It's my understanding the restaurant before was Soul Food.
Like I said, they had tables and chairs in there.
My client purchased this property recently as a restaurant and did not contribute to the hardship in any way.
I am going to show you the proof of ownership, which is in the packet at the end, which is the deed for the property.
Which is here and has both of my clients' names on there.
If you're familiar with the area on the corner of Snyder and Fifth, it's an area with a lot of commercial uses.
There are bars and restaurants in the area. There are churches, senior housing across the street.
So allowing this to be a sit-down restaurant would fit in with the neighborhood and wouldn't change the nature of the neighborhood at all.
we did send out notices to the community we sent out notices to 159 of the neighbors
and we did meet with the local rco one neighbor showed up which was the uh the direct neighbor
and she was also very excited. She said her co-workers went to the restaurant that was
there before and they've been looking forward to something opening up there so that the workers
have somewhere to eat during lunch. We provided notice we did receive this letter here from the
local RCO. And I want to show really quickly photos of the, we have the refusal and I want
to show a couple of photos of the property really quickly so that you can see that the
notice was posted. We have receipts and a certificate of mailing, the letter that went
out to the neighborhood. The refusal. We do have a site plan of the property attached as well.
Here's the posting. It was posted on two sides because it's a corner property. So it was posted
on the Snyder Avenue, which is the busy street. And it was also posted on the corner of the
5th street. And I just want to show you one more photo of the building as it was when it was
purchased, how it's been set up and used. It's just a small, like I said, less than 30 seats
in the restaurant. Why don't you have your testimony adopted by one of your clients?
Thank you. If one of the owners could raise their hand.
Excuse me. Owner, you're free to speak.
Hi, my name is Tom. Can you spell spell your name for the court reporter, please?
Yes, sir. Tong is T as in Tom, U-N-G. Last name is Phan, P as in Paul, H-A-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Okay. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Did you hear the testimony that I gave today?
Yes, I did.
And do you agree that it was true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Tam.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Tam, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, my name is Tam T-A-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Tam, did you hear the testimony that I provided today?
And do you also believe that it's true and correct to the best of your knowledge and adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Aye, Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan.
Given the site's documented use history, we recommend the request for variance be granted.
MI 2022-003-809-2039 South 5th Street.
I vote yes.
Cheryl Tenere, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Five days in advance of this hearing. And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of those.
You may proceed and begin to share with your screen.
Good afternoon. So this is, we believe that this home that we're here for, 1520 North Lawrence Street,
was built sometime in the late 1800s, and it was a single-family home originally,
and it was converted into a duplex sometime around the mid-1900s, maybe 1950s, 1960s.
Our client, Mr. Cohen, purchased the property 20 years ago when it had already been a duplex
for many decades. Mr. Cohen has applied for a zoning permit because he wants to legalize this
duplex he wasn't responding to a code violation or any or any complaints that were happening
because there have really been no complaints against this property or the tenants who live
there at the original rco meeting uh that was done there were no near neighbors who um appeared
to it was a virtual meeting and um there were however other neighbors from farther away who
were there for a different property that was being considered. And they voted on this property and
they voted to oppose it. The RCO leadership, though, felt that it wasn't a proper vote because
there was no one from the near neighborhood there. So they actually waited. And then at the
next month, it happened that there was a property just a few doors down from this location that was
featured at the RCO meeting. And many neighbors from that street, from Lawrence Street and the
surrounding area came to that meeting. And they voted to support that other project, which was
for a triplex and for an addition onto an existing structure. And at the end of that conversation,
the RCO leader said to them, well, we have this case that happened last month and nobody really
from the neighborhood was there. Here's the deal. She, she gave them the whole, um, background and
they voted and they voted to support it. So, uh, we have the RCO letter of support, uh,
and that is here, um, in, in which, um, the letter basically, uh, talks about, uh, the September
meeting and the residents who weren't really from close by. And then in the October meeting,
this was a meeting around 1533 North Lawrence. So as a result, the RCO has voted to support
this. There was no one in opposition at that second meeting. We also have a preliminary review
from the Planning Commission that describes the appeal,
describes the unnecessary hardship.
So in this case, the unnecessary hardship is that the property
being configured for a duplex for so many years,
for Mr. Cohen to have to convert it back into a conforming
single-family project structure would actually be a significantly
financial burden. And the courts have ruled many times that if the only way to meet the
requirements of the zoning code would be to either demolish or have extensive renovation with
extensive costs, that actually is one of the definitions of unnecessary hardship.
And that's what the Planning Commission also discusses in their review.
In Exhibit 4 is our plans. So let's take a look at those.
So we have, remember, this is existing conditions. This is the first floor plan. We have one apartment on the first floor. It's a one-bedroom apartment.
On the second floor, the second apartment is a split between the second and the third floor.
So on the second floor, you have the living room, a kitchen, and the bathroom.
And then it goes up into a smaller section of the third floor, which is where the other one bedroom is.
And then we have a number of photos.
So this is the second floor bathroom,
the second floor kitchen,
Another view of the second floor kitchen, and that's where the washer dryer is on the
second floor apartment.
This is the living room area for the second floor.
This is another view of that living room area.
Here you have the stairs that go up to that third floor where the bedroom is.
We have the first floor kitchen.
And here's that third floor bedroom.
Another view of the third floor bedroom with their, the door here is the stairs going downstairs.
Another view of the third floor bedroom.
And here's the first floor bedroom.
First floor living room.
With a lot of guitars.
here's the zoning posters um we posted the the zoning notice and the refusal
right on the front door of 1520
we have a tax clearance
this is the deed
Our application for appeal discusses the hardship and quotes from three cases that stand for that proposition that when the premises cannot be converted into a permitted use without demolition and extensive rent reconstruction, that unnecessary hardship exists.
Here's the project information form.
and the zoning notice, RCO notice that was mailed. We have our proof of mailing to 140
addresses, and these are all the addresses that it was mailed to.
At this point, I'd like to call Joshua Cohen to raise his hand so that he can be sworn in.
Mr. Cohen, please unmute yourself. You're free to speak.
Hi, Mr. Cohen, could you state your name, spell for the court reporter, please?
Ottawa Cohen, J-O-S-H-U-A-C-O-H-E-N.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Hi, Josh. You've heard my testimony this afternoon.
Do you agree with it?
And do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, yes, and yes.
I have no further questions.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning commission.
I'll run Bednar City Planning.
Property is indicated for residential and a city plan.
Given the documented use history of the site and its existing physical condition,