North 7th Street
7th Street.
It's Thomas
Thomas Holliman
Holloman at Ishmael.
I vote yes with proviso.
Temporary variance to expire
on 8-1-26.
Can you
please
Mr. Chairman, can you hear that?
I can't hear you, Tom.
Can you repeat the vote?
Go ahead, Tom.
I'm sorry, Chair.
This is Tanya.
He's requesting you repeat it so he can lay his stuff up.
Oh, sure, sure, sure.
Thank you.
Absolutely. Absolutely. Absolutely. So, MI 2022 007 300, 1204 North 7th Street. I vote yes with proviso. Temporary variance to expire 8-1-26.
I'm Solomon. Yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso number seven mi 2023 000 239 8205 caster
uh i vote with thomas hallman and also james snell in this so i vote yes her amended refusal
dated 5-15-23, with Proviso.
Sole medical, dental, and health practitioner use
limited to diabetes education and management.
Thomas Hoffman, Proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Kelly, you okay?
Chair, just to be doubly sure, could I please have Mr. Holloman repeat his vote?
Tom, vote one more time, Tom.
Thomas.
Okay, Mr. Kelly.
Thank you, Chair.
all right we're going to our regular list
we're going to hear number two first
MI 2023-009-63-4301-29 Chesson Street
Stephanie Boggs is the attorney
The attorney is coming back in as a panelist here. Thank you.
Good afternoon. Thank you, Chair.
Sure. Counsel, you've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record again.
Stephanie Boggs-Meganya. Right. Could you identify your client
on this case? Yes. We have V. Vargas from
Grocery Outlet here on behalf of the tenant, and Diane Quigley is here from
Custom Finishers Inc., who is the sign designer.
could you could you do this one sure um the bargain no ismail could you do the follow-up
on this can you get through i'm not sure the time can
do you stipulate to the accuracy the refusal yes i do although i'll note changes based on
revised plans but and all of your paperwork is in one time correct proceed thank you um
If you could just raise your hand so that you can identify yourself, we'll do that, and I'll walk through our application a bit here.
So this project is at 4301 Chestnut Street, located between 43rd and 44th Street, with primary footage along Chestnut Street.
The site was previously approved for the construction of a mixed-use building with a commercial ground floor tenant that will be leased by grocery outlet for a new store there.
Here's a rendering of the building, which was previously approved in a separate application.
This application specifically is to allow accessory signage for grocery outlet at this location.
Six signs were submitted as part of the application, five along Chestnut Street and one along 44th Street to identify grocery outlet as their tenant space and primarily to main signs to identify their entrances to the building.
to the building um there were two refusals which i'll pull up here issued in connection with this
There were two refusals, which I'll pull up here, issued.
application when it was filed both were for the size of the proposed sign the two primary entrance
signs were 121 square feet whereas 100 is permitted in the district we presented our original plans
to spruce hill community association um and their letter of non-opposition as you can see here is
included within our packet. They had no comments to the, or no concerns, as I understand, to the
sign proposed along 44th Street. Its design and its context within the frame of that front edge
of the building were considered appropriate. And they did have comments, however, to the design
of the sign that's located along Chestnut Street, the primary entrance sign. So that sign was
redesigned in to be consistent with their comments. And I'll show the plans here that
were shared with Spruce Hill. Let's see, we have again, six signs were submitted as part of this
application. This being the primary entrance sign located along Chestnut Street. And this is the
revised design. There is a entrance marquee located at the primary entrance of the space
along Chestnut Street. And the sign, this sign was redesigned to fit better within the context
of that marquee, which in turn did reduce the square footage of the sign. And we believe based
on reading the refusal that this eliminates one of the two sign refusals that were issued
based on the revised plans. But as I noted, Spruce Hill's non-opposition letter based on
the revised plans is included within your packet. So we are requesting approval for the size of the
sign that is located along 44th Street, which again was presented to Spruce Hill as part of
that presentation. Both are intended to serve as wayfinding and identification needs for the
entrances of Grocery Outlet and have been designed to be in keeping with the context of the building
and the character of the area. So with that, I will ask Vee Vargas to raise her hand if she
hasn't already so that I can ask her to adopt my testimony. And again, she's here on behalf
Good afternoon. This is V Vargas. And yes, could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
My name is actually Veronica Vargas. And that is V E R O N I C A Vargas V A R G A S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Proceed, counsel.
Thanks. Have you heard my statements to the board this afternoon?
Yes, Stephanie. And I concur.
Thank you. Is there anything you would change or any additional comments you want to add to that?
Okay, thank you.
Then again, we do have the sign designer here as well, Diane Quigley, if there are questions about the design.
Questions from the board?
Chairman?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location. The proposed signed variance is minor and is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the proposed signed variance.
Thank you. MI 2023-000-963-4301-29 Chessna Street. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, four pages, stamped by ZBA, July 12, 2023.
My vote is Tom.
Tom, one more time.
My vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Is your use still on?
That's good.
You have your votes.
Thank you.
Number one and number seven, we will hear together.
MI-2022-005-976-1113 East Palmer Street, and number seven is MI-2022-005-567-1115 East Palmer Street.
There's a letter of support from the Fishtown Neighbors Association and letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you, will you stipulate to the reading and the accuracy of the refusal?
Do you...
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is, the name of the owner is Palmer Street is Neat LLC.
And then the virtual audience is its member, Bob Shaw.
Thank you.
Please share your screen.
Thank you.
All right, so I'm here to present two matters at the same time.
They're separate variance applications, 1113 and 1115 East Palmer Street.
So in these combined presentation materials that are in front of you, and by the way,
I did submit separate presentation materials for record purposes, you'll see the notices
of refusal back-to-back for both properties.
The correspondence from the Fishtown Neighbors Association, where they issued a letter of support, as well as from the district council member, where Council Member Swilla issued a letter in non-opposition, given the overwhelming support of the neighborhood.
I have letters of support from the nearby neighbors.
So we're 1113 and 1115.
We actually got a letter of support from 1111 and 1117.
um and you know our variance request is to put off street parking in front of these proposed
homes and you'll see that it's non-common for this zoning board uh to grant uh or not not for
the zoning board but it's non-common for uh you know for the neighborhood nearby to have uh
accessory surface parking uh we'll review the maps of the area photographs of the property
our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notices, one for each zoning application,
our applications for appeal, our deed to the property showing that Palmer Street is NEAT LLC
as the owner of the property, and our certificates of tax clearance. Again, the virtual audience is
Bob Shaw, the member of the corporate holding company that owns both of these properties.
So our notices are refusal. Again, the only thing we're seeking is to have two, well, the reason why we're here today is we're seeking to have two off-street surface parking spots in the front yards of each of these properties.
You'll see from the photographs that one of the properties already has a curb cut there, which is a vacant lot.
We're proposing demolishing the other property and then setting the building back, the new building back, to match the surrounding area.
So we're basically taking one long curb cut, which is going to probably take two parking spots off of the street.
But we're to take two parking spots off of the street, but we're taking four parking spots ultimately off the street.
So it's a net positive of two. So I think that's what the neighborhood appreciated.
It wasn't a one to one ratio. And the fact is not uncommon to have this type of parking in this section of Fishtown.
And this is the same refusal. The only add on for this refusal is that given this property,
1115 East Palmer Street we face where adjacent to left of us is another building structure
which also has parking in the front we have this extra refusal regarding the surface parking as
well a technical refusal uh the letter of support from the Fishtown Neighbors Association it was a
very well attended meeting um we you know ultimately um uh adhere to what they requested
They wanted some landscaping down the middle between these two properties to have a buffer, which we willingly did.
And based on that, we had an overwhelming support.
We had almost 30 people attend that meeting.
Only 25 people voted in favor, it looks like, and six people did not support this project, but overwhelming support.
And then because of that overwhelming support, Council Member Mark Suella also issued a letter of non-opposition.
And then again, we asked the neighbors to left and right of us, the ones who would be most directly impacted by this development project, if they were in support of it.
And we have a letter of support from each of those neighbors as well.
And then again, it's not uncommon to have off-street accessory service parking.
So you'll see 1111 East Palmer Street, 1117 through 1121 East Palmer Street, which we're
mimicking, setting the building structures back and having service parking of two cars
each in front, 1131 Palmer Street, 1112 Palmer Street.
11, 12 Palmer Street. And then maps to the area. We're not trying to increase density in any way.
And then maps to the area.
We're not trying to include.
These are single-family structures. We're here simply to request for off-street parking.
And again, we're taking essentially two cars off of the street by way of this curb cut public
parking off of the street, but we're taking four cars essentially off of the street by putting them
onto our lot. So it's a net positive of two. And then this is just a Google map. We're not that
far off in 95 where East Palmer Street is. So we're between Wildly and Girard and Eyrie and
Earl Streets. And then photographs of the property. So this is the one vacant lot at 1115 Palmer
Street. This is 1113 Palmer Street. We're going to demolish this property, but it's not the greatest
photo but there is actually a curb cut in front of this property which not being respected but
it's a vacant lot so this is Palmer Street to the right of the property as you can see to the
properties that we're looking at so well this is to the left of us but like these are we're
mimicking these properties there which have already been built with has which have off-street
parking of two cars each which are set back and which have landscaping which serve as a buffer
between properties. And that's what was important to the Fishtown community. And then it's Palmer
Street to the left of the property. As you can see, even here, more off-street parking. Here's
more off-street parking. And then these are our hearing notice posters for each of the properties.
And then our plans and drawings. This is just a site plan. The dimensions of our parking paths
are as a code, a little over nine feet by a little bit over 18 feet for each one.
You can see from the site plan. And then what was really important to the neighborhood group was the landscaping.
So we did the landscaping to the right of each property or the right of this property in the middle.
And then we have landscaping on the sides. And then they were also mindful of the type of agriculture we would use here.
So we gave them a detailed listing of what we intend to put there.
And then this is just a rendering showing, you know, the parking spots that would be in front of these houses.
And again, while this is not part of the variance request, we just decided to show you the floor plans.
Pretty basic floor plan. You know, you have an open floor plan on the first floor.
You have a master suite that's actually on the second.
And then you have two bedrooms on the third floor with a roof deck.
And then our RCO meeting notices we met with the community on April 4th.