So, they all be by right. Okay, correct? Okay. Can't hear you. Can't hear you. You're right. Um, I was saying the, the red is showing an easement alley and is it shared just for those 3 parcels or the entire block and a 4th parcel at 1937.
so they all be by right okay correct
in the alley of the basement.
any funding to it and have you talked to the adjacent property owners about the subdivision
so evan 1937 there was common ownership is that right yeah we we presented at ecna at the rco
and we we discussed it at length the the immediate immediate neighbors were not there though
actually night i'm sorry 1937 is is aware of the product project the immediate neighbor
to the other side of the team 33 i guess it is or i guess there's one on each side okay
other questions questions from our attorney not at this time mr chair comments from the virtual
audience i do not see any hands mr chair thank you planning commission welcome madison
matera planning commission staff the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rm1
residential multi-family zoning at this location the proposed lot sizes are in harmony with the
surrounding area and the configuration is in the spirit of the zoning code planning commission
recommends the board grant the requested variance for minimum lot size thank you mi 2026 000 267
1935 east huntington street i vote yes michael johns my vote is yes
cheryl gaston my vote is yes ryan mcadams my vote is yes i win my vote is yes thank you very
much have a great afternoon you too number 12 mi 2026 000 291 47 14 griscom street verne anastasio
is the attorney there's not opposition from council member lazada and support from the rco
don't be coming back in as the panel control there he is good afternoon mr chair council
you've already been sworn today just for the record state your name vern anastasio anastasio
on behalf of my client mr mark brown okay our uh board secretary has a few questions thank you
um good afternoon council afternoon did you submit your documents and exhibits five days
in advance of this hearing?
I have.
And do you waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Then you can share your screen
and begin your presentation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
The property in question was purchased by my client, and it was already built out by the previous owner as far as framing is concerned.
So what my client would like to do is, in fact, finish it up, and when doing so, it would become a five-family dwelling.
This is the property in question exterior.
Here's the interior.
And we'll show you some plans as well.
Just so we know here, unit one is the basement, 737 square feet.
Unit two is 422 square feet.
Unit three on the first floor will be 546.
Unit four will be 503.
And unit five will be 500.
You can see the plot. Here's your aerial view, your plot, and the interior layout drawn to scale.
I can zoom in if you'd like.
you can see the lower basement unit you enter to the side
kitchen living area two bedrooms and a full bath
We have a rear entrance to unit three, open concept with a full bath, two additional bedrooms.
we have a rear entrance to unit three
You got this unit in the front, the kitchen, two bedrooms and a full bath.
Then the second floor, two additional units, one in the front and one in the rear.
We also have an attic with laundry area and mechanicals.
This is the refusal, dated 12-18-2025, and the project information form.
Here's the taxes, here's the rental license that was active, effective 224-2026.
The internal, there's the proof that the purchase was just, you know, several months ago, October, 2025.
And as the RCO letter indicates, the work that was done was done with permits.
I'm also going to share something else here for you.
That's not what I want. Hold on.
So the request is for five dwelling units, there'll be no new construction exterior-wise, and there will, of course, be one sprinkler system.
There's a 75-year history of multi-use on the property as far back as 1948.
There was a multiple mixed-use commercial structure.
In 1965, there were five units.
There were two dental offices, an optometrist, and a two-family dwelling.
So this historically has, in fact, been multi-use for quite some time,
which is another reason why the RCO felt compelled to send a letter of non-opposition, as did Councilmember Lozada.
MVMDE LLC is going to be the property management.
As you can see here, here are the five units broken down, again, with the different square footage, the bedrooms and the baths.
Unit one basement has a dedicated entrance from the rear.
There's two street facing entrances for the first floor.
and then there's interior stair access for the unit 4 and unit 5.
We're moving all of this into evidence as well.
And we have two binders.
This one is a 21-pager that we're also submitting into evidence.
With that, I'd like Mr. Brown to...
We're going to question before he comes on.
What does the block look like?
Say it again. What's the rest of the block look like there's vacancies and there are some boarded up properties. There's vacant lots. And of course, there's also multifamily dwellings, including single families, a couple single families on the block as well.
Okay, thank you. Why don't you bring your client on?
And with that, I'd like to call Mr. Brown. You could raise his virtual hand. Thank you.
that we were joining as a panama sir thank you welcome
yellow hello can you hear me hi sir could you please state your name is spelled for the
stenographer name is mark brown m-a-r-k-b-r-o-w-n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
told truth nothing but the truth i do could you turn your video on mr brown
thank you
mr brown um i'm sorry mr chairman may i proceed yeah sure oh thank you mr brown uh did you hear
my presentation to the board this afternoon yes i did is it true and accurate to the best of your
knowledge yes it is do you adopt it as your own testimony yes i do thank you do you have
have anything to add mr brown to the uh for the board's consideration um not really this property
was was purchased i mean in october of last year it's a very large compared to um very large
property um as as you can see it was of um various uses throughout the years it was never really used
as a single family property in its entire existence i mean as mr um vernon said that
I mean, as Mr. Vernon said, there's quite a few different properties on the block.
There's quite a few different
There is an open lot beside me.
There is also large multifamilies further down the block as well.
There are mid-block, and there's also single families.
There's really a mixture of quite a few different properties on the block.
But again, given the history, go ahead, Vernon.
Thank you, Mr. Vernon.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
yeah um yeah just one general comment i think the units are too dense i don't think they work at all
for two bedrooms for each one of those units even even your plan just says kitchen doesn't say
kitchen living you can you don't have you know it doesn't it doesn't work in terms of a living space
so it's just uh just too dense in my opinion
other questions yeah i mean i'm looking at the history and it looks like this is
for a long time only been a two family uh apartment like building so like we're going
from two to five and i think that's like a really big shift a question that i have is
like what's the width of the alley that's now two of the units are being accessed from
sort of about it's about five feet it's about five feet yes okay and then all units will have access
to that backyard yes all units have access to the backyard truly it's through the alley
okay and then what's the plan for splitting the mechanicals and for the two separate boundary
areas well the mechanicals the the idea is for the basement to have the mechanicals for
for two of the apartments and the attic to have the remaining okay and they're already in place
no no nothing is in place nothing in place nothing is in place everything is just it's right now is
just whatever you see in the pictures that's all that's there so it's still reframed yes
still reframed okay um i mean then i will i think reiterate i do agree that uh that there could be
more living space. I do think these are very dense with not a lot of public space for like
the units. And I feel like if you're hoping for families, that's going to make these really hard
to be viable housing units. If the board is inclined to grant a variance for a number of
units that are less than what Mr. Brown is proposing, he certainly would prefer that to
uh a denial thank you thank you what's what was the width of that side yard again the side alley
the side five my boy five feet you've got five feet so once you do light wells out of those
out of the basement bedroom i don't think you have enough room for a walkway
um what is the size of the units i'm sorry i couldn't hear the square footage for the units
oh yeah i went over that at the beginning i'll bring it up again for you it's right
it's right on the screen it's right there okay they range from 422 to 737. all right thank you
are you determining the occupants because they're all the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms
well that's going to be subject to the lease i understand that but you've got it listed here as
three and four like these are all the same bedrooms and bathrooms but like one is 200
almost 250 square feet bigger than the other i think it's mr brown's intention to at least
to know more than it's really it's really really just based on the number of bedrooms i think when
we did the initial drawing from the architect that's basically as it was listed but if it's
a two-bedroom it's only going to be ready to a two as a somebody told it to our events
i think a two-bedroom would be four no questions but i just want to note um mr anastasia i don't
think we got your we've gotten piecemeal documents for this and not your packet so if you could
upload that by close of business tomorrow so we have your complete packet that would be great
thank you yeah i send it to mr haggarty but i'll do the same yep questions or comments from the
virtual audience mr chair i do not see any further hands planning commission madison matera planning
commission staff the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from the
existing rsa 5 residential single family to rm1 residential multifamily this property was remapped
from cmx2 to rm1 in 2014 according to the recommendation in the district plan and was
later remapped again in our to rsa5 in 2017. under the recommended zoning of rm1 they would
to RSA 5 in 2017. Under the recommended zoning of RM1, they would be allowed 5 units based on
the size of this lot. The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested
variance for 5 dwelling units. William Moore, obviously there's been some questions raised,
so what I'm going to do is we'll take this to executive session next Wednesday morning,
and I'll vote at 2 p.m. next Wednesday. William Moore, Thank you. William Moore, Thank you.
William Moore, For the record, this is targeted for RM1 use. Is that correct?
pardon me this property is tagged for rm1 use a designation in the future that's what the
planning commission has said is that correct yep thank you all right thanks all um all right
i think we got one more here mi 2026 000 855 1664 conklin street um mr consul is our attorney
um there's not opposition from with the hick and neighbors and non-opposition from council member
Lozada I'll be back in as a panelist the council uh I just warned you earlier today could you just
state your name for the record attorney Joseph council could you identify your client the
relationship for property cynthia buffington and she's the owner of prima casa sessa llc
and our um board secretary has a few questions good afternoon counsel did you submit your
documents and exhibits five days in advance of this year i did and do you wait the reading of
the refusal and stipulate total purchase i do and you can share your screen and be getting a
presentation thank you all right last one of this docket joe's up i'm here on 1664 conklin street
uh as i mentioned cynthia buffington is on the call hopefully uh she owns prima casa sessa llc
which is the owner of this property uh as noted on the screen we're here seeking
approval for a two-family dwelling. As noted, lower down on the screen in 1985, this was granted
approval for a two-family dwelling, but as it notes, the permit was not picked up. So there's
the variance that was granted in 1985 for two units. Property was built as such, but they never
picked up the use permit. And we have some decent background about this property because
my client's been involved in it since that 1985 date. The property in 1985 was owned
by her ex-husband and her former mother-in-law. They went to the ZBA, got the variants, but
didn't pick up the permit, as mentioned. And for decades, it operated as a single-family residence
with an antique bookshop in one of the units on the lower floor. And I'll show you the pictures.
That does not appear to have been licensed, but it was lived in by the family that owned it.
But at some point, my client got divorced, and her and her partner, who's now deceased,
purchased the property from her ex-family members. So not super convoluted, but the point is she's
been involved with it since the beginning. So as you'll see in the photos in a second,
the property is still set up as two units. It's perfectly move-in ready quality. She's kept it
really nice. And we don't believe that there's too much to discuss here. So there's the exterior
of the property. It's our proof of mailing. Some more exterior photos showing where they store the
trash in the side yard. This is the first apartment which functioned as an antique book shop. My
client cynthia is an antique books dealer and that has that operation has been moved somewhere else
going upstairs we'll go going to the basement pardon me
now we're upstairs at apartment two
We also included the deed project information form and she does not have a tax clearance
we also included the deed
at the moment.
We do have a tax balance of a credit on the property.
We're going to get the clearance.
There was some issues with her LLC not having filed something or other, but she's rectifying
that so we understand the vote has to be uh held but um this is the only property that llc owns
and um she got it when her former partner died and the estate transferred it to her llc
so with that if um if cynthia's on the call could you raise your hand
They're coming back in as a panelist council, Mr. Chair.
Hi, do you see and hear me?
Cynthia Buffington, C-Y-N-T-H-I-A, Buffington, B as in bird, U-F-F as in fish, I-N-G-T-O-N.
I do, and I should tell you that I am not hearing everyone quite clearly.
What's that?
what's that yeah there's a coming through it sounds like
and faintness for some speakers not all okay mr council uh uh uh uh uh just now
I don't think so.
My phone is nearby, though.
Let me turn it off.
Does that make a difference?