in advance of this hearing yes we have please proceed counsel thank you uh i'm going to share
the screen now? Please. And can everybody see the exhibits? We can. So thank you everyone for your
time this afternoon. My name is Eileen Quigley. I'm here on behalf of Bricksmore Roosevelt Mall
Owner LLC. We're counsel to the applicant. With me are William Grimel, who is the Vice President
of Real Estate Development at Bricksmore. We also have Curtis Taylor, who is at In-Place Design,
and he is the Principal and Director of Graphics at In-Place Design. And we also have Brian Conlon,
who is Associate Principal and Vice President at Langan Engineering. And with that, I'd like to
move forward. As we said, we did submit our packet, which is on the screen right now. We
have our deed, the change of entity name from Centro NP to Brixmore, Certificate of Tax
Clearance, photos of the posted zoning notices, and the refusal. And we also have a letter of
support, as you know, from the Roanhurst Civic Association. We appeared before them on November
30th we sent out our notice letters to the registered community organizations and the
neighbors with certificates of mailing we have attached those letters and also the mailing list
and with that i would like to let you know why we are here today we are here seeking zoning
relief a variance for signage that is going to replace freestanding signs that were already at
this site let me go to the plan so there were two digital pylon or freestanding
signs along Cotman Avenue and this is Cotman Avenue to the south Roosevelt
Boulevard to the east Bly Avenue to the north and Busselton Avenue to the west
so just to orient everybody this is the Roosevelt Mall and this has been at this
location for at at least 50 years and for the board's knowledge the
least 50 years and for the board's knowledge the the ownership is going
through millions of dollars of improvements and updates and upgrades at
this site right now and as you can see even though these are not part of this
application there are new pad sites or new tenants that they are building
spaces for right now along Cotman Avenue so there are lots of wonderful things
happening here. There is a whole new signage package that goes along with the upgrades and
the improvements. Most of the signage is by right. We are here today for two freestanding signs
that were refused on the grounds that the sign area exceeded 150 square feet per face.
Also, just for the board's knowledge, there are lots of improvements going on, also
tied in with the streets department in the city along this Cotman Avenue commercial corridor
this site falls in the CA2 which is commercial which is car auto oriented zoning so here are
the signs these are the new freestanding signs so as I said they're going to be two along Cotman
Avenue these are internally illuminated sign boxes and internally illuminated the channel
letters here as I said this square footage required is 150 square feet
obviously they need to have more more sign area because we're talking about a
very large mall here with tenants that go back towards Bly Avenue so there's a
lot of space to cover and also Cotman Avenue being the commercial corridor
these new signs at this size will really aid and facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic along
that route. We believe that this signage, if Bricksmore does not get the variance for this
signage, it will present a hardship because of the size of the property and the amount of tenants
that they have on this site, and also it lends itself to, as I said,
vehicular and pedestrian safety because people can see what is within the site
as they travel along Cotman Avenue from far enough away
where they can navigate their entrance or exit from this site.
there aren't i mean unless here's the existing site
where the signage will go this sign will be removed
this sign is coming down so as you can see this really lovely new signage will take the place
the existing signage along here at Cotman Avenue, which really is updated in line with all the
improvements and the money that Bricksmore is spending to update and modernize this mall.
Why don't you have someone adopt your testimony? Yes. So I would like to ask
Curtis Taylor to be elevated to a panelist. Thank you.
Curtis Taylor is coming in as a panelist.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sorry, my name is Curtis Taylor.
Hello.
Hi, how are you, sir?
Great, how are you?
My name is Curtis Taylor, C-U-R-T-I-S-S-T-A-Y-L-O-R,
and I'm Director of Graphics at In-Place Design.
Right. Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Council.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Thank you, Curtis, for coming on.
Curtis, you heard my narrative about this project
and the importance of these two freestanding pylon signs
to the overall improvements and upgrades to this site
and that if the variance is not granted,
it will present a hardship correct yes i have and would you say that my presentation was accurate
absolutely and uh curtis if you were to testify would you adopt my narrative as your testimony
yes i would thank you mr thank you questions from the board
no chair
thank you questions or comments from our attorney
Thank you. Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Hillary Emerson
I just wanted to clarify one thing. Ms. Quigley, you mentioned Bricksmore. Are they the ones seeking the signs or are they the sign company?
No, Bricksmore's ownership. So on OPA, it still has Centro NP. That's why we included in with the deed at Exhibit A, the change of entity name.
So, Centro was changed to Bricksmore, just so you know that it's under same ownership.
It was just a name change.
Oh, okay.
So, Bricksmore is the applicant and owner of the property.
Thank you so much for the clarification.
There you go.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
You're welcome.
I'm sorry, Chair.
We just had somebody by the name of Stan Sawinski with their hand out.
I've allowed them to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court's stenographer?
Name is Stan Swinski, S-T-A-N-C-Y-W-I-N-S-K-I.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Sir, are you a neighbor?
No, sir.
I am from the 6th Councilmatic District.
Please proceed.
All right. Currently, the applicant is in the 10th council district, but as of January 1st, it will become part of the 6th council district with council member Mike Driscoll.
The council member wanted to reach out to let the board know that he is absolutely in support of this application and hopefully good things will follow.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing CA2 commercial at this location.
We feel the applicant has demonstrated hardship and the proposal is the minimum necessary variance.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2023-005-593-2327-83, Copman Avenue, I vote yes.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Counsel.
Chair Bergman, before I leave, may I move my exhibits into evidence, please?
You absolutely can. Thank you.
Thank you. Have a wonderful holiday, everybody.
You too. Thank you. Thank you. Number 18, MI 2023, 004-606-3593 Primrose Road.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney. There is a letter of opposition from the Northeast Community Civic Association.
There is a petition that has been signed in support by 42 neighbors.
Mr. Nockmson, you've already been sworn once a day. Just for the record, state your name, please.
Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Could you identify your clients and their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Hena Kabbani, who is the owner of the property.
She's actually in my office in another conference, in another room, but she's here presently.
Okay. Our Vice Chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, Counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you, Counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
All right. Thank you. And thank you for accommodating Ms. Cabani and taking her out of order.
All right. I'll try to get into this. All right. So the first matter we're going to be hearing this afternoon from me is 3593 Primrose Road.
This is currently a duplex, and we're looking to increase the unit count by one by making it into a triplex where Ms. Cabani would be living.
Again, not out of character, I believe the property next door has received a zoning permit for three units, at least a public record.
So the first thing we're going to do is review the notice of refusal.
So we did meet with the community at an RCO meeting and not sure what happened there because, you know, the people.
Not sure what happened there because, you know, the people within the community did not support, within that meeting did not support it.
But I would have to say that Ms. Kavani made a concerted effort to meet with as many of her neighboring property owners and occupants, and we have an extensive petition in support of this project.
We also gave, in our presentation material, we have the rental license showing that we are currently two units.
So it's not like we're taking a property that's single family in nature and making it into a triplex.
It already has a multifamily history, right?
Looking to add an additional unit, which is the door for that additional unit has its own entrance and not uncommon, which what we're doing is converting the garage into a living space.
And you'll see pictures of that.
But you also see the use permit as well for this property.
And then the garages that have been converted nearby, we're going to show you pictures of all these houses, which under similar circumstances, they had to the unit.
Then maps of the area, photographs of the property, interior photographs showing, again, that she's living above grade.
She's an elderly lady.
She's owned this property since, I believe, 2016.
And she just needs a place to live.
And you'll see, like, again, she's trying to do everything responsibly, legally, and hopefully this board will agree to grant her this variance.
Then we made some simple plans, like, you know, for her to show you what she's trying to do for this one unit.
And then we had we show proof of the RCO meeting notice.
Again, we had some people show up, not a ton, but I think that the petition outweighs that the people that showed up to the meeting, not always the easiest to show up in person nowadays.
So that's why we made an effort of community outreach ourselves.
The application for appeal that we filed on Ms. Cabani's behalf, her deed showing that she's owned the property since 2016, and a certificate of tax clearance.
Again, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Ms. Kamani, who's with my associate, Alex Goldberg, virtually raise her hand.
So I'd probably be Alex, raise the hand for her, and then she'll be sworn in and I'll have a couple of questions for her.
So a notice of refusal, again, two things.
We're looking to extend the use of this property from two units to three units, not out of character.
I believe there's a big apartment building around the corner as well.
So we've got two refusals.
First is the proposed use of the property because this is RTA1.
But again, not out of character to have multifamily use.
The second one we do dispute.
I should have said that from the beginning.
It talks about parking.
You should have one accessory parking space per dwelling unit.
Actually, we do.
We have two parking spaces in the back.
And now we're seeking a third dwelling unit.
The reason why we don't need that third space is because Ms. Cabani doesn't drive. Actually, her daughter drove her here and is with her. But, you know, she's not taking any additional parking away from the neighborhood. The current, you know, occupants, there are two units in there, each have a parking spot in the rear, and they would continue to have a parking spot in the rear. And Ms. Cabani is not going to take an additional parking space.
and then this is the correspondence from the northeast community civic alliance you know we
deal with them a lot they give a fair forum very respectful um i just don't think that this is
that you know this is reflective of what the community has thought as a whole i don't know
how there were 10 people mr chair who showed up um and you know which surprised me about their
comments the reason for the position we received only negative feedback regarding this application
I also received numerous calls and emails in opposition of the proposed zoning in the days and weeks following the meeting.
That's not anything we've heard. Like my client, you'll see she's an elderly lady.
She's maintained the property pretty well. I don't believe there's been any violations against the property to her ownership.
And she really did make a concerted effort to meet as many of her nearby neighbors who know her and she wants to live there.
So this is going to be an owner-occupied unit. I don't know what's going to happen if we don't get this approval because I don't know she's going to be able to afford to live somewhere else. And the income that's generated from this property is not enough. So in a down market, this is not a great situation for my client.
But again, the petition. So again, what we do is we tell our clients this. Focus on the people that are most directly impacted by this proposed change in use or the project in general. I don't consider this a project. I consider this someone who has a property, is multifamily in nature. She's looking to add an additional unit to allow her to live there.
She can't just take someone out of their property. There's a current lease. And even if she was allowed to take someone out of one of the units, she couldn't afford to live there herself. She needs this income to help support her retirement. But she talked to the people who are nearby. They were all supportive of that.
They were all supportive of that.
The letter that the coordinating
The letter that the coordinating RCO gave did not indicate how close by these individuals lived or who lodged the complaints if they're close by either.
Again, a lot of times people, you know, attend a community meeting, they just attend community meetings, but they don't know the neighborhood or the particular circumstances that we are facing in a particular appeal.
So here, nearby neighbors were all supportive.
And then this is the petition, you know, supporting three, you know, family dwellings.
And then here's the rental license showing that, again, she does everything the right way.
You don't have someone who, like, doesn't do the correct filings, like even just the legalist, you know, to add that third unit.
We're doing everything the right way from a zoning perspective.
She's had a rental license forever, and she wants to increase that use by one unit for herself.
And then if you look at here, too, this shows the zoning permit to allow for three units next door to us that was issued in 2016.