and just just proponents of the health system in general really great um supporters all around
um but but really what it comes down to is that um this is our flagship hospital and so as such
uh there are types of specialty care and really complicated procedures that are really only
provided at this building uh and what that becomes is that we we do receive a large number
of visitors from outside of town. And so even if you are from this area, that part of the
neighborhood, I think everybody's aware is pretty dense and it can be complicated. If you're coming
to visit the hospital, you generally have a whole lot of other things on your mind. It can be
confusing. We do receive a number of visitors that accidentally become confused, arrive at the wrong
building. So any chance we can take to really highlight building identity and really
improve the wayfinding we see really tends to alleviate that so the building top signage you
know is for folks that are approaching maybe from the highway or at a distance they can you know feel
comfortable that they're going the right place they're finding the building and then the second
And then the second monument sign that we're requesting is really just in the four years we've been open.
monument sign that we're requesting is really just in the
We see that that is a weak point in kind of decision-making as people are driving down the street.
And so we think that that will go a long way to help alleviate that and bring people comfort that they're driving to the right.
And what I'm showing you is the existing sign, correct?
Correct.
Okay. And so this is what the rendering would be on the other side of the building, correct?
Correct.
Correct. And the two high building identification signs are visible from I-76, is that fair to say?
Correct. And the signs were included in an overall sign package that was seen by the Art Commission in connection with its approval of the chains of copy for the way signing signs?
Correct. And would you agree or opine that a hardship would exist here to adequately identify the building correctly?
Especially at that height and those distances that you have to view the sign?
Yes. Okay. And this building and the other building comport with the character and context of that campus. And there are similar buildings with similar size and location of signage. Is that fair to say? Yes. And what would you call this campus? A collection of pan and chop? Yes. So a very dense area. And as you mentioned, it would be important for ways of finding and traffic safety. Correct. Okay. Thank you.
we did meet with the southwest district services on august 20 and you there's a letter of support
for the signage so again three signs one is two are expanding existing sign and one is a new
monument sign i'll show you the picture again there we go
do you have to have your testimony adopted or i did you did i i went yes i did that okay good
yeah thank you questions from the board i'm recusing um from from this uh i was chair when
came to CDR. Okay. Questions from our attorney? I don't have a question. I just have a comment.
Well, my son was in the pavilion twice, and it's an amazing building, and
you know
anything to
promote Penn and the work that they do
there is
I would say too
that Penn name up top means nothing
if you're looking for a building
it didn't say pavilion
at the time
it did not
we've learned a lot in the last four years
since it's been open
so this is really trying to rectify that
Thank you. Questions from our attorney? No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any answer, Mr. Chair.
The Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive
plan recommends no change in zoning to the existing
SPINS, Special Purpose Institution. The appellant has
demonstrated that the proposed signs of this size are necessary for
wayfinding the planning commission recommends the board grant their requested variances for
building identification sign area thank you um mi 2025 004 825 1 convention center i vote yes
cheryl gaston my vote is yes tenetta graham my vote is yes ryan mcadams my vote is yes
thank you thank you all right thank you very much um we're gonna let
So Alan, come up and set up.
We're going to take a five-minute.
Alan will be ready by then.
We're going to do the three-minute, the three cases he has,
and then we're going to go right into the 330 list, okay?
So everybody take five minutes.
I'll try to keep it short.
No, no, no, that's okay.
All right, number eight, MI 2025-004-044-2304 North 21st Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
There's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Young
and a letter of support from all the family CDC with two provisors.
So if you would, please state your name and spell for the stenographer.
Alan Nockamson.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is 2304 N21st Street, LLC.
the owner of the property, and its representative should be in the virtual audience.
Boom, hire son, Nicholas.
uh nicholas our vice chair has a few questions for you good afternoon have you submitted your
Our vice chair has a few questions.
documents five days in advance of this hearing yes and do you waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy i do okay thank you you can proceed with your case thank you
i do not believe i'm a panelist yet
you will be soon yes
Thank you.
I'm trying to just get full screen mode.
all right so i'm here to present 2304 north 21st street uh it had you know it has 12 exhibits in
my exhibit packet and we notify 201 addresses of the community meeting so this is an rsa5 property
that we're looking to put a duplex here as the chairman stated we have a letter of support
from the community, all in the family, CDC.
There are two provisos, no basement living.
We have no objection to that proviso.
And then the trash management is unit number one
has trash stored in the rear
and unit number two has a ventilated trash room.
We have no objection to that proviso as well.
Again, here's a letter, just a vote count.
And then this property has a long history
of multifamily use when it was active
It went from four units to three units in 1954.
And then the aerial views of the property, this is really interesting.
If you look at it, we're the only property building structure on 21st Street on this block.
So it's very interesting.
I do believe that there was a variance request and approval from the board for a duplex next door to us at 2306 some time ago.
The maps of the area, again, we are RSA 5 property, but, you know, again, long history of multifamily use.
There's not one other building structure currently on our block.
This is our property right now.
My clients have done updates with permits, but, you know, obviously we're trying to get the use approved.
This is our orange notice posting for today's hearing.
this is what the property looked in 2019 before my client put work on the property again with
permits this is north 21st street to the right to the left interior photos this is the basement
so this is the current condition of the basement we are not intending to have basement living down
there probably just utilities i do believe there is this is a bi-level unit and maybe there will
be a washer and dryer down there but nothing else and then this is just pictures various pictures
my client's just waiting for the approval you know to get you know to use this property
um i do actually no let me say this his brother lives in the upper unit so he does have a rental
license for for one unit his brother lives in the upper unit just keeping a watchful eye on the
property plans and drawings as you can see here you walk through a common vestibule you'll make
a left you have a living room kitchen you know bathroom bedroom you go down the flight of steps
and it's an open floor plan down here again proviso no living in the basement instead of
going to left for unit number one which which is a two bedroom one bath you go to unit number two
which is a bi-level three-bedroom, two-bath, you see here that, oh, by the way, in this unit,
also you can go up a flight of steps, and this is the second bedroom on the second floor.
Instead of unit number one, you go up to this flight of steps for unit number two,
kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, go up a flight of steps, there's two more bedrooms and a bathroom.
again we met with the community 201 addresses were notified of the community meeting on
september 9th 2025 at 6 30 p.m this is the addresses we mailed it to proof of mailing
to those addresses our applications for appeal that we filed on behalf of 2304 and 21st street
LLC. And then finally, our, you know, proof of ownership with the deed, as well as proof of tax compliance. I'm going to unshare.
as well as proof of tax compliance.
I'm going to unshare my screen.
I would ask that Nick virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
In the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Oh, Mr. Nicholas.
He goes by Nick, but Mr. Nicholas?
Okay, they're coming back in as a panel now, though.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I do see him in the virtual audience, just his camera.
There's some issue, I guess, with his camera.
Mr. Nicholas?
Hi. Sir, could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
First name is Boomerson, B-O-O-M-H-Y-R-S-O-N.
Last name is Nicholas, N-I-C-O-L-A-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Nicholas, could you turn your video on? Is that possible?
i'm trying to do that right now okay so alan start your testimony yeah mr nicholas you heard
everything i had to state today yes is it true and correct yes and do you adopt it as your own
testimony yes i do thank you questions from the board look like you made it work say that one
more time. It looks like you made it work. Oh thank you. Thank you.
Questions or comments from our attorney? No chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive
plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the current RSA 5 residential
single-family. While this property has evidence of multifamily use in the 1950s, there is a 1970
zoning permit stating that the current use is single-family. The plan has not demonstrated
that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances of the property that would prevent
it from being used in conformance with the zoning code. The Planning Commission recommends that the
board deny the requested variance for multifamily. Yeah, Mr. Chair, as I stated, I believe that 2306
north 21st street was granted for a duplex does have a history of a long history of multifamily
use and we're trying to activate that block as the only standing building structure on the block
so we would ask for a duplex thank you so mi 2025 004044 2304 north 21st street i vote yes
with proviso provisos no household living in the basement trash stored in the rear yard for unit
one, interior trash storage for unit two.
Johns, my vote is yes with provisals.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisals.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with provisals.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes with provisals.
Number nine, MI 2025-004045-2307 North 11th Street.
Mr. Nockleson, just for the record, state your name.
Alan Nockleson.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is SJ Developers, LLC, and to the left of me is Josh Kravitz, its representative.
There's a support from the 37th Ward RCO.
The vote was 13 in support, one in opposition, two abstain, and there's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Young,
and also there's an applicant who provided one form letter of support from a near neighbor.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon.
have you submitted your documents five days in advance of this hearing yes and
do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy I do okay
thank you make sure your screen and proceed thank you so if this board is
inclined to grant this variance appeal I would ask that I would grant it with
proviso we have revised plans that we previously said I so for 2307 North 11
Street, we have 11 exhibits. We notified 130 addresses of the community meeting. So our refusal
is this. We're asking for five-family household living at a CMX2 property. We have two refusals,
the first of which is the fact that we're not offering any commercial use on the ground floor,
not out of character for that block, as you'll see. And then secondly,
Not out of character for that block, as you'll see.
And then secondly, the amount of units.
We're allowed three units as of right for CMX2.
We're asking for five.
We're swapping out the commercial unit with the residential unit.
And we believe that based on the floor plans, it should fit the needs for a good five units.
As I indicated, we have submitted revised plans.
We made two changes.
We reduced the building height to 31 feet, four inches, and we also removed basement living.
So we would ask that the board grant the variance request with the revised plans.
So we have a letter of support from the community.