No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission good morning mr chairman david
facto f-e-c-t-e-a-u with the city planning commission right you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed thank you sir mr
chairman and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends a change at this location to
residential single family zoning since we have not received a request to rezone this neighborhood
we must judge the application according to the current zoning from 1933 so that is rm1 there is
no unique physical condition of this 1463 square foot lot that would prevent it from being used in
conformance with the zoning code that is for three dwelling units we also note that smaller dwelling
units are not necessarily more affordable the city planning commission recommends the board deny the
variance for a fourth unit. Mr. Chairman, I heard that Mr. Fecto mentioned it's 1400 square foot
lot. I just want to, our information has it as 1500 plus square foot. So I'm not sure if that is
something that is different in the city records. With regard to the area, I do want to point out
also that the area actually is completely multifamily zoning, but it's also relatively
underdeveloped at this time so i would ask the board take into consideration that situation
thank you thank you m i 2022 001 800 1027 west orphan street i vote yes thomas halliman my vote
is yes james snell my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you may i be excused yeah
Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Number seven, MI 2022-001-685-1838 Bainbridge Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney. Letter of support from SOSNA.
Chair, Mr. Anastasio is coming back in as a panelist now.
good morning Mr. Chair good morning you've already been sworn just state your name please for the
record that's Vern Anastasio A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O could you identify your client in relationship
to the property yes my client is Ms. Lisa Flaherty and she is the owner of the property
thank you our our board secretary has a few questions good morning counsel good morning
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
All right.
Did you email the exhibits of the documents required, proof of ownership, tax clearance,
copy of refusal or referral, pictures of drawings of the property within five days in advance
of this hearing, and did you meet with the RFCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes to all that.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Please proceed to share your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
My screen is shared, and this is for the removal of an existing roof deck, partial demolition of a rear portion of the existing structure, which is basically the outdoor stairs, which are pretty dangerous and unsightly, and the construction of a roof deck with roof deck access structure, and the size and location are going to be on the plans that I show you.
The roof deck access structure is at the very corner of the property, and as such, what is allowed is 38 feet.
We're proposing 43, and the height due to the setback is 38 feet, and it's 43 as proposed.
And again, as you'll see in a moment, sorry about that.
I'm having a little technical issue.
I may have to stop sharing and reboot this, Mr. Chair.
That's fine.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Technology is great until it doesn't work, right?
Just give me one moment.
i'm sorry for the delay mr tim kerner is the architect he is in the audience if he
could be recognized, I do believe he has the plans up, and he could share them with you while I work
on my technical issues. That's fine. You'll do the testimony, right? Yes, of course. Sure. Could we
please recognize him? Mr. Kerner, if you're in the virtual audience, can you please raise your hand?
He's coming back in as a panelist now. Thank you.
Good morning, sir.
Good morning.
am i yes can you hear me now so so here i don't have to swear you in because you're not going to
testify could you just put the plans up uh yes i didn't have them up on my screen i'm just i just
need to get them just a moment thank you tim sure i think i'm having some technical issue today
can you see that now mr chair yeah we're good all right this these are mine i just rebooted
and try to get tim stay with us okay because you're gonna you're gonna be walking everybody
through the uh the new structure so this is the property in question as indicated by the round
circle this is the pictures of the deck as it currently exists and you can see the lower right
hand side the dangerous uh outdoor staircase that's being demolished this is the subject
property here where my cursor is. As you can see, this is where the structure would be and there's
going to be also a shade element attached to that structure so that folks can access the
roof deck from the interior of the property instead of the way it was. It is set back
so that you cannot see it from the north elevation, from the sidewalk.
But from the rear, as you can see, it looks like part of the actual house itself when in fact it is not.
it looks like part of the actual house itself when in fact it is not and that's the only reason why
And that's the only reason.
we have this refusal if this access structure was put in the center or towards the front of the
house it would be able to be done as a matter of right but the fact of the matter is the property
is not very deep putting the access structure anywhere but in this corner would render the roof
deck um just useless so and tim do you want to talk about uh some of this while i scroll through
uh sure let me swear him in please okay state your name and spell for the court reporter
timothy kerner t-i-m-o-t-h-y kerner k-e-r-n-e-r do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth yes i do proceed please okay i guess vern if you just maybe back
up to the photographs and we could just point out the stair i guess i just wanted to point out on
the right right the top right hand side you can see if you're looking to the left of the structure
in the alleyway you see that's the stair that we'd be taking off it's deteriorating it's and
you can see just below it the the state of that stair to the left of that you can the left two
pictures, you can see the state of the roof deck currently, which is also deteriorating. And then
to the far left, the corner, what you're looking at is the back of the structure, which was built
next to it. The dark structure is a new building, multifamily building. And then the gray and tan
structure is the existing house. So the lower two floors are in stucco. Above that is an existing
I guess it's a vinyl plaid structure, which is the existing master bedroom and a balcony.
So if you could just remember those images as we move forward to compare to the new project,
which we're proposing. So here on the site plan in the L configuration, the top right corner of
the dark rectangle, that is the stair. So we are making the pilot house as small as possible,
which just enclosing the stair itself.
The reason it works best in that location are a few different reasons.
One, the stairs that are in the existing stairs are directly below it.
And within a small house, if you're going to have a stair,
a new stair up to the roof inside,
it really has to be over the existing stairway,
or you're just taking space away from what are already pretty small rooms.
So it's in that corner, but that corner is also,
least obtrusive. It's set all the way back, it's far back from the street, so it's out of view from
the street and also away from the roof decks on the new structures, which are directly on the
bottom. So that rectangle, which the cursor is on now, is new structure, and the rectangle to the
left of that is a new structure. Those are new multifamily units that were just built within the
last couple of years just finished recently and they're taller than what we are proposing they're
basically surrounding this building um we're just trying to get a little a little bit of a light up
above but you can see in this picture that their roof deck is higher than the roof deck we're
proposing um and as verne said if our pilot house structure was in the center of our roof deck
even though it'd be more of an imposition upon the street it would be by right but
just because we're pushing as far away from the street as possible and making sense of both the
roof deck and the space below we're getting the um we need to ask for a variance uh and then here
you see the section it's just showing the existing roof and how we're getting up and the stairs going
over the existing stairs and everything pushed to the rear and if you go forward vern yep and this
is just showing how the the new stairs up to the deck fit over the existing stairs which are
well in line with the existing stairs I should say they go they go directly up into the hallway
and then these are the three-dimensional elements so top left you can see how the
from the street view the pilot house is pushed all the way back so you can't see it from the
front you see that on the right side as well uh and on the far right side you see the three
dimensional view of the pilot house enclosure and the trellis in front of that and then on the
bottom left you see that that's the existing balcony and then our our uh stairwell is going
up above that existing balcony and then that picture to the right of that the cursor is on
now just showing you the overall view from above uh where you see the pilot house and the trellis
uh where you see the pilot house and the trellis again set back these are current conditions
again, sit back.
there's the deed there's a letter of uh support um not non-opposition but full full support from
everybody in attendance uh at the sasna zoning committee all 12 folks in attendance
voted to support this it below here's proof of mailing 144 individual households were in fact
invited and of course we had the tax clearance because the property is not very deep because we
wanted to make sure that any stair access structure was a far away from the sidewalk as possible so
not to be seen from bypassers by and because the roof deck itself would be rendered useless if we
were to move it we respectfully request that this appeal be granted you want to have your
testimony adopted by i do if lisa flaherty could please raise her hand
Ms. Flaherty can you please raise your hand you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair
Hi could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
Lisa Flaherty L-I-S-A my last name is F as in Frank
L-A-H-E-R-T-Y. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? Yes, I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Flirty, have you heard my
presentation to the board this morning? I did. And is it true and accurate to the best of your
knowledge? Yes, it is. And do you adopt it as your own testimony? I do. Thank you. Mr. Chair,
i have nothing else all right questions from the board no mr chairman chair no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission thank you sir david facto city
planning commission mr chairman and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the residential multi-family zoning at this location this is a 600 square foot lot
It is unusually small in the context of this block, where lot sizes range from approximately 930 to 1,400 square feet.
So we would argue that the applicant has met their burden of proof that there is a unique physical condition of the lot that would require relief from the zoning board.
So the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the dimensional variances.
Thank you. MI 2022-001-685-1838 Bainbridge Street, I vote yes.
james snell my vote is yes yes no shaheed my vote is yes thank you thank you
case number nine
MI-2022-001-687-3725 Mt. Vernon Street.
Meredith Verlegger is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
chair she's coming back in as a panelist now thank you good morning mr chairman hi good
morning could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter sure my name is
meredith ferliger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r of delworth paxton 1500 market street suite 3500 e you
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I sure do.
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
My client is 42nd Market Associates, LLC, which is the owner of the property, and that entity is represented by Brahim and Gladen.
Our board secretary has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning.
Okay. Do you agree to waive the reading and the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I agree to waive the reading and I mostly stipulate to the accuracy. The refusal itself
and the description of the property are correct. However, the notes to the zoning board that are
included within that refusal are not specific to this property. I don't know where the examiner
came up with them, but you'll see in my presentation that those notes do not apply
came up with them but you'll see in my presentation that those notes do not apply to this property.
of this property.
Fair enough. Did you email the exhibits in all the documents that were required
such as the proof of ownership tax clearance copy of refusal or referral pictures or drawings of
the property within five days of this hearing and did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
yes to all of the above there's a letter of support from mantua civic association in the packet
okay please proceed to share your screen thank you all right good morning board uh
the property before the board today is 3725 mount vernon street which is a large over seven 7100
square foot property that is just off the corner. Let me change the view here so you can see this a
little better. That is just off the corner of Mount Vernon Street and North 38th Street. And I will
bring up the map for you to see this. The exhibit packet in front of you today includes 18 exhibits
that I will walk you through, starting first with a basic property overview. As you can see here in
the aerials at Exhibit 10, this property sits along a predominantly unoccupied stretch of
Mount Vernon Street between 37th Street and North 38th Street. This mostly vacant block includes a
few existing structures as well as a public park at the corner of North 37th Street.
Now turning back to the zoning map here at Exhibit 9, you'll see that this property is zoned RSA 5.
Notably, this block is circled by RM1 multifamily zoning, as well as CMX2 zoning, just one block down Mount Vernon, as well as the special purpose park-related zoning classification for the Mantua Park.
Now, this block was one of the many blocks that was previously zoned RM1 prior to the 2017 Mantua rezoning, which I did include for reference in the packet at Exhibit 4.
Now, if we look more closely at the photographs at exhibit 18, as I scroll through, you'll note the relative condition of the existing structures on this block, such as the one in this photo across the street, whose use I was not able to determine through public records.
it's a bit unclear to me whether this is a residence, a multifamily residence, or a legally
occupied structure. The next photo is just looking across the street from the property,
and this is looking north towards North 38th Street. And then in this photograph, you can
get a little bit of a better sense of the property that's before the board today. This is looking
from North 38th Street. Now, historically speaking, the last remaining structure that
ever existed on this property was demolished back in 1937. So, at Exhibit 14, I have included
I'm sorry, my bookmark seemed to have disappeared.
So at Exhibit 14, you will see here evidence of when that last structure was demolished back in 1937.
Prior to that, the property was used as the Mantua Primary School from the late 1800s.
I did also include some historical maps, which are really kind of neat to look at, but do
paint a pretty interesting picture here that shows that once the building was demolished,
you can see here the mansion was schooled back in 1895. And then by 1942, it looks like this
property was used as a playground. But by the late 90s, if not earlier, the property itself had
become unused. And you can see here, this is an image from 1996. Presumably, the playground here
became unused once the Mantua playground was built down the street. Eventually, the prior owner of
the property, which was the church congregation just across North 38th Street, turned the lot