I mean, can you see the the list? Could you open up 70,
34 Caster Avenue? No?
In other words, what we're seeing is all your documents and messages. We're good now. We're
good now, sir. You're good? Okay. Yeah, we're good. All right. First of all, the property in
question is, it's a two-story office building. It has one commercial tenant on the first floor,
an appliance store, along with a non-profit education facility on the first floor.
And then it has a very large parking lot.
And I'll show you in the pictures exactly what it looks like.
My clients purchased the property March 12th of 2020.
It's owned CMX2.
They had a problem with trespassers into the parking lot.
They did construct a fence that was six feet in height.
The ordinance requires that fences along the street front, in this case along Caster Avenue and Princeton Avenue, be only four feet in height.
However, my clients believe that a four-foot fence would not keep out the trespassers who also were leaving, they were leaving a lot of trash, they were doing drugs in the parking lot, and it was a mess.
and also this right here along along the along castor avenues castor avenue here this is princeton
avenue here um these are photographs of the zoning notice that was posted uh they were it
was originally posted on the 15th my client's been there several times including today and it's still
there this is the fence in the in the back of the property this six foot fence in the back along
along where this car is parked it's that that's not what's at issue that the zoning for that is
eight feet and it complies with that the the this and this is facing princeton avenue so it's it's
it's the portion of the fence the small portion that's uh facing the street so it's uh apparently
four panels is what is what we're looking at um as you can see the back of the fence you can see
the neighbors across on the back, this back alleyway, all have six foot fences back here.
And this is the back fence. Again, this is the back. This is this another view of the fence on
Princeton Avenue that we're looking for the variance for. And this is the front of the
property. This metal fence in the front that is not, you know, is that you can see through the
fence is is the other fence that's in question here that's facing caster avenue
um and this is a closer book a street view of the fence on caster avenue
in the front of the building this is underneath the building it shows it's all been all cleaned
out and they've been able to maintain the cleanliness of the of the parking lot since
the fence that has been installed um this is a notice email to the rco uh community on the rise
and copy of it that was sent to the zoning board this is the notice that was sent with the refusal
this is the post office list of all the letters that were sent out this is a consent of the
neighbors. We had a petition signed by many of the neighbors. And if you compare this consent
form to the list of properties where the notice was sent, 90% of them, I believe, are on that
list. So these are all neighbors within a block or two of the property. This is the letter from the
RCO approving or supporting the petition and an email I received from the, I guess,
the zoning representative from the RCO who told me that it was approved.
And I think basically I've touched on everything. I would move for the admission of these exhibits.
I do have my client here, Eva Chen. Have him adopt your testimony.
Eva, are you here?
I'm not showing anyone listed with that name and no hands around.
Sir, you're an officer of the court.
We will accept your testimony.
I reviewed everything with Eva beforehand.
I know she told me she was in.
So if you'll accept my testimony, then...
We will.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
No, no, no. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have someone with the last name ending Lee.
Okay. Please unmute yourself.
recommends no change in existing zoning at this location. The applicant's hardship
is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that
would prevent it from being used in conformity with the fence height requirements of the code.
Therefore, we recommend that rest for ranch not be granted. Okay. MI 2022-006-694-7040-48
Castor Avenue, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Sorry about that, Bill. Trying to get the button here. My vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Perkis. You have your votes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, panel.
All right. Thank you. Number eight, MI 2022-006-413-222 Hartel Avenue. Sean Ward is the attorney. Letter of support from the Fox Chase Homeowners Association with Proviso. Letter of opposition from neighbors across the street who could not attend the RCO meeting.
Once again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N-W-A-R-D, Esquire, attorney for the owner, applicant at 222 Hartel, H-A-R-T-E-L Avenue.
Mr. Ward, could you identify your client?
My client is Dan McVeigh, doing business as Triple Deuce Realty, owner of the premises and applicant in this matter.
All right, our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal?
stipulate to his accuracy? I most certainly do. Have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Very good. This is Hillary. I just
want to note that Mr. Ward forwarded over a letter of non-opposition from Councilman O'Neill
in this matter. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Very good. Thank you, Hillary. Mr.
Chairman, I've submitted my typical exhibit packet, which is visible on the screen share.
I represent Dan McVeigh doing business as Triple Deuce Real Estate LLC, owner of the premises at
222 Hartel Avenue at calendar number MI2022006413. The packet includes A1 is the notice of refusal.
This was an application for a retail grocery store under the food, beverage, and groceries
category under the zoning code at the first floor, together with an existing single family
dwelling on the second floor in an existing structure. Under the code, food, beverage,
and groceries is not permitted in RSA3. Accordingly, we seek a use variance today.
A2 is the ZBA application of appeal. A3 is the project information form. A4, proof of ownership.
A5, proof of tax clearance. A6 is the site plan. A7 are floor plans. A8 are photographs
with the first floor is a commercial space, and the second floor is the apartment.
We have floor plans showing your typical grocery-type corner store layout with the register, the shelves, the refrigerators, et cetera.
As you can see in this archive for Google, I'm sorry, this is the picture of the posting on the front of the property, a close-up view of the poster.
An angle shot from Google, as you can see, Berholm Avenue runs from bottom to upper left, and Hartel Avenue from bottom to upper right.
In the archive photos from Google Earth, as you can see, this was one of those Unity Frankfurt grocery stores that were predominant throughout the city back in the day.
Here's a side view of the property.
The apartment has its own separate entrance towards the rear of the property on the side.
We have street views, Hartel Avenue.
Hartel Avenue the other way.
Burholm and Burholm.
This is the letter from Fox Chase Homeowners, March 9th of 2023, indicating their support for the application.
This is a copy of the notice of the meeting.
We had a copy of the refusal attached with the addresses, certificate of mailing, 66 identical pieces were mailed out for the property at 22, 22 Hartel Avenue.
This is a copy of Councilman O'Neill's office dated yesterday, stating as no objection to the subject application.
Again, we have the zoning permits from the past, the zoning map and the aerial photograph.
Dan McVeigh is occupied with his other projects today.
However, as an officer of the court, I do certify that I reviewed the exhibit packet with Mr. McVeigh.
And if he were present today, he would verify my representations to the board and adopt them as his own testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
So Ron Bednar City Planning, while the property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan, given the physical circumstances of the property, and it's documented use history, we have no objection to the granting of variance.
MI 2022-006-413-222 Hartel Avenue. I vote yes, with proviso. Hours of operation, Monday through Sunday, 6.30 a.m. to 6.30 p.m.
James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shahid my vote is yes with proviso
you have your votes Mr. Ward
thank you very much have a great evening
all right is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose 330 case has not been called
i see no handshare um thanks everyone we'll be done a little later today but i appreciate
everybody hanging around thank you very much great job jerry one great thank you