chair we have a kathy perron
ms perron you can unmute yourself and speak now
ms perron or perron please identify yourself spell your first and last name
yes kathleen perron k-a-t-h-l-e-e-n last name perron p-e-r-r-o-n
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do uh yes i just wanted to go on the record as one of the neighbors to say we are still here
we are still opposed to this there may be other variances on the block where there is parking on
the front but they were either empty lots or old garages that were knocked down this is either a
city of neighborhoods neighbors and neighborhoods or it's not um just because it would take two cars
on the street doesn't mean that we want a garage um taking up a house and i'm i am just speaking
as a neighbor and a concerned citizen and i also find that the idea of a camera in front of a house
as opposed to people going in and out and being part of the neighborhood seems cynical to me
um that's my two cents thank you anyone else to testify in this case
there's no additional hands chair thank you planning commission good morning david fecto
city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no
change in the single family residential zoning for this property this is an 1100 square foot lot
there is no unique circumstances that would that would prevent this property from being used in
there is no unique circumstances that would that would prevent this property from being used in
informants with the
conformance with the code we recommend that the board deny the requested variances thank you mi
2021-001122 959 north randolph street my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no
i believe that concludes the 9 30 list thank you tanya do we have anything else yvette
Chair, we have nothing else, but if you could make the announcement, if anyone feels as though we haven't called the case, that would be appreciated.
I think Ms. Sunkit just spelled it out correctly.
Anyone believes that we haven't addressed any issues or called your case, please raise your hand.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
With that, I will say, everyone, have a good afternoon, and we'll see you back here at 2 o'clock.
Thank you.
Thanks, Frank.
Thank you.
Thank you, and Tanya and or Yvette, let us know when you're ready to go.
We're ready now, Chair.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCiucco.
I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. James, James Snell and Mr. Thomas Holloman.
Board Administrator, Ms. Yvette Brenton, and our board attorney, Ms. Rebecca Cole, are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded, and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded, and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I repeat that as well.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
and i'd like to remind everyone please do not attempt to testify in the chat any comments and
concerns should be directed to our board administrator miss benton for her review with that i will read
off um the add-ons for today the two o'clock hearing there are a number of lengthy letters
correspondence that I need to read into the record for MI 2020-001-0004204 Parkside Avenue
and MI 2021-000999-4206 Parkside Avenue.
and the purpose of this is only for uh the uh letters to be read into the record
with which the board will make its decision and vote
and am i missing anything tanya as of yet before i begin with the letters
or rebecca
go ahead okay thank you this letter is from the east parkside residents association
dear chairman de chico the coordinating rco has surveyed the community
and one rco leader supports the developers project one resident is not opposed and seven members and
RCO leaders opposed the idea of adding two more units
to each of the properties under review.
There are five issues troubling the residents.
The developer owned but did not maintain the property for five years.
The developer owned but did not maintain the property for five years.
This intentional blighting created an eyesore and a place for vagrants to gather.
In the last ZBA hearing, the developer said the community let the property fall into disarray.
He owned it, so that makes it his responsibility.
Germany. German Yakubov, Y-A-C-O-B-O-V, the developer sent an email threatening that he
would board up the property if he does not get an approval to put two more apartments in each
building. In other words, if he can't get two more apartments in his plans, excuse me, if he can't get
two more apartments, his plans will fail. The other developers that say they can't make a profit
easily with six apartments at this location they say that they can do it with lower rents too
he says he will let's let it stay that way until units unit rents increase to the point that makes
it viable his typical rent is 490 1495 now he then says it will take five more years
some of the members felt that that this was a threat to continue blighting our community
like he has done in the past and it refers us to see the attached email
we saw this last week in 46 excuse me again we saw this last week in 4306 part side avenue zba
hearing he said he needed 10 more apartments approved for a lot big enough for four so he
can afford to pay to move the color league mural color league mural councilwoman got the a said
in the hearing that the community should not be put in that position we should not have to trade
over overcrowding for a mural moving across the street number two trash his lawyer testified at
the last hearing that he will put a dumpster in the backyard and have a trash truck drive up the
large alley on a regular basis see pictures attached this is a five foot wide dead end alley
there is no exit the eight foot wide truck cannot get up the street if it rode on the curbs to get
into the alley, it would have to back out the alley onto incoming traffic. Number three, parking.
The street was recently repainted to accommodate bike lanes. This eliminated so many parking spaces
that the residents park a block away in the Fairmount Park now. This is dangerous because
or there are no sidewalks or lights in the park.
Number five, density.
The same developer owns,
this is a type of somewhere,
is building or was trying to build 54 apartments
in a three-block area.
No other developer even comes close.
He is single handling, handily doubling the population in just three years, in just three years, he is handily, handily developing, doubling the population in three years.
Number five, community opposition. The community voted seven to oppose and one non-oppose and one in support. I had to call and survey the community to get their votes because the developer abruptly left the meeting without turning the Zoom host controls back to me on the night of the community slash developer meeting.
I will list the attendees' contact info below for verification.
In summary, the community embraces development by community-conscious developers.
This developer gave the community turkeys and toys last year, while at the same time doubling the customary rents from $800 to $15.
per month and doubling the parking trash and congestion problems our historic row house
community is becoming a nightmare due to overcrowding over developing and it's it's
new last transit neighborhood transient neighborhood these are the names of the
people who oppose byron harris joyce smith
Byron Harris, Joyce Smith, Lucille Coleman, Ludell Coleman, Donna Peters, Sandra Carter, and Jihad Ali.
Those in support are Elaine Gomez.
The one in non-opposition is Paulette Fields.
Sincerely, Mr. Brian Harris.
The second letter comes from Centennial Parkside Community Development Corporation.
Again, regarding 42-06 Parkside Avenue.
Dear Chairman DiCicco, I'm providing you this letter on behalf of the Centennial Park CDC in relation to the request for a zoning variance at 4204-06 Parkside Avenue.
The Centennial Parkside CDC has a mission to preserve, promote, and revitalize East Parkside through partnerships with businesses and institutions and programs that engage the residents, create opportunity, and grow a diverse and thriving community.
In 2016, we worked very closely with then Councilwoman Blackwell to remap East Parkside from a zoning perspective to support the values of this historic community.
The current proposal by Lev Yakbubov includes 16 dwelling units and a roof deck, which exceeds the zoning for these lots and would have a detrimental mental impact on the public health, safety and welfare of East Parkside community by creating a harmful level of density and limiting light sight lines in a nationally registered historic district.
For this reason, the Centennial Park CDC opposes the proposal as is and requests that the property owner negotiate in good faith with the coordinating RCO, in parentheses, East Park Residents Association, to arrive at a building that supports the values of the community members and respects the historic value of the existing building stock.
Each building previously held six units, which is what the local RCO supports and matches the other buildings on the street.
Please feel free to reach out to me with any questions you have regarding this letter of opposition to the proposed project at 4204-06 Parkside Avenue.
Sincerely, Alexandra McFadden, President of the Central Parkside Community Development Corporation.
This letter is from Mr. Yakubov.
Hi, everyone.
Hope this email finds you well.
I'm writing to you regarding the historical twin at 4204-06 Parkside Avenue.
As you know, we placed an application in for a variance for an eight-unit building in each parcel, a total of 16 units.
That is the minimum we need to make this project work.
If the variance is denied or even approved at six units each, we will not proceed with the project.
We will board up the property and wait until the rents catch up to a point where it would make sense to rehab this property.
We are eager to rehab this property and bring it back into use, and we would be able to without a variance if it were zone RM1, as are many of the identical homes on the block.
However, at this time, the project does not make financial sense at the six units that it was last used as.
There is a ZBA hearing on the 30th regarding this property, and the ZBA is waiting a letter from the RCO to report their position.
I understand that no new votes has been scheduled, and the councilman sent in her letter to match what the Planning Commission suggested, which was six units.
So I waited to get an idea of the position of the RCOs going to take, the RCOs are going to take on this project.
Again, we will not be able to proceed with this project and anything less than eight units in each building.
The building sit there empty probably for at least the next, will probably sit there empty for the next three to five years.
Thank you, German.
German.
I haven't read that.
unless there's any unfinished business on that rebecca i'm turning to you is there any other
Unless there's any
unfinished business on that.
Rebecca, I'm turning to you.
Is there any other?
other business related to that parkside to the parkside avenue project to restate the
summary vote of the rco was one in support seven opposed and one non-opposition
so with that that we can now vote correct go for it see with the vote mi 2020-001
000 4204 parks parkside avenue and mi 2021-000999 4206 parkside avenue my vote is no on both
My vote is no to both.
No to both.
No to both.
Let me rephrase that.
According to the planning commission, it supports.
Let me revote that.
To vote at the two applications that have just been read into the record.
My vote is yes, with a maximum six units per building, six units and 4204 Parkside, maximum six units.
in 4206 party parkside i apologize my vote is no to both
so jim and tom you can either vote no straight out or vote yes with the proviso maximum six in each
my vote is yes with a maximum of six units each building
we lost James
Jim Snell
yeah Frank I'm sorry you must
maybe I didn't unmute
I'm sorry I thought I answered
my vote was no to vote
thank you
next case
on the add-on list
is MI2020-000
zero seven three zero three west highland my vote is yes with revised plan uh three pages
revised plan three pages approved today yes with proviso yes with proviso my vote is no
and I believe
there is still the one from this morning
Mr. Plaza you're going to handle that one
do you have the material on that if not we can
wait and do it at the end of this session
which one Frank the 1201 yes
Okay. Calendar number MI 2021-000994-1201 West Girard Avenue. This is a request for reconsideration. My vote is yes.
Yes to reconsideration.
My vote is no to reconsideration.
I think that completes the add ons. Now go to our regular list and I'll announce those cases that have requested to be continued on the two o'clock list.
Number seven, MI 2021-001420, 1715 North 42nd Street is continued.
Number nine, MI 2021-001421, 1717 North 42nd Street is continued.
Number 13, MI 2021-000558-5608 North 12th Street is continued.
If anyone disagrees with the cases I just read in to be continued, please raise your hand.
Only if you would disagree with the cases that have just been rented into the record to being continued, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Alan Nockamson with his hand up.
Mr. Nockamson, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Alan Nockamson of Nockamson, PC.
N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Where for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yes, we ask that items for the matters for 1715 and 1717 North 42nd street proceed. We do have letters of support from two of the RCOs, the request.
Yes, we ask that items for the matter.
We did file a secondary zoning permit application at the behest of the community groups in order to include porches to the front facades.
And that's why we're in this position right now.
That's the only change.
My understanding is there were some issues as it relates to notification and or documents being submitted.
No, we don't get. Could you.
So we can only go forward with the original refusals.
Anytime there's something new at it, it would have to be submitted to the board to be documented in the Eclipse system.
So right now, the only thing that could go forward would be the original refusal.