The surrounding area, the notice that we sent of the community meeting, which was held on April 18th, our certificates of nailing, the application for appeal, deed, as well as a certificate of tax clearance.
And here we have the refusal. Again, this is a residential property, Zone RSA 5.
However, it is a non-conforming use in that it was previously Zone CMX 5 with two residential units and one commercial unit, dating back to 2006.
When my client purchased the property, the prior owner had converted that commercial use to a residential use.
As my client tried to obtain the rental license, we realized that there were issues with the zoning.
rental license we realized that there were issues with the zoning and so now we are looking to
And so now we are looking to legalize.
legalize that third unit and this is a corner property with multiple entrances as well as
egresses as you will see in the photos as i mentioned we did meet with the community on april
18th and we do have a unanimous letter of support as you can see there are five yeses and one
abstention and here we have the floor plans of the property i'll just zoom out a little bit here
The first floor is a two-bedroom, one-bath. That's about 706 square feet. The second floor
unit is also a two-bedroom, one-bath at about 628 square feet. And the third floor is a one-bedroom,
one-bath at 486 square feet. We do not have any basement living. As you can see, it is a three-story
property with multiple means of egress and ingress. There's an entrance here along West
Tioga Street as well as along North 15th Street on the corner. And here we have a photo of the
posting of the property with the ZVA information for today's hearing. Interior photos of two
different angles of the bedrooms. This was recently renovated as well as photos of the kitchen and
we have views to the left of this property on Tioga Street as views to the right of the property
along tayoga street as well again we are a corner property and we are on the corner as you see here
west tayoga and north 15th street and we did provide notice of the community meeting
and this is letter indicating that the meeting would be held on april 18th as you saw we did
receive a letter of support we also included information for today's cba hearing for those
who would like to participate a copy of the refusal as well as a pamphlet that the rca
requests that we include within our material packets. A list of the properties that were
notified of that April 18th meeting. And we do have a certificate of mailing for each property
that was notified of the meeting. I'll go through a few. However, all in all, we have well over 100.
So they were submitted within our presentation packet. I'm just going to jump down to our
application for appeal here so here we have the application of appeal again this property has a
history as it was previously zoned as cms5 for commercial use as well as a duplex above we're
simply seeking to convert that commercial legalize the use of the commercial space as a residential
unit here we have our project information form as well as the deed showing that my client clover
Holdings LLC does in fact own the property, and we have our Certificate of Tax Clearance
as well.
So with that, if I could have my client adopt my testimony, it should be Yusef Avram or
Abraham, excuse me.
Yosef has been allowed to speak.
Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Yosef Avraham. Yosef is Y-O-S-E-F. Avraham is A-V-R-A-H-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Yosef, did you hear my presentation today?
And was it your own correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes. Thank you.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Charles Richardson. They've been allowed to speak.
Sure. Good morning, Mr. Richardson. Just state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer.
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you for taking the time to cause. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, sir, and good morning.
David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning
at this location from residential single-family to residential multifamily.
The recommended zoning would allow two dwelling units.
The recommended zoning would allow two dwelling units.
However, the property has a documented history of use of two dwelling units with a salon dating back to 2006.
However, the property has a document.
The appellant seeks to legalize the conversion of the former commercial space into a dwelling unit.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use variance for three dwelling units.
Thank you. MI 2023-001-119-1441 West Ioga Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
We're going to hear number eight and number 10 at the same time.
MI 2023-001-324-1621 Webster Street.
Jennifer Brazdillo is the attorney.
And number 10, MI 2023-001-087-1623, Webster Street.
Jennifer Rizzillo is also the attorney there.
And we have a letter of support from the South of South Neighborhood Association for both properties.
Counsel, we're going to hear both together.
Could you identify your, well, first of all, state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Sure, Jennifer Bezidlo, my last name is spelled B-A-Z-Y-D-L-O.
Right, do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Sure, my client is Oksana Chomenko, and she is the property owner for both properties.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. I'm going to share my screen.
um we just get to the right packet hold on one second all right so um like i said jennifer i'm
here on behalf of the property owner oxana chamanco um these are i'm just going to briefly
go through our exhibit packet and we'll revisit most of these as i present but um here you have
the refusal um it's a refusal for not having a third floor setback it's the same for both
properties. Basically, all of this is the same for both properties, which is why I'm presenting
them together. Here's the deeds showing that Oksana owns both properties. There's one.
There's the second one. We also have the proof that the property taxes have been paid.
That's one. That's the other.
Here are our letters of support from SOSNA.
It was unanimous support for both.
We did do some redesigns to meet their recommendations, and then we got their approval.
And here is our postings on both properties.
There's one. There's the other.
And these are the buildings we're talking about. The gray one and then the building to the right.
The brick one here is 1621 and the gray one is 1623 Webster. We'll come back to these photos later.
But this is the surrounding street. As you can see, there's diversity of height here. Sorry,
don't know what happened. These are the houses behind those houses on Catherine Street. I'm
sorry, I'm having some technical difficulty with my computer. This is the aerial view.
We're going to come back to this next map because this shows the current heights
and stories and of the surrounding parcels, the zoning map, and here are our, this is our rendering
of what the third story would look like, and as well as the floor plans. So we're going to come
back to this. Let's go to the photo. So 1621 and 1623 Webster Street, as you can see, these are both
existing two-story single-family homes. 21 is a two-bedroom, one-bath, and is currently about
900 square feet in the interior. 1623 is a little bit bigger. It's a little over 1100.
1623 is a little bit bigger. It's a little over 1,100 square feet, and that's a three-bedroom,
one-bath. So we have two smaller row homes, not the smallest in the city, but they're not the
largest either. And our proposal is to add that third story with a mansard roof and then also a
roof deck. So the third story will be used as a suite for the, for the owner and owner suite
with a bedroom and another full bath, and then a little work from home space as well.
And why we're looking to do this, as you know, life has radically changed for most people home
life since these homes were built a hundred years ago. And we work from home. We have larger,
We have, you know, kids need space to do schoolwork and things like that.
So this addition will add, and also everyone wants a second bathroom.
So this will add another bathroom and provide that kind of live workspace for the owner to accommodate more modern living while maintaining the existing structure and character of, you know, the two-story brick home.
We are maintaining not only the cornice line, but our proposal is to maintain the original cornice.
That was one of the things that SOSNA has requested, and we were perfectly happy to accommodate that.
The additions on each, so 1621, the third floor adds about a little over 380 square feet of livable space,
and 1623, it's going to add about 480 square feet of livable space.
I also wanted to note that at the top, you're only at a little under 32 feet, so we're not even going up to the full 38 feet allowed.
We're well under the height. Let me just see. Hold on one second.
Go back to this rendering. So you can see it's nice.
You're maintaining that cornice. You're maintaining kind of a historical feel with the Manzard roof.
um let me see so each property only uh got one refusal and that was for not having the required
eight foot setback um for that third story uh since the buildings on either side were only
two story however um you know as we know that regulation is in place to try to maintain the
cornice line on intact two-story blocks as well as provide some sort of you know light and air
for neighbors across the street who may also only be in two-story homes. And while I think those
were really, that's, those are really good goals, right? The resulting projects from that, when you
have that eight-foot setback, especially on a small, smaller house like this, you run into two
problems. One, it doesn't actually look nice with the big blob on top. You still see it. And the
second is that uh these buildings are pretty short uh 1621 is only 33 feet long 1623 is 37
feet long um we're only proposing um right now the full three story adds you know 380 and 480
square feet if we did the full eight foot setback we're losing another 130 square feet or more off
of that. So it's really kind of impractical to add that full, to add that space with a full
eight-foot setback. And we think we're meeting the goals of that eight-foot setback with this
Manzer roof of maintaining the cornice line and giving that sight line back with the gentle slope
of giving that space of light and air. So I just wanted to go into a little bit about
the existing conditions on the block and how this proposal fits in. So if we go here, I've made a
little map of where, what, how many stories exist, what buildings are already three stories, what
can be by right, and what we're left with. So there are 22 properties right here that face Webster
Street. This is Webster going down. It kind of dead ends at the end on this block. Of those 22
properties, six are already full three stories with no setback. The property directly across
the street right here from 1621 is also owned by my client and a third story is going to be
edit by right uh since there's only there is a third story but three-story building adjacent to
it so we're going to have a seventh full three-story building on this block and then eight
more of the 22 so we have seven already who are full three stories eight more can be a full
three stories with no setback no mansard roof by right and that includes both of the
three stories with no setback, no mansard roof, buy right. And that includes both of the properties
practice.
adjacent to our properties. So these are the red X's are our properties. As you can see,
the pink B's are buy right third stories. So you have a block that's kind of already
a mix. Let's go to the photos that show this is Webster Street going up and down.
taken from these are my client's properties right here so you can see especially this one in the
upper right hand corner you can see that it's not a solid block of two-story homes it goes up and
down and I think what we're proposing is fits well within the character of this block and adds a nice
historical feel with the mansard roof giving them modern living spaces but preserving kind of those
charming two-story brick houses. So it's kind of a win-win. And I believe Sassna agreed with us.
So we went to Sassna, did the full meeting, notified a bunch of people, and they voted to
support. Specifically, they, you know, they liked that the mansard roof was added for the third
floor. And their only proviso was that there are security gates on some of the windows and they
will be removed during construction. And we were absolutely fine with that. So in summary,
we're looking to add a third story to existing properties with a mansard roof and maintain the
cornice line and the original cornice. And we do not believe this to be out of character with the
existing block, which is a mix of two and three stories already. And oh, what I didn't touch on
is that also on Catherine Street behind all of those houses to the rear are three stories or
could be by right. So I think that this fits in with the neighborhood provides a way to maintain
these older homes, but update them in a way to accommodate modern families.
Counsel, I understand the security bars are only on one of the properties?
I believe so. It's only on the brick one. All right. Thank you. You want to bring your client
on? I'm not sure if she's
here. She told me this morning she had a family
emergency, but if she is, her name is
Oksana. All right. You're an officer
of the court. We will gladly accept your
testimony. Thank you. I appreciate it. Questions
from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual
audience?
Kara, I see no hands at this time.