okay so you we will show our slide deck yep can can you see our screen we we can it says we
propose converting and assisting okay reading boards to a four season room so there's already
a porch there and you will now want to make it a four season room that is correct um so I am
the owner of 8424 Navajo Street along with my husband um today to request a variance
to remain enclosed the screened in porch HVAC electric and windows where there are screens
okay this this view that you see here is the the proposed project it's not the way that it is now
obviously these are windows here um but it's essentially where you see windows there are
currently screens there and you'll see that on the next um sure why don't you move through the
documents okay uh this um yep we have that yeah so we were we submitted a um please please go back
no i just wanted to so we submitted from chestnut hill community association right
right so right so we had we were denied our um
we are considering a non-conforming structure as you mentioned
okay so when you maureen when you talk to the side we can't hear you so just if you can speak
straight ahead we're losing you when you go to the side i'm so sorry okay no you don't have to
i'm so sorry okay no you don't have to be sorry that's fine okay okay all right so we were denied
be sorry that's fine okay okay all right
um the permit because we're a non-conforming structure as you said so we are we are proposing
um um um a a um a four seasons room that you're going to enclose that right right and um realize
that we don't meet the setback but what this is why we need a variance to do that okay yep so all
why don't you show us your photos there show us some okay okay so um this page here there are the
five pictures that are on here three of them are of the home as it is existing now and you'll see
the screens there there's a front view a back view and a side view and then the other the two that
are over to the right and the site map they are the proposed structure so um it is a as mentioned
and existing screened in porch the roof is in place the the floor is in place we are essentially
not changing the footprint of that structure at all we're merely swapping out um
windows and and a track and all that nice stuff for um for the screens that are currently in place
did the architect draw this up for you yes he is he is on the call as well too
right why don't you show us his plans okay so that's um
this is another view um of one of his plans and um and then we have the next page here this is
this is a side view back view and then a front view
okay what else do you have here um
and that's the the overall site map of the property where there's no
if you look over to the right and um you see the the dashed line that is the area in
question and and all we're talking about doing is is not changing the size of that um area but
merely enclosing it as opposed to um screening so it's going to be the same size it was but it's
going to be screened in no it's going to be the same size that it was but it'll be um enclosed
in glass it's currently currently screened in all right do you have anything else to show us
um i think that's um i think that's it all right questions from the board
any questions uh just nicely done thank you
questions more attorney um just a clarification ms malloy um so i noticed on the letters from the
rco they indicated that there were changes to the plans or clarifications to the plans
but i wasn't clear what was revised and if there are revised plans that you're requesting the board
to stamp we do need a proviso form outlining those changes okay um go to the next one hang
on one second the um so um if you look at oh wait no go to the side this is the next one the one
that has all three of them okay you can see it here on the um and i know that i'm the one that's
supposed to speak, but if this, like I said, my architect is on the, our architect is on the call.
Is your architect on the line?
Is your architect on the line?
Yes, he is.
What's his name?
Neil Young.
Why don't we bring him?
No relation to the singer.
We're coming back in shortly as a panelist, Mr. Kay.
hi everybody this is neil can you hear me hi mr young could you please state your name
is bell for the stenographer neil young n-e-i-l-y-o-u-n-g do you swear or firm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do did you hear our attorney's question i did
could you please answer it sure the the only change that the um the historic commission had
requested was a detail of the capitals that are part of the proposed edition and it didn't it
didn't impact the size or um or area of the proposed um plan in any way it was it was a
minor detail basically a trim detail that they had asked us to revise so was it so so was something
did they just want clarification on what it would be,
did they just want clarification on what it would be or was there a change made on no they just
or was there a change made on-
Correct. No.
wanted clarification on on detailing of the of the of the capital um parliament base okay um and did
that result any changes to the plans that were submitted to l and i with this it did not okay
all right then i i don't think we need revised plans thank you so much for the clarification
right questions comments from the virtual audience
do not see any hands mr chair any commission
thank you chair and good morning david vecto f-e-c-t-e-a-u with the city planning committee
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir i do
please proceed sir thank you sir chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the rsd3 residential single family detached zoning at this location the appellant
requests three dimensional variances the variance for front setback reflects a current condition of
the structure and the appellant has shown that enclosing the existing porch will not injure the
use of adjacent properties the city planning commission recommends that the board grant
to be proposed dimensional variances. Thank you. MI 2025-004-111, 8424 Navajo Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes. Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes.
Tyo Nguyen, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you. Number three, MI 2025, 000400, 1113 Mount Vernon Street. Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Mr. Consul, could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
JOSEPH last name is consul that's c-o-n-s-o-l-e do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth I do Mr. Consul we understand this will be hold will be held
for a corrected or amended refusal and a proof of tax compliance yes um could you identify your
client in relationship to the property yeah uh my client is aj168 llc it's uh represented by mr
albert zhang and uh you should be on the call or getting on the call he's having some trouble
connecting but he's figuring it out and our vice chair has a few questions good morning have you
submitted your documents and exhibits five days in advance of this hearing yes and do you waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes okay you can proceed with your case
okay good morning board mr chairman my name is joseph consul and as mentioned i represent
the owner of 1113 mount vernon street uh with me on the call is albert zhang the representative of
the owner. We are here on an empty lot on Mount Vernon Street seeking a use variance to permit
a three-unit multifamily building on this vacant lot. This application involves one use refusal
only, which is multifamily household living in an RSA 5 district. No dimensional variances are
required our original ask uh and i'll discuss our discussions with the rco was for um six units
and pardon me it's the wrong one however we since have made uh adjustments to that
and are now asking for three did my exhibits for 11 13 come up yes okay great um
still learning how to do this in person so there it is originally with six dwelling units uh now
we've we've we're asking for three and we will amend the refusal uh accordingly
so uh there is our uh letter of support from the 14th community organization rco
with three provisos no limited lodging no household living in the basement and a maximum
of three dwelling units and they spoke about our interactions with them and uh there was their vote
support
our proof of mailing and i'll go through the details of the property in a second
We posted the photos twice here. The first posting was on December 17th.
we posted the photos twice
Bye-bye.
We received notice on December 31st. There's the deed that those postings have been taken down.
So we reposted on January. I believe it was Sunday.
this this past sunday we already have streets streets approval uh the curb cut is is existing
and so that won't change with our updated um refusal the uh lot is 2282 square feet
uh as it sits today obviously contributes nothing to the block we believe this proposal would uh
close a long-standing gap in the streetscape with a building that fits
uh both the scale and density of mount vernon street
um show you some of the plans
the external or the the top down plan of all the units um each of the units would have access to
entrances in both the front and the rear the uh rear entrance uh is to the left of the unit one
and they have access to the hallway, which would give you both access to the basement
and then access to units two and three above.
All three of the units are two bedrooms, two bathrooms.
The building itself would be, that's the same one,
approximately 35 feet in height,
which is consistent with the surrounding attack structures.
as per the request or uh the desires of the rco it will contain a red brick facade which
matches the character of mount vernon street as mentioned we have two means of egress for
uh each each of the units uh the means of egress by way of the um walk out to the back would give
each unit access to the trash storage room in the back, which is consistent with the other
properties on the block. Trash would then be taken to Lemon Street, which is where all the
cars park along the back of the properties that front Mount Vernon Street. This application is a
The product of a meaningful community engagement we first went to the neighbors in June of 2,025 with a 6 unit proposal that did not go over great.
They had submitted see if I have that as part of my yeah that they submitted this in June, noting that they did not reach an agreement on the application.
They graciously permitted myself and my team to return, and in November, we returned with a plan that cut the density in half from six units to three, and that resulted in the formal letter of support that you have before you.
In addition to the RCO support, we have a non-opposition from the next door neighbor.
excuse me this is the reporter i my audio has cut out is the audio working yes
Okay, I I could not hear Mr. console at all.
It just dropped off a few seconds ago. Okay, I'm hearing you now.
I'm repeating that attorney Mattione, who represents the property next door, which is a 5 unit building submitted an email this morning saying he does his client, the owner of the building will not oppose our our project.
So in addition to the RCO support, we have support from the next-door neighbor.
And finally, there's two other properties on the block that have in the past been approved for multifamily use.
1119 is a licensed three-unit property, and 1121 at one point was a licensed six-unit building.
So we believe because of all the large structures on this block that while I would say the majority of them now are single family homes, there's evidence in the past of there having been multifamily use.
evidence in the past of there having been multi-family use. There is multi-family use currently
and coupled with the fact that we had a very productive back and forth with the RCO and it
was not, there was no one in the room that said they wanted this to definitely be a single family
home because of the way the neighborhood's going. They thought that having access for folks to be
able to move in that would not be a multi-million dollar home on such a large lot was beneficial.
So with that, I'll call my client, Albert, to raise his virtual hand.
So one issue, I don't think we got, I saw the cars. Could you just show the drawings a little
bit more? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Owlzing has been promoted to panelists. Sir, could you please
state your name and spell for the stenographer sir hi can you hear me yeah could you please state
your name and spell for the stenographer it's albert zhang a-l-b-e-r-t last name zh-e-n-g
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, the whole truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Good morning, Albert. Did you hear my testimony just now?
Yes, yes, I heard it, all of it, yes.
About your lot on Mount Vernon?
Do you adopt what I said as your own?
Is there anything you'd like to add for the board?
I don't think you mentioned it's a street-to-street property.
Yeah, it's a fairly, you know, big lot, like you said.
but yeah that that's all i have to say yeah all right um nothing further pending public comment
as i know questions from the board there is one yeah is your client okay with the proviso for um
no limited lodging do you agree for no uh any kind of airbnb at all
none none so you agree with that proviso yes
so and then can you zoom out so we can see the entire plan all the plans with the parking
uh i i understand and was was clear with the architect that that likely wouldn't work for
three uh i'm just anticipating your concern michael but yes okay i mean you you you got it i mean you
the three cars and there's no way to get out of that wall i i i get it one of the cars barely fit
which it's it's why it was wide enough and approved for two um for some reason on the
revised plans i believe that was due to the i i don't even know why he stuck a third car in there
but there you go i have a question about the streets plan so has streets reviewed this and
the curb cut at the rear on Lemon Street, is it existing? It's an existing curb cut. The streets
have reviewed it. I don't believe we need to send them revised plans because nothing's changing
from that perspective. We're not occupying more of the footprint or anything of that nature.
And then what's the security gate that is proposed at the rear? Can you speak to that,
albert are you proposing a security gate yes uh i would add like it's yeah the security gate
well you have one i'm just asking like could you explain what it like what kind of gate
okay one it looks hard to work for parking and two it's different than all the other ones that
are on lemon street currently so on the plan is that how it should be uh how the gate is like
zigzag is that how it's supposed to be i mean a gate could be zigzag it depends what gate you get
i mean i mean it's gonna be like a uh like those metal gates where it comes up and down
like the garage door yeah yeah exactly
i think my only concern with lemon street is it's a very narrow street mount vernon's also
very narrow street and there's um as a house right across the street on like uh lemon street now and
it looks tight like even on the google map images it looks like there's a lot of people that are
you know illegally parking on the sidewalk right there so it just there's no other houses on the
interior of the block that seem to have parking at the rear most of the houses that have parking
at the rear are closer to the edges of the block so i was a little concerned about navigating cars
in and out and being able to i mean i have a family friend that lives on 11 23 and i go there
you know quite often um so it's pretty much the same thing i you know parking is pretty
parking is pretty pretty easy because people be you know parking on the pavement on the left side
pretty easy because people will be you know parking on the paper
so it's it's pretty easy to get in actually it's not that bad and then what's your plan for the