Hillary, we'll go to the community now, and then we'll do it again if we get something from them.
So we're just holding it for a vote for a letter from the RCO, a response to the applicant, and there may be supplemental information from the applicant wishes to submit to show support.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, Samuel Clifton is now in the audience. I will allow him to speak.
I promoted him. He'll be coming back in shortly.
Sure. Thank you.
Mr. Clifton.
Can you hear me now?
Mr. Clifton, could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Yes, my name is Samuel Clifton. Spelling my name is C-L-I-F-T-O-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Hi, Mr. Clifton.
I'm trying to turn off my phone so you can hear me on the computer, but it's not working right.
mr clifton could you uh do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
the unmute yourself you're muted
you're muted please can you hear me now i can do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel yeah sam you heard everything
i have to state today about jersey yes clifton this is ian heger you're gonna have to turn the
volume off on your phone right the problem is that the computer is not picking up that zoom
is not working right for me so i turned my phone why don't we just try to get you to answer some
questions real yeah and you heard everything i had to state today about your zoning matter
yes and it's true and correct correct and and do you adopt this your own testimony
yes questions or comments from the virtual audience for the audience
yeah i have a hand up from uh charles richardson i will promote him to
panelists it'll be back in shortly i'm mr richardson
good morning uh no good afternoon mr chair
uh do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth mr richardson
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, Mr. Richardson?
Just for the record, state your name.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Baskin, 508 City Hall.
Please proceed.
I spoke with Alan earlier in the week and was determined at that point that the applicant had not fulfilled his obligations that he had agreed to
with regard to meeting with several individuals
in the community, including the vice chair of the RCO
who was our former chief of staff, Tyrone Barge.
He never reached out to them.
He said that he did, but Tyrone emphatically says
that they did not. There was supposed to be a meeting so that the people
would get to know the individual and nothing ever
occurred. And this was last year. And I spoke to Alan, and Alan was talking about this two-week
thing a couple weeks ago, you know, earlier this week. And I told him I didn't think two weeks was
going to be sufficient for their applicant to be able to meet with the community or for us to be
able to gather together the people that they needed to gather that were interested in the last
meeting. And it was a fair amount of people that were on the last meeting. It was not just that's
the one person that's next door. And they had a lot of questions. So, you know, at this point,
we're objecting to this request for two weeks. And, you know, for, and Alan, for all of the
things that we talked about earlier in the week, and I could not support that because of the fact
that he needs to fulfill that obligation first in order for us to be able to be comfortable to
to either support him or, you know, we're to object.
So can I respond, Mr. Chair? Sure. So Charles,
I think you're confusing me with Alex because we didn't talk about this this
week. Okay. Well, it was, it was Alex then maybe, but again, it's your firm.
Yeah, no, no. And I agree with that,
but this is the first I'm hearing that we were going to have to talk to anyone
in your office. We have been dealing with Sharon Carter,
who I also understand this with your office, who is a,
is the head of this rco and what happened the first meeting you know full disclosure
we were supposed to have a meeting at six o'clock when was that we had that meeting i think it was
either the day or the day day before the original hearing date i i was not getting through uh the
zoom we weren't let in we were in a virtual meeting room i eventually got in at seven o'clock
and we made our presentation what we heard from the community was they were very upset with us
so they were very upset with us because they thought there was like a bait and switch that
we were we put a six o'clock meeting and it we presented at seven i said i have no control of
being let in to the to the to the meeting the second time we so then we had another meeting
The second time we met, Mr. Goldberg from my office presented the meeting again, I believe it was at six o'clock. We weren't let in until 630. There was one individual that showed up. We then logged off. And then we're told, I think, probably like 15, 20 minutes later, all these people started showing up. Can you log back on? He was not in front of his computer anymore. We finished.
They were already a half an hour late for the meeting, and we made our presentation.
He logged off his computer, and we were asked again, can you just show up?
And I think that was very unfair.
And I don't think there's any ill intent here, but we have a notice of refusal dated June of 2024.
My client told me today that the bank that he's lent money, he borrowed money from,
is threatening to foreclose on this property because it's not an active use and you know
we've told our client that we're willing to work with the community but it reaches a point
so the fact that I'm hearing now that we have to meet with someone in your office Charles I have
no problem with me with Alex hold on did Alex uh speak to you with regard to this because I spoke
to him maybe a couple days ago then if that was the case yeah he was the one that that put it out
there that he wanted to do two weeks and i said two weeks was not going to be sufficient well we
got a call from our client that they're going to your client did not your client did not fulfill
what he was originally supposed to fill so we're not going to have it yeah here i mean yeah charles
what's your position uh position is that we're we're going to hold our opinion until he meets
the community okay very good thank you um anyone else in the virtual audience
mr chair i do not see any further hands so uh hillary will take a position from
hillary will take a position from um planning planning please
planning planning please
and we work with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this location there are no unique physical conditions
or circumstances that the property that would prevent it from being using strict conformity
with the zoning code except for two other properties this is a single family block
the property was converted to multi-family without the benefit of permits in fact there
was a 2019 building permit stating that this is a one-family structure and a one-unit rental license
from the same year. There are no other building permits available on Atlas after 2019. The planning
commission recommends that the board deny the proposed variance for two dwelling units. Thank
you. Hillary, can we take this out three weeks? Are we still just asking for additional information
to be submitted i want to see what was what came from the neighbors and alan's response to that
and also i believe the council office may have a response as well right um yes um okay so it's
can i just respond to planning just for two seconds just give me give me one second um so
three weeks three weeks out um would be may would be may 21st right okay exactly yeah that would be
fine yeah if you just look at how the building's configured that that and the fact as a corner
property this speaks to it being multi-family in nature you have four entry points or exit points
uh this looks like the quintessential like at the very least a cmx1 property um so i would say that
you know the fact of how it's configured and again my client it was advertised this way to
have two units uh he has made those changes thank you okay so we're going to hold this until 5 21 25
at 2 p.m other than that it's closed except from what we hear from the neighbors your response
the neighbor's response and also the council person so can so are we taking neighbors are
we taking rco which are both are we leaving i think i'd open up a what he's going to deal
with the rco but i'd open it up again here okay well so then why don't we we'll we'll we'll just
leave the record open for any any public comments so that could be the rco the council office or
neighbors and then any response from the applicant otherwise it's closed okay thank you thank you
all right now we're going to go with uh
see here i think number six
How about number six?
MI 2025-000-318-527-East-Chelton Avenue.
I'm going to defer to Mr. Goldberg.
There you go.
We'll do the same thing with your office, pumping it in.
Mr. Goldberg, could you please state your name and spell for the courts?
Alex Goldberg, A-L-E-X-G-O-L-D-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to the property?
My client is Madison Ventures, PHL2 LLC, and it's Representative Carlos Mesa's in the virtual audience.
I have a letter of non-opposition from the 59th Democratic Ward.
Also, there's a letter of support from a neighbor for three addresses on the, signed by three addresses on the block.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate towards
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed
and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes i have thank you counsel please proceed you have already shared your screen
nick if you could go full screen for me um so this is a property on the 500 block of east
shelton street and uh it has a long history of non-single family use despite its zone and
classification as rsa3 this application is for can nick widen the screen please sure nick if you can
widen it and also go right to the refusal we're seeking zoning approval for two dwelling units
in an existing structure no changes to the building and this is actually a property that
the planning planning commission has identified in its 2035 plan to change to rm1 which aligns
with the uses that are on the block.
If this was an RM1 property, we'd be allowed four units.
As of right, we're asking for two.
Nick, if you can go to the refusal.
It seems like he has his hand raised.
Nick, can you hear that?
Can you zoom?
Hold the control button down to roll your will.
I think that,
I don't think he's sharing his screen right now.
It looks like Jasmine is sharing her screen.
jasmine is sharing her screen
she can unshare i think he'll have the ability to share
there we go
cool okay thank you
there we go um so the notice of refusal is on the screen it was issued in december
again two family household living in an existing semi-detached structure this is the left side of
a twin next slide nick letter of opposition from the 59th democratic ward we had two meetings
we we had one that was not very well attended then we had a second one as well same situation
we have a couple of letters of support from the block there's a lot of multi-family on our block
and and you know the the rco has stated non-opposition they told me that the council
member was joining in non-opposition i'm not sure if a letter saying that has been delivered
um anyway um next slide next letters of support from 531 530 next three and 535 east shelton
those are all multi-family structures as well next slide here's the property history it has
a history of four rooming units um before that it was a nursing home um so no recent um you know
legal use as a single family living. There are multiple instances of multifamily living on this
block, what we're asking for in two units as well as more. You can see there, I know it's a little
faint, but I would say there's as many instances of multifamily here as there are not. The property
to the left of us where it sort of just looks like nothing is there, as well as the one next
to it those are drive aisles for the large industrial buildings that are behind us which
is a warehouse for the distribution of storage of plumbing supplies a metal welding shop and a
newspaper distribution center so behind us is is a lot of industrial use you'll see that in the
photos directly across from us is a church so again not not a ton of single family use on this
rsa3 lot which is why i believe the planning commission has identified it as a as a lot to
change to R1. Next slide, Nick.
Here are the archival documents
sort of backing up that map that you just saw. If you could click through these, Nick.
Two and three family structures, we think two is appropriate here.
And you'll see the floor plans in a couple slides.
Here's the Upper Northwest District plan.
I pointed out with a red arrow, our block, just our block.
you can see the purple industrial is right behind it and proposed zoning change to orange which
would be residential multi-family on our block next slide zoning map which looks different from
what you just saw but again you can see that industrial use covering the rear the rear of
this entire block next slide google maps perspective as well next slide here's some photos so you can
see the front of the property here to the left of us is no residential use it's just a driveway
you can see the property needs some tlc um here's here's notice posters there is a front door
leading directly down into the basement but it's an unfinished basement we'd agree to a proviso for
no no living in the basement you'll see it on the plan it's just utilities and laundry i believe
here's to the right of the property and to the left of the property
architectural plans and drawings if you can zoom in nick the first floor
um both both you both units enter through a common hallway
there we go uh the first floor you make a left it's the it's the second plan to the to the you
know on the left side here um it is a two bedroom one bath um with access sole access to the basement
but again just utilities and storage we'd agree to a proviso as such the upstairs unit travels
straight through up the stairs it's a four bed two bath suitable for a family about 1200 square feet
and you can see in the middle of that second floor this is a bi-level unit you have a large
sort of open space for kitchen and living space next slide nick
rco meeting notice we met twice this is the notice from our most recent meeting
which was on march 18th or actually even more recently than that
which was on March 18th, or actually even more recently than that.
It was mailed out to the neighbors.
Keep going, Nick.
Application for appeal.