showing that he owns the property,
and our certificate of tax credits.
I would
say, I would ask Chris to virtually
raise his hand and be sworn in.
Christopher, could you
please state your name and spell for the
stenographer?
can you hear me yes yeah please state your name is spelled for the court stenographer
christopher brewer chris t-o-p-h-e-r b as in boy r-e-w-e-r you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed counsel yes chris you heard
everything i had to state today about yours any matter yes is it true and correct yes
and do you adopt this your own testimony i do all right thank you questions or comments from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair cleaning commission good evening chairman and board
members david fecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa5 residential single family zoning at this
location the appellant wishes to legalize a parking space built without the benefit of permits
within the required rear yard.
The proposed legalization will have no detrimental impacts
on the surrounding properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
their variances for off-street accessory parking.
Thank you.
MI 2024-004-951-907 South 10th Street, I vote yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowen, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Alan.
Thank you.
Number 14, MI 2020, hi, MI 2024, 004-954-710-North 42nd Street.
Meredith Verliger is the attorney.
She's coming in now as a panelist chair.
Evening.
Counsel, could you please state your name? You've already been sworn.
sure meredith berlger f-e-r l-e-g-e-r do you identify your client a relationship
Do you identify your client in relationship to the property?
to the property certainly my client
Certainly.
My client is 710 North 42nd LLC, which is the owner of the property.
We have a request from Council Member Gauthier's office to hold a vote on this.
There's some extraordinary circumstances with the RCL leader.
I'll address it in my presentation.
We certainly understand if the board makes that decision, but I will address that.
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. You already shared your screen.
Thank you. Good evening, board members. Again, Meredith Ferliger of Delworth-Paxson.
on behalf of 710 North 42nd Street, LLC, the owner of the property at 710 North 42nd Street.
With me today, I have Salam Barr, who is a member of the LLC and owner of this property.
As you know, the case in front of you this evening concerns 710 North 42nd Street in the city's
West Belmont neighborhood. As the board listens to the presentation today, a critical piece of
information for you to consider is that my client purchased this property as an RM1 lot and
structure that would have permitted the application before you today. A short time after his purchase
and having already invested significant financial dollars into making the dilapidated structure safe
in preparation for his planned redevelopment and with no knowledge of what had transpired,
the lot was rezoned along with many others in the area to RSA 5. I'll bring up the exhibit packet
which I do have up on the screen which contains 16 total exhibits with one exception. A brief
note about the RCO. We did have a meeting with West Belmont Civic Association which is led by
David Pickett. Shortly after the leader of the organization was injured in a fire at his home
And to our understanding, he has not yet returned to his home or has not yet left the hospital or rehabilitation center.
As an officer of the court, I can represent to the board that the vote that was taken the evening of the meeting was in support.
But as the councilwoman's office indicated, both her office and myself have not been able to connect with anybody from the West Belmont Civic Organization to secure proof of that vote.
But as I stated, the vote that evening was in support. Tax clearance is included at Exhibit 2, and the deed is included at Exhibit 3, where you will see that my client purchased this property on August 29, 2022.
Unfortunately, this property had fallen into significant disrepair, as you'll see in the photographs, and Ellen and I eventually declared this structure unsafe.
I have included some of those records here at Exhibit 9, where you can see the structure was declared unsafe shortly after my client purchased it.
Salam quickly worked to secure the appropriate permits to render the property safe, still expecting at that point that he would be able to bring his vision for this property to life.
As you'll see on the zoning map that I've shown up on the screen at Exhibit 7, although the property was rezoned to RSA 5, the property sits on a block that serves as a point of division between the new RSA 5 and the retained RM1 and CMX2 zoning.
The west side of the street was switched to RSA 5, while the east side retained its more dense zoning classifications.
By way of context, I have included aerials at Exhibit 8, which you can see up on the screen.
710 North 42nd Street is this bookend structure here that sits in a residential area about one block off of Lancaster Avenue.
You'll notice that a vast majority of this particular block face is still undeveloped and is predominantly owned by the Housing Authority.
On the opposite side of the street, looking from a northwest view, you'll notice a mix of uses, including residential, automotive, and other commercial that fronts on Lancaster Avenue that extends back to Warren Street and connecting with North 42nd Street.
I've included quite a few photographs at Exhibit 16.
You'll note that this is an existing three-story structure that matches the character of the other older residential structures that still exist.
that matches the character of the other older residential structures that still remain on this block.
Next door, you'll notice that a new three-family dwelling was recently completed.
From the time that he purchased the property, Salam felt it was critically important to preserve
the existing structure if at all feasible, and this image is post his efforts at making it safe.
So you can see, as you'll see in some of the later photographs, this front porch area was
brought up into a current condition that doesn't pose any hazard to passers-by.
So this next photograph here is facing Fairmont Avenue. We're again off in the distance here,
you'll see the start of the 161 family development that's just across Fairmont Avenue.
Looking across the street, you'll notice another new construction project that was just built,
and this one actually contains four units, which is denser than what the applicant is asking for
today. Flipping in the opposite direction, looking towards Aspen Street, you can see the auto repair
garage that's directly across the street from this property. Finally, I've provided another
current view of the existing structure here from the side, and again, this is looking up towards
Fairmont Avenue, where you'll see again that most of this block face is undeveloped. Presumably,
these vehicles are probably being stored by the auto repair garage across the street,
but, you know, ultimately that is truly just an assumption.
And again, zoning posters were posted on September 19, 2024.
I want to walk you through some interior photographs so you can get a sense of the
pretty extraordinary condition of this property that Salam purchased. So the first set of
photographs that you can see here is during the time that he and his team were cleaning up the
property and working towards making the property even safe for anybody to be anywhere near it.
And again, so this is on the first floor. These next two photographs were at that same time
during the make safe uh and this is a view from the second floor so you can see the structure
was really in a in a quite unfortunate condition i've also included some photographs of the front
of the property again back when uh salam was making efforts towards making the property safe
and you can really see uh fairly clearly in this photograph the condition that he found it in when
he purchased it. I have also included some photographs of the current condition, post-cleanup
and post-make-safe, just to give you a sense of really what exists there today. Quite obviously,
it is still uninhabitable without considerable investment. These first few photographs here are
on the first floor, looking towards the front in this first photograph, and looking towards the
back in the second photograph. And again, this is another view of that first floor looking towards
the front underneath the existing stairs. The second floor is in some ways in slightly worse
condition, which you can see here. And again, this is looking towards the front and looking towards
that stairwell. And then an image of the partial third floor is also shown where, again, this is
looking out towards the back. You can see that this is only a partial third story. This is
looking out essentially onto the roof of the second floor. And we did also include a few
photographs showing the condition of the rear of the property. So again, you know, this property
has fairly clearly seen better days and Salam is looking to bring it back to life. So in that
regard, the zoning plans are shown at Exhibit 5. This application proposes to renovate the existing
structure and add a rear addition to create three dwelling units, one unit per floor.
On the first and second floor, you can see that the addition will extend back 11 feet. And you
know what, let me actually bring up the next view because I think you can see it a little bit more
clearly here. All right, so this is showing the framing plan, so you can really get a sense of
where this addition will be. So again, on the first and second floor, there's a slight addition in the
back. And then on the third floor, which currently only exists as a half floor, which you can see
here, that addition will extend back to meet the first and second floor addition. So this will be
a total of a 30-foot addition, and you can see that here in this framing plan.
From the front, the proposal is to keep the existing structure in its historical character, with the addition being entirely in line with this existing structure.
From the front, the proposal is to keep the existing structure in
So that addition will be invisible from the front.
Even with the addition, the rear yard will retain 16 feet, and you can see that on the zoning plan here, in the back here.
It will retain a 16-foot rear yard, which does lead back to a four-foot-wide alley that leads out to Fairmount Avenue.
We have also included floor plans in the exhibit packet at Exhibit 6.
The basement will be exclusively used for mechanicals for the first floor unit.
Each of the units in this new proposal will be a two-bedroom unit of identical 749 square feet each.
So really nicely sized units.
The rear of the building, really the side of the building steps in a little bit, which will allow for significant light and air into all of these new units.
That obviously allows for many more windows than would be allowed if it extended property line to property line.
You can also see the impact of the slight addition here visually, particularly on the third floor.
So you can see really where this addition allows for an extra bedroom in each of the first and second floor units and really allows for any form of a livable unit on that third floor here.
So you can see that these units are nicely laid out, they're quite large, and there's ample storage space in the units themselves to allow for trash storage in the units.
Now, with respect to the application, we received one refusal for the proposed three-dwelling unit use in the now RSA 5 zone district.
As I referenced, this case presents a dual hardship.
Actually, really, three hardships.
Most importantly, as I mentioned earlier on, the applicant purchased this property in 2022
with the specific goal of developing the project that is in front of you today.
He made a considerable financial investment in making the necessary improvements to secure the
property and render it safe instead of just demolishing it, which I suspect is what many
would have done given the condition that they found it in. Again, this was done with the goal
that the investment would be justified by the three units that were permitted for this lot.
The remapping bill is included in the exhibits at Exhibit 11. And you can see here that the
property was originally RM1 and was rezoned to RSA5. And you can see where the properties across
the street were not rezoned with this effort. As the board is probably aware, when a remapping
is introduced, no advance notice is provided to affected property owners. Accordingly, it was not
until this bill became effective around February of 2023 that the applicant even caught wind of
what had transpired, fundamentally frustrating its investment in this property without any form
of a recourse other than seeking the relief requested before this board today. Furthermore,
mark. Despite the rezoning, the area surrounding this property remains a mixed compilation of
single-family, multifamily, and even some commercial uses. The fact that the rezoning
line was drawn essentially down this street accentuates the hardship that faces this
particular property. At Exhibit 10, which I have brought up on the screen now, I've included a map
illustrating that the property is surrounded on all sides by a mix of multifamily densities.
This map was derived from records provided by the city on Atlas. I did point out some of these uses
earlier in the photographs, but you can see that immediately next door at 708, ignore Google's
addresses. This is actually 708. Directly across the street and even behind this property are all
multifamily uses of identical or higher densities. You can also see that at the other end of this
block along Fairmount, there are also two structures with either two or three dwelling
units in them. I wasn't able to confirm whether the corner is two or three. But you can see here
that there's new construction that has been approved right backing up on Brooklyn Street
for three-family dwellings. Right next door is a three-family dwelling. Across the street is a
four-family, and a three-family was just approved right next to the auto repair garage.
Additionally, I've also included evidence of zoning permits for 660 North 42nd Street,
evidence of zoning permits for 660 North 42nd Street, which is just on the next block across
which is just
Fairmount Avenue. It's just out of view of this image. The board actually heard and granted that
applicant similar relief just back in January, and that was even for a vacant lot. Finally,
as you'll hear from the applicant himself, the condition of this structure would make it
economically not feasible to return this property to a single-family use, particularly in light of
the other challenges that the board has heard today. The level of investment that would be
required to bring this structure up to a habitable condition, even for a single-family dwelling,
would be far more than this property is worth. Just by way of example, Zillow shows that a duplex
on this block just sold for $100,000, rendering it completely impossible to justify the cost to
renovate this structure for a single-family dwelling, given that the renovation cost would
be more than even a duplex sold on this very block. The applicant further submits the proposal
represents the lease modification to provide relief from the requirements of the code,
given that the entirety of this proposal would have been permitted by Wright at the time that
the applicant purchased the property under the prior RM1 zoning. This application simply seeks
approval for the exact development that was contemplated and designed as a then-by Wright
proposal. Furthermore, as you can see from this map, the density is well in line with the character
of this surrounding block, which includes predominantly three family dwellings.
The proposal will not contribute to congestion in the area. As you may have noticed as I walked
through the photographs, this block still has ample parking on each side of the street.
In addition, the property is a mere block from Lancaster Avenue, and as a result, the property
benefits from significant public transportation in close proximity. We also submit the variances
will not impair light and air or harm the neighbors. No dimensional variances are requested
and the proposed structure will retain its historical character that was set upon its
original construction back in the 1920s. This proposal will fulfill the intended goal for
the reactivation of the property that was set in motion when the applicant purchased it in 2022.
In addition to these reasons, we submit that the application complies in full with the standards
outlined in the Zoning Code at 14303 AE, as is more thoroughly established in the Memorandum