So what's in the proviso letter from the meeting is what we understood.
Thank you very much.
Appreciate you taking the time to call.
is there anyone else in the audience see no hands chair planning commission thank you chairman and
good morning david effecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this
location the city rezoned this neighborhood in 2014 in accord with recommendations in the
comprehensive plan. There is no unique physical condition or circumstances of this 1,378 square
foot lot that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the zoning code.
The city planning commission recommends the board deny their proposed use variance for two
dwelling units. Okay. Mr. Chair, if I may, and of course I respect Mr. Fecto's input. If we were
to build a single family home on this quite large lot, it would sit vacant. It's unaffordable
given this current market conditions. It's a corner where the Planning Commission typically
encourages multifamily, and that's what we're trying to do here. Thank you. All right. So,
Vern, what we're going to do is I'm going to vote on this next Wednesday at 930. I just want to
discuss with the board a couple of the issues relative to the case.
I think the only the issue at maybe a controversy is the bedrooms in the basement, as Mr.
Johns noted, the basement.
I think I heard Mr.
Johns.
I heard Mr.
Johns.
And that first floor does have a den, I suppose, could be a basement.
But that but if we if we eliminate those bedrooms down there, we're encouraging more transient
Thank you.
OK, good.
So we will we will have this ready to go next Wednesday at 930.
And Vern, while you're here, why don't you stay and I'll do your last case.
That sounds great.
Thank you, by the way, for everybody involved in that case.
Let's see here.
So number 15, MI2025-000394-2026 South 5th Street.
Vern, just for the record, state your name.
Vern Anastasio on behalf of Mr. Mohamed El-Lacy.
And there's a, let's see here. There's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla, and I think he sent a second letter. And we don't have an RCO letter, but there was a notice sent to the neighbors. Am I correct?
No, you have a handwritten letter from the RCO chair that was sent.
All right, good. Thank you.
So just to confirm, we do have that previous letter that was submitted by the RCO.
Why don't you start?
And then this new piece of evidence, I believe this is a reconsideration.
I saw that.
And our, Tanetta has just a few questions for you.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Have you submitted your documents five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
And do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
You may show your screen and proceed with your case.
Thank you.
Being this is a reconsideration, could you, this is the way we'd like to do it.
you present your supplemental information that will then quote questions from the board and
the council public testimony and we'll see if planning has any changes thank you okay
mr chair i'd just like to note for the record that the evidence and testimony from the april
30th hearing in this matter are incorporated into the record for this hearing and the scope as you
noted of this hearing is limited to the presentation of evidence regarding the prior use of the
property that was not presented to the board at the April 30th hearing. Thank you. Thank you.
That was not presented to the board at the April 30th hearing.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Included in that evidence, Mr. Chair, thank you all, by the way, for hearing this again,
including in that previous testimony is signatures from the immediate neighbors in support on the block.
As you said, the letter of support from Council Member Squilla, two letters,
and of course the vote tally and letter of support from the RCO.
There was some question as to the longevity of this, and we have a letter dated from Emil Damsik, who lives right next door.
A letter from Emil. He's a resident of 2028, which is right next door to 2026, South Philly.
And it clearly shows that for as long as he has been there, at least over the past 11 years, it has been common knowledge among all neighbors that the property is a multifamily duplex.
He wants to confirm that to his personal knowledge, it's operated that way for the
entire duration of his residency in the neighborhood. He has had the opportunity
to be inside the property and can attest that is configured and used as an operating duplex
with two distinct living units. That's from the immediate neighbor, a letter that may not have
been reviewed previously. We wanted to make sure you saw that in context with overwhelming support.
And I do believe the Planning Commission's recommendation that this board grant this variance.
And with that, I'm going to shut up and answer any questions.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
I just want to note for the record that the prior recommendation of the Planning Commission was to deny the requested variance.
but I will defer to planning if there is any additional comments they wish to offer.
Thank you. I must have misremembered. Should have shut up sooner.
There are two electric meters and two everything else.
I got it. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission, do you want to change your or have another comment?
Chairman, thank you for the opportunity. We'll stand on our previous recommendation.
Thank you.
okay thank you so mi 2025 000 394 2026 south fish street i vote yes
michael johns my vote is yes cheryl gaston my vote is yes
ty when my vote is no
you have your votes thank you um number seven mi 2025 001
835-436-40
East Wyoming. Darlene
Threat is the attorney.
There is a letter of unanimous
support from the 42nd Ward
and a letter of non-opposition
from Council Member Lozada.
Darlene Threat
is coming in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning, Commissioners. Darlene Threat
on behalf of the applicant
owner, Esam Sarama.
Darlene, could you please state your name again and spell for the sonographer?
Darlene Threat, D-A-R-L-E-N-E, Threat, T as in Thomas, H-R-E-A-T-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Danetta Graham, our board member, has a few questions.
Good morning.
Have you submitted your documents five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did submit the documents five days in advance, but yesterday I uploaded the community
letter.
Okay, thank you.
And do you waive the reading letter of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
When I filed the application, it was accurate, but currently I am withdrawing the request
for the consumer goods on the first floor, unbeknownst to me that was previously permitted.
So it's not a subject of my presentation today.
Okay, thank you.
You can share your screen and proceed with your case.
I'm sorry, Ms. Threet, can I just get a clarification, because I did see the by-right permit, but
it seems to me that the reason for the, well, it says referral, but I think it should be
a refusal for the commercial space was because it occupied more than 2,000 square feet of
gross floor area, which is not permitted in CMX1.
So I understand the use is permitted by right, and you have a permit for the use, but my reading of the refusal was that a variance was needed for a floor area in excess of 2,000 square feet.
Ms. Emerson, I'm going to show you as part of my presentation.
Unbeknownst to me, and subsequent to filing, I had to file the application twice.
I had to file the application twice. There was a zoning use permit applied for by the owner, and it was granted. Here's a copy of it, 2523.
There was a zoning use permit.
No, I understand that, but since that was back in 2023, it appears that a variance was needed because the use is in excess of 2,000 square feet. Can you confirm that, or do you have an idea of how many square feet the use is?
Ms. Emerson, I don't want to make a misrepresentation to the board, and I can't represent to you that it is under 2,000 square feet.
I do have the owner on the line.
He is the one that applied for the permit, and I'm sure he can address that question for you.
That would be very helpful.
Thank you.
When you get there.
Could you please promote Mr. Esam Sarama to the line now?
Mr. Sarama, can you raise your virtual hand?
Mr. Sarama
Mr. Sarama
please raise your virtual hand
Darlene why don't you start your proposal
and we'll see if we can find him.
Okay, good afternoon, Commissioners.
I'm Darlene Threatt,
and I'm representing Mr. Esam Sarama
in this application
in front of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
We have an address of 436 to 440 East Wyoming today.
I would like to note for the board
that that is three property addresses.
We applied originally for an application
to legalize five units
and a consumer goods store on the first floor.
We received a refusal,
and I filed an appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I have the syllabus here today, which concerns 13 exhibits and 41 pages.
I'll start my presentation.
I filed a use application permit with the board, excuse me, with license and inspections.
Thereafter, I filed the appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I did put in the use permit that was issued for the consumer goods on the first floor on 2423, and I'll try to have Mr. Sarama address that a little later.
I just wanted to show the board a little map here, and I couldn't actually present, I mean,
cop, excuse me, print the certifications, but I did want the board to note that this
property has been approved and had a fire alarm certification approval for the last
four to five years.
I put in a little property information just to show you some details of the property.
what i really would like you to note that it's real mixed commercial residential and then it's
a very large property with a 6 30 square feet of improvement area
uh here's uh tax information showing that the taxes are clear and they've been paid up to date
Here is a deed in the property to Isan Sarama in 2019.
I wanted to put this partial map in here just to show the board that this is our property here.
It is a CMX-1.
The closest residential district is a RSA-5.
As we know, the RSA-5 only allows for a one-unit commissioners.
we're here today seeking two additional units. We do have three property addresses and I'm seeking
the legalization of five units. I would also like you to note that almost across the street
diagonally is a CMX2. The area is the same. The commercial uses here are all the same. The zoning
designation is different. If in fact this was a CMX2, we would be allowed to have about seven
units here as a matter of right here is a picture of how the front of the store looks this is a
corner property you can see the three roof areas here for the 36 38 and 40 addresses down on the
bottom is a commercial facility it operates not the whole bottom floor but certainly a good portion
it operates not the whole bottom floor but certainly a good portion of the bottom floor
i'm going to switch over to the plan here and let me just reduce it a little bit
i'll enlarge it again a little later so uh let me just
there we go so this is a site plan of the property you can see it's on the corner
that there are actually three different addresses it fronts uh east wyoming and the side street
Marlene, could you speak up just a little bit, maybe pull the mic up?
This is a corner property.
You can see there are three addresses here.
It's front.
Can you hear me, Commissioner?
It fronts Wyoming, and the side street is actually Hurley Street.
I'm going to move over to the plan now and show you the setup of the property.
so here would be actually Wyoming Street and you could actually enter this building on the front