and that has been lost with this change in the scheme which is one continuous long building
one could argue it's two buildings joined by a bridge or you could argue the opposite but
clearly you can walk from one end of the site to the other on the third through the sixth floors
and that's around 450 feet it's a very long imperfect building the only opening now that's
available for anyone to get through to from main street to the riverside is a 20 foot wide
access way that goes only up 12 feet before it comes in contact with the bridge and that means
it's a significant loss of connection with the river frontage also i'll point out on the street
level plan which i didn't the landscape plan there is a fence and gate shown across that opening so
the building can be locked off which was part of the discussion in the testimony and questions from
Ms. Gaston in the July 16th hearing.
I'm sorry, this is not my 10 minutes.
Here's the proposed elevation, and I want you to look at this closely
and compare it with the conceptual renders at the end of this presentation.
Here you can see the bottom elevation is almost a continuous wall of building,
which is relatively repetitive.
It's Stone Pier glass block opening, Stone Pier glass block opening.
The glass blocks are not transparent.
They're translucent, but they're not transparent.
This is supposed to be at the eastern end of the building, a flood-proof ground floor, or first floor, as we would call it.
There has been testimony from the flood manager for the city, who called in to the July 16th meeting,
which questioned that flood proofing.
And we question it also because there are two types of flood proofing.
There's wet flood proofing and there's dry flood proofing.
Mr. Laver in his testimony four times referred to dry flood proofing of the first floor.
Dry flood proofing is an attempt to make the building substantially watertight.
And the Association of Civil Engineers, we sent this through in a letter to you on Friday, cites that, and Mr. Labour is aware of this, that really three feet of floodproofing is only really a reasonable attempt of floodproofing, three feet high, and four feet is probably the maximum.
Here, the floodproofing required to make this ground floor, the commercial space and the egress spaces is 10 feet.
And so it's just probably impossible to design this first floor of the building to be watertight and floodproof, as is indicated.
And the reason that is, you know, obviously very problematic for the commercial spaces, which Mr. Al-Haddad has suggested he would occupy.
But it also is where all three lobbies and elevators from the building come down to street level.
That means to say that during a flood of probably more than four feet, all the egress rooms and doors in and out of this building will be inundated and flooded.
And therefore, when we come to look at the evacuation protocol and procedure, it might work in terms of getting people out, some of the people out.
But once those people are out, there is no way for them to get back in the building until the whole of Main Street, lower Main Street, has been secured and all the debris and wreckage, et cetera, removed.
And then when the street is open and Hurricane Ida, that took almost a week.
And only then can the public be allowed back into the building.
And then the recovery of the damaged stairs, the doors, the elevators, which will have to be re-inspected and certified, will have to take place.
And our question is, where do all the people and the cars go during that period if they are successfully evacuated?
It's not one day. It's much, much more than that. It's much more disruptive.
So we feel that this scheme is unachievable to safely and securely evacuate people, but it also would be a total disruption of the permanent residence, which is proposed here on the upper floors.
of their permanent residence, which is proposed here on the upper floors.
I'm sorry I'm going on beyond your 10 minutes, Mr. Bergman, but I'm trying my hardest here to go through it.
So let me tell you, John, what we're going to do.
Our board member has to step out.
I'm going to stop now and bring you both back at 11 a.m.
Yeah, sure.
All right.
Adam Slaver, is that okay?
Of course, Mr. Chairman.
Yeah, it's just something we'll do.
So what we'll do is we'll, John, we're going to start right where you're leaving off.
And we'll see you at 11 o'clock.
All right.
That's fine.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Go to number seven.
I'm seven here.
MI 2024-005-782-916-WestFisher.
Clemente Amazon is the attorney.
There's unanimous support from Logan Civic Association.
Seven near neighbors also involved in the 12 that was for it.
Good morning, counsel.
could you please state your name? It's spelled for the court stenographer. Good morning,
chairman and members of the board. Clementa Amazon, that's spelled C-L-E-M-E-N-T-A. Last
name is spelled A-M-A-Z-A-N. You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Could you identify your client and relationship to the
property? My client is the owner of the property, Markins Coriolan. Our vice chair has a few
questions. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree
to waive the read and other refusal or stipulate
to its accuracy? Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and
exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I
have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed
and share your screen. Thank you.
again good morning my name is clemente amazon i am the representative for the property owner
markens coriolan today i'll be presenting 916 west fisher avenue during my presentation i will
go through the refusal. As the chairman mentioned, we do have a letter of unanimous support from the
RCO who we met with on November 11th. This is a pre-existing use. So in my presentation, you will
notice that we do have a current rental license as well as a zoning permit that was issued for
this property back in 2022. Maps of the area, exterior photos, posting photos, as well as
interior photos of the property. The notice that was sent to the community regarding the meeting,
the certificates of mailing showing that notice was in fact sent out in a timely manner,
our application for appeal, project information form, as well as the deed and certificate of tax
clearance. This is property that is zoned RSA 5. As you will see in the notes, it did have a history
or excuse me, it does have a history of multifamily duplex use that was granted back in 1946 by the
board. In 2015, my client purchased the property. He then went on to request a zoning variance for
visitor accommodation use in an existing structure. At that time, there was a temporary
variance, which was set to expire on December 1st, 2024. We are here today to renew that use.
We are asking that the variance be granted without a time restriction. In the event that the board
decides that it is required to include a time restriction, we are requesting five years at a
minimum. This is a property that has been self-managed by my client. There have been
no issues by the neighbors. There has been unanimous community support every time my
client has requested for this use. So again, we are requesting that the use be granted
without a time restriction. The property is refused due to the fact that it is zoned RSA
5. However, we are looking to renew and continue the visitor accommodation use.
as i mentioned we did meet with the community on november 11th there was unanimous support
for the property there have been no issues or complaints for the use of the property as visitor
accommodations there were seven nearby neighbors who were present all voted in support of this
property the rco has requested that there be a two-year renewal in light of the fact that was
in light of the fact that was the proviso that was entered previously again we are asking that
the proviso that was entered previously again we are asking that
Thank you.
the board grant this use in the event the board does require we have a time limit we're requesting
just five years here there have been no issues with the property no complaints by nearby neighbors
my client self manages it he's about 10 minutes away from the property so we are requesting that
it be an ongoing use due to the financial burden that it requires to renew this type of use every
two years. As I mentioned, this is an ongoing use, so we do have the rental license showing
the hotel designation for the two units with an effective date of June 4, 2024. The expiration
is April 30, 2025. Again, it is only two units that are being used in this manner.
We have a map of the area. Again, the property is on West Fisher Avenue along North Hutchinson
Street as well. Here we have a view of the front of the property. It is attached and we are this
property here along the left side. Photos showing that the property was in fact posted.
A view to the right of the property along West Fisher Avenue. A view to the left of the property
along West Fisher Avenue. And here we do have interior photos of each unit. When our client
purchased the property in 2015. It did require some renovations, so he did take the time out
to make sure that it was properly renovated, brand new kitchen. The bathroom was recently
renovated as well. He takes great pride in the work and providing a space that is hospitable to
his guests. And here we just have pictures of the second unit. Again, we did send out notice of the
community meeting on October 28th. The meeting was held on November 11th at 7 p.m. We did
provide the zba zoom information as well a copy of the refusal again this property has duplex use
that dates back to 1946 the variance was requested and granted by this board on this excuse me on
november 11th 2022 with the temporary variance expect to expire on december 1st 2024 due to the
financial burden that it requires to continuously operate this use every two years and to renew we
are requesting that the board grant this variance indefinitely without a time restriction. If the
board does see fit to require a time restriction, we are requesting that it be five years as opposed
to the two-year request. A list of the properties that were notified of the community meeting that
was held on November 11th. Copy of the certificates of mailing showing that it was in fact sent out
to the list as required by the city, our copy of the application for appeal, our project
information form, and the deed showing that my client Markins Coriolan does in fact own
this property and has owned it since 2015, has used it as visitor accommodation since
2022 without any issues or complaints from neighbors, and the certificate of tax clearance
as well. So with that, I'd be happy to have Markins come on to adopt my testimony.
Mark has been allowed to speak. Hey, could you please state your name and spell for the
sonographer? Yes, my name is Markins Coriolan, Markins, M-A-R-K-E-N-S, Coriolan, C-O-R-I-O,
L-A-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Markins, did you hear my presentation today?
And was it true and correct?
And how long have you owned this property?
Since 2015.
And how long has it been using it for visitor accommodation use?
For the past three years.
Have you had any complaints from neighbors?
Have you received support for this project when you presented it to the community?
Yes. Thank you. And would you adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes. Thank you. Questions from the board?
I have no questions. I have a question. Just curious. So your neighbors at
19, 18 and
14, were they part of the support? Those are your immediate
neighbors on both sides of you. I don't believe they didn't
attend, but they do appreciate the fact that for the last
three years, I have not had any issues because in the past I had it as a rental and there was
always issues with the tenants. But for the past three years, I have been very supportive with
helping with trash. I've done the snow. So when I do my own snow, I do their snow as well. So I
know they're very appreciative of me being there at least two, three times a week. And I'm always
looking out for their property as well, as far as keeping it clean. And so they would say yes
to me having it for as long as possible as an airbnb i do have a quick question
as long as possible as an Airbnb. I do have a quick question. What's the maximum number of
individuals that you rent to per unit at a time? So it's listed as three per unit, three persons
per unit. But most of the time I have two people, couples that attend, that comes on a weekend,
And usually it's Friday to Sunday or they'll stay from Friday to Monday, but it's usually two people per unit that comes.
So there's no issues with parking. There's never any issues in the past three years with parking.
There's never any issues with parties, never any issues with trash on the front yard or at the backyard.
So it's really a well-maintained Airbnb.
Thank you.
i have a question yeah how many days in the past three years on average would you say you're
renting the units via airbnb so how many days so it's definitely it's always a yes on the weekends
and maybe a couple days doing a week so for for both of them but the the the weekends are always
rented so how many days would that be so that'll be roughly 100 you're saying 160 170 days a year
you've got someone in the unit yes okay and then could you explain the hardship um to having to
come back to reaffirm your use yeah the hardship would be you know getting an attorney every two
years it's expensive uh to have to pay for it and um and also you know the work that we have to do
to because i have to have a posting on um the door or the windows and a lot of people when they're
coming in they're you know they're thinking okay what's this yellow sign that's on the door or
that what's this yellow sign that's on the window or thinking there's an issue with the property
But for the most part, it's really the, I feel like it's the fees, the attorney fees, because I don't do it by myself. I always make sure that I have my attorney, which I've been using for the past seven years since I've been doing real estate. So I think those fees is usually hard for me to have to pay it every two years.
he broke up
i was saying just so he knows that for future reference doesn't have to be yellow
for your own reference from future so i have another question our office handles the posting
So we'll make note of that.
Just to clarify, there's not a requirement right now for the poster color because applicants are required to print them out themselves.
The board is no longer sending them out.
Ty, you have a question?
No, I have no other question.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Planning Commission.