So I'll show you the building permit that was issued by the city, and this was on page 88 of my packet, and I'll just skip right ahead to that.
um so uh here's a printout of it and it says you know the plans are here and they were stamped
uh by the city as approved so this was for the construction of the um the addition and the
alterations and so the addition in the rear is what the permit that was issued is what ultimately
we're here for today so this was a building permit that was issued as if the zoning was
already approved for what we're here for today um but it was just issued by mistake and i'll just
you there was a stamp by the city on the plans here um uh you know these are the same uh plans
that we're ultimately going to bring back through uh hopefully after today um to get approved and
here's the plant the stamp at the top right of this page um so uh like i said uh and i'll show
you there there was a meeting and we did get a letter of support and um that letter should be
page 59 of my packet and that was from the south kensington community partners so there were people
that showed up and spoke and and they understood it says here the neighbors generally voiced support
um it was improperly permitted and already built it in place and they didn't discover the issue
until after um they purchased the property they're a nice young couple and you know they didn't
understand you know understand what was needed here but um we did put into our packet the actual
escrow agreement that they had with the builder where, you know, the builder doesn't make it seem
like it's just a matter of them getting the permits closed out. And so at the time that they
bought the property, here's the addendum, $30,000 held in escrow. And just for all the permits and
including the rooftop and approvals to be closed out and the settlement issued, you know, if it
wasn't by settlement. Now, the settlement went through and then ultimately here's the money
getting released from the escrow where the builder did not keep up with the agreement.
Seller agrees to release it so the buyers can do it on their own because they didn't
and weren't willing to do so.
And if you'll promote my clients, they'll be, I'm sure, willing to adopt.
Well, I'll ask them if they'll adopt my testimony.
And otherwise, we're happy to answer any questions.
Why don't we do that?
Why don't you bring one of your clients on?
I'm sorry, if you wouldn't mind promoting Benjamin Eisenberg.
Ben has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Good morning. My name is Ben Eisenberg, B-E-N, last name Eisenberg, A-Y-Z-E-N-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Ben, have you heard my testimony so far today?
and do you adopt my testimony as your own i do thank you all right question questions from the
board no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time
mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience i see no hands planning commission thank
i see no hands planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david effecta with the
Thank you, Chairman.
city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the residential single family zoning at this location the appellant is requesting
dimensional variances for a rear yard setback this is an existing undersized lot with a rear
setback line comparable to others on the block face the city planning commission recommends
the zoning board grant, the dimensional variances. Thank you. MI 2023-004-927-1347
Master Street, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Counselor, you have your votes. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Number six, MI 2023-006-465-2623
Anna Street. Lee Elsie is the attorney. There's a letter of support from residents organized for
advocacy and direction. Good morning, Mr. Elsie. Could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer? Good morning. Lee Elsie, L-E-E-E-L-S-E-Y. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client and
their relationship to this property? Yes, the property is owned by my clients, who are Mr.
Lionel Thomas and Mr. Kareem Welker. Okay, and Mr. Thomas, our board member, Mr. Holloman,
has a few questions for you. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do did you email all the exhibits and documents
as required five days in advance to this hearing i did thank you please proceed and share your screen
okay good morning mr chair and members of the board um i believe my screen should be visible
i'm acting today both as attorney and architect so i'm able to speak um in regards to both
matters. We're at 2623 and 2625 Annan Street. The proposal for this project is
both the consolidation of these two lots as well as new construction for a
four-story multi-family building. Now the refusal, let me jump right to the
refusal here. To be clear, there was an original refusal and it's since been revised. We have
refusals both for the number of multifamily units in a multifamily unit zone. We're requesting
four units. Two are allowed by right. And we're also seeking a dimensional variance for the
required minimum rear yard depth. Seven feet is required in the lot. We're seeking five and a half
inches, but that is something we can clarify, I believe, and sort of alleviate some of the concerns
of how that sounds. Now, here is a rendering of the proposed new construction. It looks like it's
kind of more suburban due to the fact that you don't see much around it but that results from
the fact that with this building being demolished which is the 2625 site we essentially have
parking lots and vacant lots extending in both directions I do believe there is some new
construction over in this area we can clarify later if desired and just just
to situate us we're on Annan Street which is a relatively narrower street
but still allows for both parking and traffic and we're located between 26th
and 27th
here are pictures of the existing site prior to the demolition this is 2625
It was an existing two-story single-family structure, which was purchased, both lots, essentially this driveway lot, which there's a car parked on it, but it belongs to the owners along with this existing building.
It was purchased in 2022 and was determined unsafe and demolished.
It was purchased in 2022 and was determined unsafe and demolished early in 2023.
Here's an existing picture of the rear yard.
And just to clarify, the existing setback from this bay is four foot six and a half inches.
Well, I just wanted to address that while we're looking at this picture, and I will return to it later.
There also exists a pass-through easement that runs on the lot line
that separates the two properties that we are consolidating.
Here are some views along Annan Street. You can see the other new properties being built primarily
multi-family in nature. Here's an update of the site as of October when 2625 Annan Street was
demolished. You can see sort of the character of buildings behind it. The
property to the left fronts on Ellsworth Street and continues all the way through
with the rear parking area as does the property to the right. Here's an updated
picture after we had a meeting with community. They addressed some concerns
about protecting the near neighbor's property and addressing some of the fill
that was left on the site, which my clients were happy to provide. Here are
pictures of the zoning posters. These are dated March 15th.
here is a deed. Now, I'll take you real quick to the zoning drawings and zoom in a little bit to
see what we're proposing. Now, the original zoning drawing, we sought to eliminate the
pass-through alley that ran between the two buildings as my clients now own both sides
of the lot. Relatively late in the process, working with the survey district, we were notified that we
were unable to eliminate this easement because it's actually deeded so that it benefits the
properties that face on Ellsworth Street. In the past, there might have been some ways to
extinguish that, but LNI is not open to removing rear yard egress easements, which we
understand and we had revised our zoning plan to reroute that easement through the exit through
the proposed rear yard and then along the 26 23 and in street property line now this is something
that is still being revised with the survey district and we will request that proviso be
added that our approval is contingent upon that being approved but we expect it to be approved
it's just a matter of of going through that process now this this easement and the fact
that we need to retain this easement is is also results in the reason why our rear yard setback
is so small the actual building line is seven foot five and a half inches from that rear property
line there is a balcony proposed at second third and fourth story here to provide outdoor living
space for the for the the unit occupants which reduces it to three and a half sorry three foot
five and a half feet and then with that three foot easement it further reduces the technical
easement to five and a half inches. But with us not fencing this off and leaving it for these
owners to just sort of traverse through the yard as they would have originally as it existed in
its current state, we believe the actual five, I'm sorry, seven foot, five and a half inch
setback is what we're realistically dealing with. And the four foot setback
to this front is what we'll be dealing with the actual building application.
Here's the previously proposed zoning plan before we amended it,
which did not show that the easement wrapping around the property and did not include that updated rear yard line.
Let me take you through the building plans real quick.
We're seeking one unit per floor with an accessible type B unit on the ground floor.
Each of the units is two bedrooms and one bathroom.
two bedrooms and one bathroom. They're all nearly identical. Each one is around between 700 and
They're all nearly identical.
800 square feet, which the only difference being the need to pass through this easement on the
first floor. And each unit has a balcony area to provide living space in the exterior, as well as
the top unit has access to a roof deck balcony so the total lot area is over a
thousand square feet and the gross building is three thousand four hundred
and thirty square feet here are proposed renderings of the building including a
front facade trash storage for use by the tenants the egress pass-through and
and the balconies located along the rear.
Now, on February 7th, we met with the community,
which included a conglomeration of several different RCOs.
The primary organizing one was the road RCO.
We had had a preliminary meeting a week or two before just with the RCO.
representatives and we sought to sort of approach them in order to explain our situation and why we
were seeking these additional units and to give them sort of some of our considerations as we
dealt with this. One of the main things that they were concerned about is, you know, with these
additional units, how can we address some of the concerns that the community has? And one of the
primary concerns the community has is the need for affordable units for low-income families.
Now, we discussed two options at that point. We discussed altering our proposal to include the
mixed income bonus, which is available for this site, although buy right would only allow in three
units, and only one of those units would have to be affordable at a 50% AMI rate. Alternatively,
we we argued for our approach which is four units that all are open to um as living as housing
assistance including uh vouchers and that was the approach that met with the most favor from the
community and when we when we dealt with the the larger community we were able to get um five yes
votes, zero no votes, and one vote that abstained. Now, as part of our argument, you know, we've
been in touch with Councilperson Johnson's office. I'm not sure if a letter of support came through.
We were having a difficult time reaching them over the last few weeks, but we have dealt with
them on other projects, and we're seeking to work with Ms. Lynn Wilkins at Laborers and Housing,
and provides assistance within that district to facilitate projects like this.
Now, the owners are seeking to become part of the minority developer program
that works with PHDC to provide affordable housing projects.
This is a neighborhood in which the PHDC is active.
As an architect, I'm working with other clients in that same program
to provide additional affordable housing in this neighborhood.
It's a real priority.
The owners of this property own another property close by on the 1500 block of Ringgold
in which they currently accept housing assistance.
And that is something that they've committed to doing this property as well.
Here is the mailing that went out with the meeting date.
went out on January 18th for that February meeting.
Here is the firm book for the certified mailing.
A preliminary letter went out because we were not able to have a meeting date
within the 20-day timeline, so we provided that mailing as well.
We do have some zoning precedents.
There are some properties on the other side of Annan Street that take a similar approach.
I know these are pretty much impossible to read from the zoning archive at this point but
these received variances for multi-family these are four unit buildings on the other side of the
street which we believe are similar in character and we just with the community and then on the
And then on the other side of Federal Street, we've also got 2609 Federal and 2605 Federal.
other side of Federal Street we've also got 2609
Those are CMX, but they have received variances for multifamily housing, which we believe are similar to this variance.
We've got our appeal. We've got our project information, tax clearances for both properties.
And at this time, I would ask for Mr. Walker and Mr. Thomas to be admitted to adopt my testimony.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court sonography?
lionel thomas l-i-o-n-e-l t-h-o-m-a-s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed counsel
thank you good morning mr thomas do you do you adopt my testimony including my representations
and the documents provided?
Yes, I do.
Do you and your partner own other rental properties
that accept financial assistance,
including financial vouchers?
Yes, three in total right now,
and I'm well on the way.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson?
just briefly mr chair um mr lz you had mentioned and um we were going through the plans
that you were requesting a proviso contingent on approval for the was it the easement you said
yep moving the easement
yes i have as part of the exhibit the the original proposed so as part of the consolidation
We approved a survey district consolidation plan, but unfortunately, and kind of a little bit of a miscommunication with us and the surveyor, they kind of went ahead and just sort of left that easement in, which makes the building almost, one of our hardships working around that easement was nearly impossible for a sort of a combined building on this one.
So we are seeking to amend this approval with the easement running across the back and along the side, which resulted in that dimension for the rear yard setback.
Okay, so I thought because there was an amended refusal here, I thought the movement of the easement was part of the amended refusal.
so it is um and i let me know whether or not this proviso is is necessary or not um l and i is not
going to issue this permit until they have this updated plan i'm not aware of anything that would