can you hear me yes what are you presenting can you see a google shot of the site are you just
showing pictures i'm showing a picture and a diagram okay so we didn't get it yet can you
click the share screen button at the bottom sure here we go you see it because yeah i did get the
blue ring around it you can see it yes now we see it thank you all right so uh here's the context
uh this is sunny side coming down here conrad this is the street in question and the property
division street um these uh most of the neighbors and if any of them here are still at the
meeting, it's a lot later than they're expecting, live in all these two-story homes, these three-story
homes on Conrad, and the owner of these three units here is also present. People who have been
living in these houses for generations, many of them, have been used to this being front to back
100 feet deep. These are 1500 square foot lots. At some point these three homes, their backyards
are subdivided and a low-level garage was developed here and it became a separate lot.
I can tell you that if the neighbors knew or had any control at the time of this lot being zoned
residential it would not have happened and they didn't even know about it until this proposal
came through so everyone was like shocked because they're just used to this pretty much an open
space east falls most backyards they go back 30 40 feet they have trees here you can see trees
trees trees trees uh people here park in division street it's one way in one way out which is why
you see cars on the sidewalk the first proposal uh that came in from the new boat group was larger
than what you see presented on my screen it was built out to the full lot it was three 600 square
Excuse me, could we limit your testimony to what is now currently being proposed?
Right. So this is the impact on the surrounding homes.
I'm going to object to this. This is speculative. And while I understand that Mr. Langer is conveying
his opinion, these drawings don't have dimensions. So I can't tell whether or not they're in fact
to scale and our accurate representations of the size and the impact.
And they look considerably larger than what is being proposed.
And I understand you may be doing that for effect, but let me ask the question.
The properties across the street from the proposed development, those two-story units,
what is the height of those? Does anyone know?
Yeah, they're about 22 feet.
22 feet high. And then further down the street, there are some three-story on that block?
down here yep they're about 30 feet okay 32 feet they're all lower than well their proposal is for
Well, the proposal is for 33 feet, 6 inches.
33 33 feet 6 inches
No, the proposed project, the height, and correct me if I'm wrong, Sarah, is 33 feet, 6 inches?
Mr. Chairman, you're correct.
Okay, can I explain that, please?
I don't know what's to explain.
It's 33, 6 inches to the roof.
okay there's a parapet that's required to be 42 inches tall by code which takes the apparent
height from the street up to 40 37 feet so the height has been reduced from 42 to 37
i'm the chair of this committee and i'm representing neighbors here
i understand that we're letting you testify right so chair i'm sorry to interrupt very kindly i
I would like to mention that we do have quite a couple other people wish to testify, as well as other cases listed, but it's still your call.
I hear you. Could you get to the crux of what the opposition is, sir?
The crux of the opposition is that the proposed development is still too high, considering the narrowness of the street and the fact that the adjacent properties are two-story.
this is an extreme hardship
for the neighbors
and we would like them to come back
and continue negotiation
until we can get a scheme
that the neighbors will accept
okay but you will admit that on the
I don't know what street that is again
there are three story homes
not the vision street
on the side
sunny side is that
Conrad here there's three-story homes but they do not go up to 37 feet.
How many stories is this project? We're proposing three stories. Three stories.
I'm talking, could someone bring up that map again? The aerial photograph?
I'd like to say that I'm in this business so usually my eyeballing is pretty accurate.
That's great. Thank you for bringing up the burial. I would not want to be exaggerating it.
the street that runs perpendicular to division
conrad's what is that that would be conrad's this street here would be conrad street
and division is is right there so there's a number of three-story homes on conrad correct
Yes, that's correct.
Leading into the vision.
In the rear, there's one house that goes back,
actually two or three houses that go back pretty far on Conrad.
All right.
All right.
We are really pressed for time here,
and I'm not suggesting this is not important to the RCO and people living there.
so is there anyone who has else could testify who hasn't something new and different if not
we're going to have to continue this case okay chair we have someone named sean kilroy with
their hand up kilroy please identify yourself with a record and i'll swear you in hello can
you hear me yes sir hello my name is sean kilroy uh 3421 conrad street and are you one of the houses
on conrad between uh division and what's the other one again sunny side that is correct
and looking at the aerial shot your house is on the right hand side
uh looking at the aerial shot uh you can see my address 3421 on the roof uh of the dark roof on
Conrad. Okay. That's a single-family home? No, that is three two-bedroom apartments.
What is the height of that building? Do you know? I don't know, sir.
But it's three stories? Yep.
Is it recent? Has it been built recently? Oh, no, no. It's over 100 years old. Okay. All right.
Your testimony? Yes. My name is Sean Kilroy. I'm at 3421 Conrad Street with my rear driveway
Yes, my name is Sean Kilroy. I'm at 3421 Conrad Street with my rear driveway directly adjacent to this proposed project. I oppose the building of two three-story houses at this location. In fact, I oppose the building of any new housing here.
direct
There's no other housing on the northwest side of Division Street, and there never has been.
Division Street is a very small street with no exit.
One enters Division from Conrad Street, then has to exit the same way by reversing out.
This block cannot accommodate any more houses.
In fact, the structure that currently sits on this plot is a one-story cinder block building with three garage doors.
However, no car can park inside this building because the street is so small it's impossible for a vehicle to turn and enter here.
Please do not allow any houses to be built here.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
How do the cars that are on the alcohol pads on the rear of these houses, how do they get in and out?
Well, they get in and out by they drive in and then they back out and come out.
But because of how close this structure is to the street, you can't make the turn there.
Like you can't turn into the garage doors of the existing structure.
And no car will be able to park in there, you're saying?
It's my belief, sir.
I think that'd be a question for the streets department.
All right.
I think we're going to have to continue this case.
And Sarah, from what Mr. Hillary said,
I'm not sure if your client is willing to continue to engage in conversation with the RCO.
You know, with regard to engaging in conversation with the RCO,
we've had multiple meetings on this project and we've made considerable compromise um we're happy
to continue to discuss with them um as always remain committed to compromise however i just
wanted to be known for the record that there's a difference between compromise and capitulation
and i think here what the rco has been asking for is for them to design our project for us
which is not
I hear you
just because no houses were ever on that side
of the street doesn't mean there can't be houses
on that side of the street
I think
I don't understand that but
in any event
do we still have
more people on this case Tanya
or Yvette
yes there are three more people here with their hands
the three people is there anybody who is
in support of this
If they are, please keep your hand up.
If not.
And do you have one person with a hand up, Chair?
Okay, please identify yourself with a record.
Name and address.
You can unmute yourself and speak.
Name and address and I'll swear you in.
Ms. Morris?
yes my name is oh i'm sorry my name is linda nariz i'm a resident of 3422 division street
i lived here for 50 years swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
so help me god okay please proceed yes looking talking about this garage i remember when that
garage was built if you can look in the back of the garage there's three apartments they were
built for those three apartments for the tenants to to park in there but it end up the owner that
owned the houses put it into a metal shop making aluminum awnings which the neighbors didn't want
early in the morning so that stopped so then they i don't know when it got self-divided we were
shocked about this but one important thing you must know this is a dead-end street and it's going
be a very big inconvenience with all this development and things going up and uh if people
won't be able to come in and out do their daily routines and trash and deliveries and another
thing it's important to know is with this garage and the proposed plan is them apartments they'll
be looking right that's in their backyard so you're looking at maybe 12 feet maybe i don't
know the exact measurements but it's good it's not fair to the residents who live
to them three apartments where the garages are it's typical of any row house neighborhood
no this is memory in the backyard i understand what you're saying all right i hear you but i'm
just saying there is a letter of opposition from the councilman too with this yeah and many
neighbors since we stayed on all day i'm sure there was many neighbors on who opposed this also
with good reason. I wish they would have stayed on and speak. So if we can continue this, I'd
appreciate it because it's not a good fit for this community. It's overdeveloped as it is.
because it's not a good fit for this
community. It's overdeveloped
as it is.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. Have a good evening.
I don't know. I mean, I'd like to
continue it, but it sounds to me like they don't want
anything developed there. That's what it
sounds like. That's what it sounds like.
Any suggestions from the board?
I'm worn out.
we should I think we should I think we should vote it I think you should I think we should vote it
we can vote it we can vote it all right uh planning commission
Ariel DiLiberto from the planning commission um Sarah you mentioned that there's no longer
a variance needed for the rear yard could you just show that in your materials of course thank you
So, just to show, this is the newly proposed structure, which shows a seven-foot deep rear
yard as required. And I would also note that the revised plans were delivered to
council for the VBA, Ms. Sharon Saleta, and the seven-foot rail yard is also noted as a
change on the revised plan. Thank you for showing that. Our recommendation,
the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single-family use.
the proposed variances are not necessary to enable viable economic use of the property
we do not believe that a hardship exists that would require the subdivision of this property
to two lots keeping the parcel one lot fulfills the required lot size for rsa5 zoning
the front access parking variance conflicts with the adopted comprehensive plan and related zoning
code updates we recommend that the board deny the variance i have one question for sarah
uh has the street department approved the curb cut have you gotten that far yet uh
yes um i do not the streets department approved the curb cut um in the initial plan when there
where there were three where there were that's normally the way it is i just was curious
all right uh here yes this is tanya again and i um just want to mention um that there are three
other individuals requesting to testify but of course it is your call but i just want to let
you know that they are mentioning in the chat that they wish to testify so it's your call
what is it what what what would if we do a resumption hearing when would that be
um we can march 3rd at three uh two two o'clock no no that would be 3 30 3 30 i meant to say i'm
I'm sorry, okay, am I-
We can come back on March 3rd
if that would please the board.
Say that again.
Mr. Chairman, we'd be happy to come back on March 3rd
if that would please the board
to allow all the neighbors to testify.
We'll do that, thank you.
MI 2020-002459, 3445 Division Street.
the hearing will be resumed on march the 3rd at 3 30 p.m at which time we will consider any