There's like six or six.
Thank you.
So not out of character.
Again, pretty straightforward here.
We have unit number one, which is the first floor and the lower level.
Unit number two is on the second floor and unit number three would be on the third floor.
And then our RCO meeting notice we sent out on March 6th for a meeting that was March 18th at 6 p.m.
We also emailed that notice to the coordinating RCO and the relevant parties.
We mailed it out on March 6th to 107 addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses,
our application for appeal on behalf of our clients, the notice of refusal,
So the project information form, the deeds of the property showing 1338 and Franklin ST LLC is the owner of the property and the Certificate of Tax Clearance.
So with that being said, and confirmation of payment as well of that amount.
With that being said, I would ask that Mr. Aliot virtually raise his hand.
Do we see him?
Yeah, he's been about, I believe he's been about to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer.
Keith Alliotz?
they've been unmuted
Mr. Aliots
Mr. Nackamson you're an officer of the court
we will accept your testimony
thank you
questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman
no Chair
questions or comments from our attorney
no this time Mr. Chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i'm sorry mr chair sorry sorry i didn't get to my notes fast enough um all right you did show
proof of tax compliance um uh mr noxon i did not see and if it was in the packet that you just
showed i apologize i missed it but i did not see a revised plan a proviso plans form for this one
which i assume there is because there were revised plans with the lower number of units listed
um i think all we're doing is doing a proviso maximum three units oh okay so there's no there's
no other changes other than the units not that i don't believe there's any change in the building
footprints reduction of that at all okay yeah and alex just confirmed that with me okay so yes
so then we can just do that via proviso.
Thank you.
Thanks, Alex.
What do you got, Alex on a speed dial there?
He's watching.
I work for him.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I'm yes, Chair.
I have a Karen Small with their hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak.
Could you please state your name?
It's spelled for the stenographer.
Karen Small, please unmute and wait to be sworn in.
Karen Small, please unmute and wait to be sworn in.
Hi, I'm muted.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Karen Small, first name Karen, K-A-R-I-E-N, last name Small, S-M-A-L-L.
Right, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am not a neighbor, but my daughter-in-law is a near neighbor, the next door neighbor.
And she is at work right now, so I'm just speaking on her behalf.
Hillary, are we okay with that?
unfortunately i understand why that she couldn't be present miss small but she also has the option
of submitting a letter to the zoning board um because you are not an attorney you cannot
testify on her behalf okay thank you thank you miss small is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands sir planning commission
good afternoon chair members of the board this is greg walton from the planning staff
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family
zoning at this location the proposed three units is consistent with documented prior use of this
property and consistent with nearby properties the city planning commission recommends the
zoning board grant the variance with the proviso for three units as per the revised plans
MI 2023-006-413-1338 North Franklin Street, I vote yes with revised plans, maximum three dwelling units.
Thomas Holloman.
Sorry, Mr. Tritt, there's no revised plans, just maximum three dwelling units.
Isn't that what I said?
You said revised plans.
All right.
All right.
Thank you.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
With proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
And now we have one more that I believe is a resumptive hearing.
MI 2023-006-504-2108 North Marshall Street.
Mr. Nockmson, could you just state your name for the record, please?
Alan Nockmson.
Okay. Mr. Knackerson, so this is a
resumptive hearing. Could you bring us up to date on where we stand with this?
Yeah, so we made a presentation to the board.
I just want to give a little background. Let me just get the right
screen up.
I'm sharing my screen, Mr. Chair.
there we go hi so um we're proposing put a 12-unit apartment building here um we have revised plans
here based on community input we had three meetings with the coordinating rco apm at the
time of the hearing we only had two and the issue was we never met the quorum requirements of six
So we did have lively community meetings with community input.
They didn't want to issue a letter until they had another opportunity to meet to hopefully meet a quorum of, you know, for that third meeting.
So we made a presentation. The board held their vote.
We met with the community. And unfortunately, we did not have another quorum.
So they did issue a letter of no opinion because they did not have a quorum there.
But in the letter, they do recognize the fact that we've made extensive changes to the plans, that we have extensive support within the community based on the petition.
And, you know, what we're offering is not out of character to what the board has proposed previously.
And I would just point your attention to 715-17 West Cumberland Street, where in 2022, the board granted 16 units on the property, which is actually smaller in size than ours, where we're only asking for 12 units.
so we do have extensive support we actually did even though the the coordinating rco did issue
a letter of no opinion because they did not reach a quorum again they they noted the extensive
petition that we have and then we we actually added upon that petition i'm trying to find it
right now but in addition to the petition we have two letters of support from members of the
Two letters of support from members of the Executive Committee of the 37th Democratic Award, Ms. L. Amour Braun, as well as from Denise Armstrong.
Executive Committee of the 36th.
And then we actually reached out to a nonprofit that's well known in the area, Doors for Hope, that deals with low-income housing.
My client, that's what they're looking to do, but more from a senior perspective.
And again, just as a reminder, there have been many projects in this neighborhood where they try to do three-bedroom units.
They're not renting out.
It's a bad situation over there.
And, you know, what we see and what we feel is that 12 one-bedroom units rather than having, you know, three-bedroom units where there would be more bedrooms in this potential building structure makes more sense.
You know, based on what you see here from just the rendering, the units are ADA accessible, and if you looked at the site plan, everyone has access to the rear yard, so it's a common rear yard.
There's no roof deck.
That was something that was asked of us, and it's not even a part of our plans.
We have revised plans, you know, showing no roof deck, and there's no basement use.
It's built on grade. In the basement is the trash room, as well as tenant storage. So we think for all these reasons, we have created a very responsible project, and we hope that the board supports our endeavor. Thank you.
Hillary, can we go right to planning?
We can see if there's any testimony from the public regarding the changes that have been made since the last hearing.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience who has comments?
Go hands away, sir.
Planning Commission.
And just to be clear, Mr. Chair, planning did already give a recommendation,
so we're just asking if they have an updated recommendation based on the revised plans.
Good afternoon, Chair and members of the board.
We do not.
Thank you. So, let's see here.
Excuse me, Mr. Waldman, would you, do you have the prior recommendation?
Oh, sure. Yeah, I can read it.
Available, if you could just, yeah, just note it for the record. Thank you, the Chair. It's been a couple months. Thank you.
Okay. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential multifamily zoning, that Pellin has not shown that the property, a standard row home lot, cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code and that the variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property. The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board denied the variance.
Thank you. MI 2023-006-504-21108 North Marshall Street. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, one page, stamp by ZBA, April 24th, 2024.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Nockmson.
Number 10, MI 2023-007-093-620-North 37th Street.
Meredith Verliger is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
They'll be rejoining as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, counsel.
Did I swear you in earlier this morning?
Ted. Could you just state your name, please, for the record?
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
And this is a resumptive hearing. Could you bring us up to date?
Sure thing. Mr. Chairman, we were in front of you, I believe, a couple weeks ago with a request to increase the number of units in a previously approved project from 15 to 19.
At the end of that hearing, there was a question, really two questions. Question number one that was raised was whether or not this application should have triggered the provisions of the min-required affordability overlay, and the second question was whether or not we would need a set of revised plans in order for the board to approve the removal of a green roof that was a part of the initial approval.
I worked with ZBA counsel and staff on these two questions and confirmed that our application
Our application should not have triggered the MIN, and the board can issue a proviso eliminating the green roof without having a set of revised plans.
should not have triggered the MIN and the board can.
So, again, just to refresh your memory, this merely requests to increase the number of units from 15, which was already approved, to 19 for all the reasons that were provided to the board in the first hearing.
Thank you.
um we're going to go to planning with this now do you want to open it up to the audience
um just uh just planning there were there were no changes mr chair we just need clarification
thank you planning planning commission good afternoon chair members of the board this is
greg waldman planning commission staff in 2017 the zoning map was amended to residential single
family at this location. The proposed increase in number of units from 15 to 19 increases the
property's non-conformity and is not necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property.
City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance.
MI 2023-007-093-620 North 37th Street. I vote yes with a proviso. Green roof eliminated.
thomas holloman my vote is yes with proviso ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso
thank you counsel thank you number 11 mi 2024 000 747 44 15 chesson street
ronald patterson is the attorney supposed to be recused on that last one okay
do you want to go back and vote it with um is that the one i was going to recuse on
uh that actually was marshall street i'm i'm sorry i missed that that was number um
number nine that was supposed to be i'm sorry that's supposed to be bill tom and lebaron
we can go back and re-vote that one okay let's vote vote it do it right now um
this is which which hillary uh 37 street no number number nine marshall street
okay all right all right so
mi 2023 006 504 2108 north marshall street i vote yes with proviso revised plans one page
sent by ZBA April 24th, 2024. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes with provisos. Thank you. So now we're at 4415
Chestnut Street. Ronald Patterson is the attorney. Council Member Agathier has taken a position of
support. There's a letter of support, too, from the Spruce Hill Community Association. Mr. Patterson,
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer? Sure. Good afternoon,
Mr. Chairman and members of the Court. Ronald Patterson, R-O-N-A-L-D, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N,
1835 Market Street, foot off in PA, and Claire Harrison Law Firm. Do you swear a firm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Could you identify your client
and relationship to the property?
My client is the owner of the property.
It's 4415 Chestnut, LLC.
The principal is Scott Orens, O-R-E-N-S,
who will be my witness today.
And our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the read and other refuse
or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibit that is needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
thank you please proceed you have already shared your screen oh thank you
so yes this application regards 44 15 chestnut street uh you see this is the front of the of
the building it actually it goes through to uh ludlow street here's a view of ludlow