MI 2023-005-139-626-30, North Delaware Avenue.
Appeal is granted with proviso.
This appeal is granted on the basis of vested rights only.
Zoning Permit 873511 is extended to 12-31-24.
Thomas Holloman, my bill is to appeal granted.
James Snell, appeal granted.
Thank you.
Number five.
Excuse me, board members, can you indicate if you're voting with the proviso as well?
Tom and Jim.
Sorry about that, Hillary.
Hillary, to include the proviso, appeal granted to include the proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number five, MI 2023-006-464-51451 South 48th Street.
Jonas McKendricus and Victoria Harris are the applicants.
This application is for the erection of a rear addition and stair from the rear yard to the first floor as part of an existing attached structure for use as a single family household living.
Whereas a minimum rear yard depth of nine foot is required.
The RC, the RSA five zoning district three foot is proposed.
We do not have a letter yet from the RCO.
The applicant has provided 13 letters of support from neighbors,
including the two adjacent neighbors.
ZBA has also received several letters from neighbors.
Mr. Jonas.
Good morning.
Good morning. Could you just state your name for the record? You've already been sworn.
All right. Jonas Mazunas.
Okay. And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing
yes thank you please proceed and show your screen all right
mr chair did you repeat the refusal into the record for this matter
what i did you did okay thank you sorry too many things going on
right can everybody see that we can great uh this is our list of exhibits that was uh that was
received um uh we have all the um you know tax compliance and deeds and that kind of thing at
the end if anyone wants to view them we can but we'll we'll stick to the condition conditions
uh plans uh and a setback diagram we've created
here's a refusal
my understanding you have one refusal for the distance in the backyard am I correct
that's right the it's for the distance in the rear yard yep yep yes
that's right the the it's for the distance in the rear yard yep yeah yes okay go ahead proceed
and then so just for context this is the front of the home you know the project is on on the back
in the garden court neighborhood this is what our block looks like with our our parcel highlighted
there's a set of alleys in the rear uh in an h shape that's that's ours uh you can see that
the parcel extends into the middle of the alley it's a it's one of these um easement alleys
uh that's the central alley in the block just for for context uh we've got a variety of decks
of different amounts of setback uh including some that are that are fairly close the east side uh
alley which ours is on the west side um is a 15 foot even just like uh just like ours uh with the
setbacks pulled you know right to it uh this is the other end of our segment of the alley we have
neighbor who um who actually you know the house exists before zoning existed so it encroaches on
the alley is you know um that's that uh and then this is our uh our our property uh you see it
labeled 451 on on the side um uh we've got the 15-foot alley uh with the neighbor across the way
um elevation looking at um looking at the home uh with our existing uh metal porch that was put on
according to my neighbor in 1960 or so uh that's the interior which is really why we're seeking to
do what we're doing uh we want to create more space for for our family there's you know the
two of us and uh two and a half kids right now um one is five months old um and we're looking to
screen it in so we can be out there during the buggy season have a little more space to be able
to have you know friends and family over um and have a space that you can walk on without without
shoes right now it's that diamond plate steel uh this is the uh material that was submitted to lni
with all the different drawings um i pulled up a couple of those for more detail so we can take
closer look uh elevations from the rear and from the side uh the porch will become actually a little
bit narrower than it is presently. And then it'll be is proposed to be deeper than it
is than it is right now. But the idea is to do a fully a porch treatment, balusters on
the bottom, removable screens on on on all sides for ease of repair, removability, opening
it up during the non-buggy seasons um that that that sort of thing and then this is the first
floor first floor plan um again the first floor being elevated kind of above the alley garage level
uh so this comes in right off the existing kitchen we're not modifying the existing door or windows
at all um but that's what that that looks like and then uh this is the site plan uh that shows
the existing alley easement which is half ours and half are across the alley neighbors
and then we've mocked up a diagram that's at least for many of us can be a little bit easier
to understand showing up just a general massing of where the where the porch would stand the
yellow line indicates the property line in our submission we used the the alley as the as the
as the setback um but it's you know ultimately set back uh ten and a half feet from the actual
property line you know we can't obviously use the alley um you know for building construction like
that um but uh it provides it would it'll remain providing a light and air the the the zoning code
uh asked for and uh resulting again it's sort of 18 feet from uh our new porch to our neighbors um
to our neighbor's house uh as you mentioned we've got a number of letters uh the 13 that
that you mentioned and then there's two more that have come in since then we know
including uh 13 of our near neighbors um both party wall uh sharing neighbors and then we had
our community meeting back on february 15th um that was attended by uh uh four um of our of our
near neighbors, three of whom had questions, and we've spoken with all of them since then,
addressed those concerns, and they've all told me that they're comfortable with where we are now,
which we feel really good about because we started talking to them back, you know, last summer
when we were thinking about making the submission. So we're happy to answer questions.
Questions from the board. Let me ask you this. What happened when you went to the,
to explain the uh the results of the rcm when you went to the meeting there was three people
disagreed and you've talked to them since is that what you're saying well there were there there were
um uh there were four or five people who were you know of the near neighbors who were present
uh there were four or five people who were you know of the near neighbors who were present uh
i think one dropped off pretty early um one of them uh one of them was you know fully supported
from the beginning and three people had questions um it wasn't really objections but they had
questions that were raised um which you know we took to account because we know the one of them
is the is the house that's across the way and so we wanted to make sure we talked to her you know
personally afterwards um and you know we did we had done so a few times before and and we spoke
to her and her husband um out in the alley uh not long after the meeting um and and she felt
comfortable uh better understanding and we talked through it physically in person um and and has
told me that she's she's comfortable with it she would she didn't want to you know write a letter
for or against but uh she was she was happy with it all right all right questions from the board
no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um i just want to note that the the correspondence regarding the continuance
request was forwarded to me by um council regati's office so thank you okay um
questions or comments from the virtual audience we have captain blunt they have been allowed to speak
good morning you uh you were already sworn so just do me a favor just state your name for the
record and then please present your testimony catherine blunt c-a-t-h-e-r-i-n-e-b-l-u-n-t
we did send on our all of our information the summary along with the letter uh to uh the proper
addresses, email addresses, so I'm surprised that you did not get in. I'm sorry about that.
All right. So we requested a continuance mainly because it's not that we, the RCO,
is opposed to what Jonas, the applicant, his variance. It's the fact that the letter that
was sent out to the near neighbors announcing the meeting by the applicant talked about a
rear porch and did not go into a case that it would be a structure, an additional structure.
And so during the course of the meeting, we pulled up the notice of refusal. We read what
was said by that notice and people were confused. And we asked for more of the drawings that you've
seen tonight, today, that we didn't see. And so basically I requested that it be a second meeting
that I would work with the applicant to get the information out because I didn't want him to do
another mailing. And then he would then specify exactly what he was doing, show the drawings so
that people were clear, and so that the near neighbors have a better idea of what he was going
to do instead of something called a back, what we called it, a back porch. And so the applicant
refused. And basically, I then requested a short continuance to have that meeting so that he could
explain to all of the neighbors that share that kind of back alleyway so that they are clear that
this was going to be a structure, and it may obscure their vision, and whatever the case may
be. And as long as they went along with it, there was no problem for us. We just wanted the process
to be clear. We wanted there to be full transparency, and we wanted the neighbors to have
an opportunity to make a decision on something that they were clear about. That transparency
did not occur, and that kind of clarity did not occur either. That's the only reason why we
You requested reply to a specific accusation.
So what, what, hold on, let me, let's do this.
Let's make sure there's no one else has testimony just for a record.
We do have in our hands at least 13 letters from near neighbors.
I just want you to know that.
Is the RCO, is she still on the line?
yes there she is okay i just i just want you to know that we have enormous letters including
the people on either side and that's fine my okay all right what i would say that they understand
that there is like a rear addition to the house as long as you can that it's a rear addition that's
going to block their view then that's fine with me i just wanted to transfer process transparent
All right. Well, you know what? We appreciate your comments. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience who has a comment?
All right. Well, you know what? We appreciate your comment.
Leonard has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Chair. My name is Leonard Clark. I'm the party wall neighbor at 449 South 48th Street.
Leonard, just for the record, could you spell your name for the court stenographer?
Yeah, it's B as in boy, O-N as in Nancy, A-R-E-K is my last name.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, sir.
I'm sorry. It's happening after my affirmation. I'm the party wall neighbor to Jonas and Victoria. I've been their neighbor for about six years now.
yeah yep um i'm very familiar with the project uh and i've seen the plans and there is already
an existing roof um on their deck which is which is you know existing um i don't see that my view
is substantively changed in any way um so i i have absolutely no objection to the property
And I understand that there was some insinuation that people weren't informed or that they had been not properly informed of what the scope of the project is.
That is not my understanding at all between myself and the neighbors that I've spoken to.
They all understand what the project is.
I haven't spoken to anyone who lives on our block or near our block that is opposed to this project.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Catherine Blunt has their hand raised again.
Ms. Blunt?
The only thing I'm going to say is this.
These new neighbors who approve...
Ms. Blunt, go ahead, proceed.
Just state your name for the record again.
Catherine Blunt, B-O-U-N-T.
All right, go ahead, proceed.
So these new neighbors did not attend the meeting.
And that was my concern because we weren't unclear.
we weren't unclear about the project until we were in the meeting and people started asking
questions. So again, my only concern is as long as I understand, so this rear roof has nothing to,
this rear, this roof over a deck, a small deck has nothing to do with this at all. This is a
structure that is being put up. So the existing deck is being torn down. A new structure is being
put up affixed to the house and it's closed in on all sides and so neighbors need to understand
they need to know that that it's possible that once this structure comes up that it will set a
precedent that the near neighbors i wish they would i wish they would have attended the meeting
i wish all of these people who signed the letters attended the meeting but they show up all right
well thank well miss blunt we understand your position thank you all right anyone else in the
virtual audience i see no hands um sir do you want to make comments jonas um yeah i just there
was one specific um accusation that was levied that we didn't share the drawings um the drawings
were sent to the rco a couple days in advance of the meeting and we shared them during the meeting
um so that's it's just an unsubstantiated accusation it won't okay thank you um planning
Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the
City Planning Commission. Right. You swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth. Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed. Thank you, sir. Chairman and board
members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning
at this location. The proposed rear deck appears to be a common condition on this block face,
and it would not injure the use of adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
a proposed dimensional variance for a non-conforming rear yard depth.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-464-451 South 48th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
You have your vote, sir.
Thank you.
Okay. Number three, MI 2023-004-927-1347 Master Street. Joshua Horowitz is the attorney.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Can we go to number 14 next?
Well, certainly.
Thank you. And then we can go back to the top of the list.
MI 2023-006-567-1201 Fanshawe Street. Richard DeMarco is the attorney. Leonard Reuter is also.
Is the attorney, Leonard Reuter, is also involved in this, representing L&I or the city?
Richard DeMarco, Leonard Reuter, has been promoted to panelists.