim American Youth Academy (MAYA) spoke out vehemently against the project. They alleged that the hotel is likely to invite crime, drug activity, prostitution and even human trafficking.

They viewed the hotel as a threat to their children and the community at large.

At its March 27 meeting, the Council was tasked with making a decision based on a motion to deny the developers’ request to rezone the area, which carried at the March 22 study session meeting.

The Council and audience members were taken by surprise at the start of the general meeting, when Joseph Ejbeh, the developers’ and Holiday Inn’s attorney, told the Council the developers wanted them to “table” the motion.

Joseph Ejbeh, Holiday Inn’s attorney, asks the Dearborn City Council to table the vote on wheher to rezone an area to allow for the hotel’s development – Photo by The AANews

He said the developers were in talks on a “tangential initiative that doesn’t involve the city or that parcel” and that they didn’t want any “damages” or “prejudice” to be attached to the property because the request to rezone it was denied.

He then assured the Council that the developers will not be moving forward with the purchase agreement for the property.

He also said his client was “subjected to a plethora of attacks at all levels” and was accused of being a “magnet” for everything from perverts to armed robbers. The comment drew sharp criticism from Council President Susan Dabaja.

Ejbeh later told the Council that they created a “chilling effect when a government body discourages economic development and where businessmen are scared to do due diligence.”

At the study session meeting, Ejbeh had said the developers performed $700,000 worth of due diligence, including conducting environmental studies, working with the Building and Engineering Department and getting the flagship location approved by the franchise company.

Councilwoman Leslie Herrick was quick to defend the city’s business friendly initiatives.

“I don’t think anybody is opposed to business development in Dearborn,” she said. “We’re all excited about what going on in our city right now, with the economy getting stronger.”

City Attorney Debra Walling said a year needs to pass by for a second request by any developer to rezone the property. If the Council tables the vote for more than 90 days, the motion is absolved and the property remains a residential zone.

However, Councilman David Bazzy said— with confirmation from Walling— the developers are not in the position to ask the Council to table a motion, as they didn’t — and couldn’t— make the request.

“This request comes from the Planning Commission to us,” Bazzy said. “We are not discussing the ownership group; we are discussing whether this will be rezoned. The fact that this happens be a hotel, it might not always be a hotel.”

The triangular block has been designated as a residential area since 1931, but the City Planning Commission unanimously voted in mid-October to recommend that the area be rezoned to accommodate businesses.

Council President Pro Tem Mike Sareini said he would have preferred the Council to have made a decision at that meeting and said the developers should have known the risk of making the request.

“We’ve already spent two meetings talking heavily about this,” Dabaja said, echoing Sareini’s comments. “We’re trying to make a decision, really, to determine what’s in the best interest of the city.”

She later advocated for the virtue of “finality”, whether the outcome would negatively or positively impact the developers.

“We’ve spoken about this so many times and people will keep continue to repeat what we’re saying,” she said.

She added that whether alcohol would be served at the hotel would not be a factor in her decision making.

Walling also pointed out that it’s unusual for the city to hold several hearings and a study session regarding a rezoning issue.

Bazzy said he made the motion to deny the zoning change, which was seconded by Councilwoman Erin Byrnes, at the March 22 study session because he thought a hotel “doesn’t fit” on that property.

“I’ve walked the property…I drive by it every day to work and back,” he said. “It not only doesn’t fit for what is there in terms of the existing buildings, it also doesn’t fit for the citizens who aren’t under our purveyance.”

He added that the houses of worship are vibrant and that it would have made sense to rezone the block if it housed deteriorated buildings and the city wanted to foster business growth there, for example.

The Council voted not to table the vote, based on a motion by Councilman Robert Abraham and seconded by Bazzy.

Ejbeh pointed out that the Council had recently approved rezoning a parcel of land to allow for a Hampton Inn hotel in the west side of Dearborn, within walking distance of several schools, churches and schools.

“Why was it OK then and it’s not OK now?” he asked.

Council members replied that the developers of the Hampton Inn had not petitioned to rezone the property it sits on and that the areas are not a fair comparison.

Dabaja told the audience “as a matter of full disclosure and transparency” that her child attends MAYA and that her husband is a member of its school board.

“I do not have any direct or indirect financial gain or connection to this,” she said.

Sareini said his wife is one of 28 board members of the ICA.

“It has no bearing on my judgment,” he said. “I am an attorney, I follow the law…I have no problem being impartial.”

The Council then unanimously voted to deny the rezoning of the parcel from a residential area to a commercial one.