excuse me chair this is Sharon I think my notes weren't clear
this is the fourth listing for this case at the last listing there was a request by the council
and tayoga united that it be continued um the
but that did not apply to this case i i don't have new exhibits but if we could see if the
attorney is here okay is there anyone here for 20 excuse me 34 42 north 18th street
if not then again this is the fourth listing yeah understood i have a few hands i don't see
um any attorneys i see uh patrick jones and charles richardson let's get mr richardson on
please oh oh chair i'm i'm so sorry this is sharon again i'm confusing this with another case
if you could go forward we do have submitted exhibits i believe this is the
third listing but we do have exhibits okay so mr jones no no worries no worries i believe
mr jones uh no chair we would have to have um the applicant or either an attorney for this one
And Mr. Jones, I believe, is the expediter.
Is Patrick Jones you referred to?
He is, Ms. Sunkett.
And the property owner is Darnell Cedric Micon.
He is here.
He can testify.
All right.
Okay, he's been promoted to panelists.
Cedric, please spell your full name.
and sorry you're muted you just have to unmute yourself yeah my name is Cedric Nixon that's C-E-D-R-I-C
M as in Mary I-X-O-N do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the
truth yes are you prepared to present your case today yes i'm prepared uh patrick houston patrick
jones was going to uh uh share his screen to show the slides okay is he going to be testifying or
just showing the exhibits uh just exhibits here i can promote them and share those i'm going to be
the one doing the bulk of the speaking. Mr. Mikan, though there was a request for continuance
or by United Tioga at the last hearing, did you ever meet with them? Do you have a letter? I did
not receive a letter. So we had a couple of meetings with them. They did not schedule a
third meeting that we were supposed to have. All right, no, let's go back to Mr. Richardson.
and he may be able to shed some light on this.
So we'll go to Mr. Richardson
of Councilwoman Bass's office.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Charles.
Please spell your name and I'll swear you in.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman
Cindy Bass, room 312, City Hall.
For him to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Can you help us out here?
Can you shed some light on the status
of the hearing meetings
and are we prepared to go forward today?
I know that they had a couple of meetings prior to that request for continuance.
We had received a request from Tioga United to support their request for continuance and we and
tayoga united uh to support their request for continuance and we and we did um my understanding
is that they were supposed to be meeting with the applicant uh a third time and um to my
understanding nothing has taken place as yet um i believe that uh verna tyner or uh mr jihad ali
or maybe veronica holman might be available to speak to that as well i don't know i've received
no further information. And I do not have any record that any meeting has taken place. So
we're kind of left in the dark with this as well as you guys.
So is there anyone out there from Tioga United who could
shed some light on the status of this application?
Chair, I have Ms. Verna Tyner. Could you please give us a moment? Thank you.
okay our chair we have verna tyner from the i'm sorry the community yeah hi good morning mr
chair good morning miss heiner please spell your full name and i'll swear you in my name is v-e-r-n-a
last name t-y-n-e-r you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you please proceed so we did have a meeting with mr patrick and the owner
and we had discussed the fact that no neighbors were on the call because they had not received
any notice. We asked them to continue the zoning hearing to put a request in, which was in June.
They did request the zoning continuance. However, they did not come back to us for a meeting.
neither have they met with any of the neighbors so when we spoke to the neighbors as an extra
precaution we went around and talked to some of the neighbors and they said that they were in
opposition due to the parking and the density and it's already a little congested around in that
area so they were opposed but we were willing to give Mr. Patrick and the owner another chance
to get onto an RCO meeting, but we never got a request from them.
Is that still the position that you would agree to a continuance?
We would, yes.
All right. Mr. Jones and Mr. Mixon,
there's obviously some housekeeping that you guys need to follow up on.
Can you hear me?
yeah so um i'm i'm talking to uh to patrick jones he's been uh handling this this situation
for me and um he said he reached out to uh miss uh veronica holman and did not get a response
no he i instructed him to reach out to me yeah i don't know miss who miss holman is so when that
what we're going to do is try to streamline this as best we can we're going to continue this and
to a must be heard date and i think miss sunken will try to her best to get you a hearing sooner
rather than later so miss sunken will work with you offline so mi 2020-000119 3442 north 18th
street this case will be continued must be heard case number five six seven eight and nine will
all be heard together they are cases number mi 2021-001314 3841 wallace street mi 2021-001315
3839 Wallace Street, MI 2021-001-259, 3845 Wallace Street, MI 2021-001-317, 3837 Wallace
Wallace Street and MI 2021-001-260-3843 Wallace Street.
Mr. Mattione is the attorney of record.
My notes indicate we have not yet received a letter of, I'm sorry,
letter RCO, oh, I'm sorry, there is a letter of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
so Mr. Mattione if you're out there please raise your hand identify yourself spell your full name
and I'll swear you in good morning Mr. Chairman Michael Mattione that's M-A-T-T-I-O
Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Michael Mattione. That's M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I, Federal Reserve Bank Building, 100 North Independence Mall, Suite 5A Northwest, Philadelphia, 19106.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you.
Thank you. Ms. Canary has some questions for you.
Good morning. Do you agree with the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal referral, photos and their plans of this property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all.
Okay, great. You may proceed. On all.
Thank you.
and again i'm representing 38 37 to 45 wallace street llc and robert sherman the principal is
here as well and i have presented exhibits including a refusal tax clearance zoning site
plan floor plans renderings the support letter from uh mantua civic association according rco
and information regarding market value of nearby single-family homes
and affidavits of service for the two RCO meetings that were held.
Presenting plans for the proposed redevelopment of what are now four vacant properties
and one soon-to-be vacant property were five contiguous lots.
We had two community meetings regarding the proposal
and numerous meetings with the Emantua Civic Zoning Committee.
As a result of all of the meetings, MCA has agreed to support the project and the requested variances.
The applicant and MCA have also entered into a community benefits agreement, reflecting provisions for supporting the Mantua community that applicant has agreed to, including providing 20% of the units as affordable units.
And the affordable units will be developed in conformity with the same finishes, amenities, et cetera, as the non-affordable units.
The obligation to provide the affordable units and other community benefits are set forth in the community benefits agreement that was completed recently.
The project itself calls for a total of 30 units, six units in each structure in five contiguous lots.
The R-Zoned RSA 5, we believe this creates a hardship to the land.
When you look at the refusals, we have a height refusal, but that's because we have a pilot house.
The building itself is about 36 feet tall with a pilot house on top.
Because the pilot house is only for mechanical access, it creates a height refusal.
We also have an open area refusal.
We have 20% open area proposed and 25% is required.
Again, we believe the refusals are created by the unique location of the properties.
If we were to develop this as single-family homes as shown in the exhibits that we attach,
We would have to sell them for an excess of $400,000.
We have a list of properties at Exhibit 8 that show homes selling between $4,000 and
$550,000 in the area.
Exhibit 9 shows the existing homes on Wallace Street are valued at $125,000 to $150,000.
The new homes would not be affordable to long-time residents, and this creates a hardship to
the land.
And the community recognized this, and they asked us to not build the single-family homes, but have those kind of prices.
So we met with them numerous times, as I said, and came up with this multifamily proposal.
And just to note, the most recent new construction on the block, 3815 and 3817 Wallace, is also multifamily.
When I look down and show some site photos, this is the area, that's the one vacant property
that's still left and all around it are the other lots that are all vacant, and you can
see both sides of the property, and then down Exhibit 10B are the only recent new construction
and on the block are also multifamily 3815 and 3817 Wallace Street and again we're proposing
six units in each building and if I pull up the floor plans, we have bi-level units in
So bi-level units in the basement, you have the living area, and then bedrooms upstairs, two units, one front and back, front and back.
the basement.
and you have the living area and then
And then upstairs, there are four one-bedroom units, two units on each floor on the second and third floors.
So that's the layout.
And then, as you can see, we have front porches that match the front porches of the other properties on the block.
We worked extensively with the Mantua Civic Association and entered into the Community Benefits Agreement.
They clearly support the project.
I believe the vote at the last meeting was 10 in support with two abstentions.
Yes, 10 and 2.
And that was on September 23rd, but we also worked and entered into the Community Benefits Agreement.
The variances, we believe, are the minimum necessary to develop the property.
residential use is proposed it's similar to the other residential uses on the
property the variances don't help avoid any environmental problems by
developing these lots and not having illegal dumping and again multifamily
residential is on the block we're seeking residential use residential is
what's there and again we worked extensively with the Mantua Civic
association and i do have a community benefits agreement just up on the screen now did not
include in the exhibits but have it up on the screen and uh just coming down to the uh and it
shows it was signed by both dwayne drummond as president of mantua and mr sherman the uh
principal of the development group and what i'd like to do is call mr sherman robert sherman
is he available
if we're not able to reach him we'll stipulate you being an officer of court your client would
have adopted your testimony okay just know he sent me a text message saying he was available
side is any questions from the board no mr chairman no anyone else would like to testify
in this case please raise your hand and did you say robert sharp chairman yes
hello mr sherman please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
Robert Sherman, R-O-B-E-R-T, Sherman, S-H-E-R-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Mariani.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Robert, did you hear my statements?
Yes, I did.
And are they true?
And did you enter into a community benefits agreement with Mantua Civic Association?
Yes, I did.
And do you adopt my statements as your testimony?
Thank you.
I have nothing further, Mr. Chair, with you.
Anyone else to testify in these cases, please raise your hand.
Yes, and we have a Mr. Curtis.
Mr. Curtis, you can unmute yourself.
Good morning, Mr. Curtis.
Please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
he's available for swearing in
please spell your name and i'll swear you in
is there anyone else beside mr sherman
no other hand sir we're having technical difficulties so uh planning commission
good morning mr chairman members of the board david vecto city planning commission
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the existing residential single-family zoning for
these properties. The requested open space variance is de minimis. However, the use variance for five
more units than allowed by Wright and for eight feet in additional height are not supported by
the applicant's claim of hardship. Neither the height nor the requested number of units
Neither the height nor the requested number of units represent the minimum variance required to allow the applicant to derive value from their land.
represent the minimum variance required
These are all 1,300 to 1,400 square foot lots.
There is nothing unique about any of these lots that would prevent them from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
We also note that the claims of affordability cannot be enforced by the city and so should not factor into consideration of the appropriateness of these proposals.
We recommend that the board deny the requested variances.