thank you thank you for telling me uh can you hear me okay we can now okay this is the floor
plan um we have a letter of support from the ridge uh the rco here's some of our signage let me rotate
look rotated the wrong way
We want you to see the signs. The signs are part of the application.
I did want you to see that. We're next to an urgent care, as you can see.
Show you some photos. I got to rotate back. Lovely.
Okay, that's the posting.
well anyway you get the idea so mr altmeier is with us oh let me give you some quick facts
it's about four doctors the hours of operation are 8 a.m to 8 p.m um there is commercial trash
and medical waste hauling as appropriate for those these types of uses let me go ahead and
ask mr altmeier and let me show you some of the window signs there was some discussion
This is going to be some of the tasteful window signs that will be used.
I'm going to ask Mike Altmaier to raise his virtual hand and adopt some testimony.
The RCO, meeting flyers.
Mike, go ahead and raise your virtual hand.
He's been allowed to speak.
Your name is spelled for the court reporter, please.
Mr. Altmaier, please unmute yourself.
with us mike michael altmeier last name a-l-t-m-e-i-e-r thank you for hearing our case
Thank you for hearing our case today.
today you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Mike, did you hear all the facts of my testimony, and can you adopt them as true and accurate and as your own testimony?
And is there anything unusual or unique about this use that would make it different or more impactful than another similar use of the same type?
no this will be a standard general practice veterinary hospital no animal boarding and
this will just be animal treatment and your offices correct no boarding
uh mr chairman thank you uh i put the rco letter on your screen you got support from the rco
everyone's excited about there's a lot of pets obviously with the COVID pandemic a lot of new
pets in all these all our communities there's exceedingly high demand for animal animal related
uses so with that I would conclude and happy to answer any questions questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman no Mr. Chairman no Mr. Chairman questions from the virtual audience
I see no further hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
David, unmute.
Unmute, David.
Sorry.
Good afternoon, David.
You've already been sworn.
Great.
Good afternoon, David.
Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for sticking with me.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location.
The applicant has shown that the proposed animal services will have no more of an impact than animal services would be expected to have, which is what they have to show.
So the planning commission recommends that the board grant a special exception for animal services.
MI 2021-004-531-5708, Ridge Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Sorry, James Snell, my vote is yes.
Fishmere Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. DeMarco.
Have a good afternoon. Thank you.
All right. MI 2021 004589 624 South 26. And at the same time, MI 2021 04588 626 South 26.
Leo Mulvihill, South Street Neighbors letter of support for both, if yes, with revised plans, one page.
He's been promoted to panel, sir.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Mr. Mulvihill, please state your name and spell for the court reporter.
Ted Lee. Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L, B as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
Mr. Hallman has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you submit the revised plan form?
Thank you. You can proceed.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the board.
I'm just going to, I have two separate packets for each of these properties, but they're more or less identical.
So I'm just going to use one and incorporate the other by reference.
I'm here today for 624 South 26th Street.
My client is Michael Murray.
What I have now is my table of contents.
Leo, could you speak up a little bit, Larry, a little low?
Oh, certainly.
What I have now is my table of contents on the screen, showing the refusal appeal and project information form at page one, the HUD and deed at page eight, deed again at page nine, tax clearance at 18.
revised zoning plan photos at 19, proviso sheet at 25, posting photos at 27, and our zoning
notification letter proof of mailing at 31. Just going to the refusal members of the board,
both of these properties are existing two-story homes on a two-story block. What's proposed is
to have a third-story addition with a mansard-style roof, roof deck with rear stair access without
pilot house, and a slight addition to the rear of the property, but it doesn't trigger any
dimensional variances. The only variances that we're requesting are the relief from the effort
setback on the third floor. And that's for both properties. Here's our application for appeal
and the project information form. Page 13, this is the deed for the property.
page 13 this is the deed for the property at 624 sell 26 on my other packet which i've submitted
to the board i also have the deed for 626. the tax certification was not working and giving me a cert
but what i did was get a screenshot of taxes showing that taxes are paid up for 624. i have
a similar screenshot for 626 showing the taxes are paid. And here's essentially the plan that
we're looking at, members of the board. So this is the existing two-family dwelling with cellar.
We're looking to have a third-story addition, zooming in on that. With a mansard-style roof
and a dormer, we're going to have the roof deck set back five feet from the top of that roof.
Roof deck is going to move along the rear. Then there's rear access stairs, so there's no pilot
Then there's rear access stairs, so there's no pilot house that extends to block any of the
neighbor's views. The third-story, the addition is also going on the rear of the property,
but we are going to have a 14-foot rear yard, so that doesn't trigger any open air or rear yard
variances. This is just the overhead view. This is, again, both of the properties next to one
another. Again, because we're dealing with 24 here, this would be 24. Next door is 626.
They're identical applications as I stated. Zooming out a little bit, members of the board,
and i'll have photographs of the property 624 and 626 here's the rears of the properties which are
both going to have the additions attached then we have views looking north and south on the streets
along with rear views of both the properties and the rear alley i also have floor plans
the property members of the board they're going to be completely renovated
overall they're going to be three bedrooms with the roof deck and here's the access in the rear
I might show you members of the board. So it's just going to be open to the air rather than
having a pilot house. So we're going to keep that massing down since we are on mostly a two-story
block, if not an entirely two-story block. Here's a rendering. So we are keeping the
structures and simply building above them. We have photographs again of the postings
on the properties themselves.
This is the zoning sign.
This was our letter that was sent out
both for 624 and for 626 at page 31.
This is our proof of mailing
showing that everything was mailed out
back on December 17th, 2021.
Separately, I can show everybody
the letter of approval,
which I believe we have from S. Sasna.
one moment while I get that up on the screen there we go so members of the board I'm showing
now separately a letter dated February 2, 2022 indicating a letter of support for 624 and 626
showing there was a meeting we did answer the neighbor's questions they did have concerns
about putting street trees in which we're going to do our best to do although that is not an
enforceable proviso here. Overall, we had a vote of 13 in support, zero in opposition for both
24 and 26. Members of the board, rather than putting it up on the screen, again, I'd just
like to incorporate by reference the packet that's been previously submitted for 626-26
as well, and we're happy to answer any questions you may have at this time.
questions from the board uh yes mr chairman the counselor are these the plans that have been revised
pardon me i'm sorry you're cut out for a second the plans that you have shown are these a revised
plan yes you do you have the revised plan form yes it was submitted to msuleta and the revised
plan form is also included here at page 20 of my packet okay thank you mr milvihill could you just
a quick outline on the record of what what the revised issues are certainly the parapet walls
were lowered there we go um and the cornice was to match the existing adjacent structures
uh this is mission to fairmount park to seek approval for additional street trees that's
actually been stricken on a revised um proviso sheet was sent to miss suetta earlier today by
the architect i got her eyes sir thank you very much other questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions from the um virtual audience
i see no further hands at this time mr chair planning commission good afternoon david fecto
city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single family zoning for 624
no change to the residential single family zoning for 624
and 626 south 26th street the proposed mansard roof in lieu of an eight foot third floor setback
matches the character of the block the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the dimensional variance
MI 2021-004-589-624-South 26 and MI 2021-04588-626-South 26th Street.
I vote yes with revised plans for power fit and also the cornice and one page.
Thomas Hallamann, my vote is yes on both with revised health.
James Snell, yes to both with provisos.
Ishmael Shahi, yes to both with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Mulvihill. Thank you, members of the board.
MI number 14, MI 2021 004529 705 North 40 Street. Mr. Consul, RCO Mantua Civic Association
letter of support mr council has been promoted to panelists
good afternoon board mr council just state your name you've already been sworn
it's joseph consul c-o-n-s-o-l-e mr holliman has a few questions good afternoon counselor do you
agree to the to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do according to
our records you have submitted all the required documents is that correct that is correct sir
please proceed okay good afternoon everyone joe consul here on 705 north 40th street
got my packet on the screen the owner of the property is park place developers llc
I do not have Jeremy on the line with me up, but I do have Momendar from Park Place Developers, LLC, who will adopt my testimony at the conclusion of my presentation.
The packet contains the refusal. It contains the RCO letter of support. It contains the plots and plans for the project and the other required documents.
this property uh let's see if i can get you a picture of it this property is the the one set
back here uh the three stories um you can see our we have our posters up the property is a
building that was bought by my clients to rehabilitate as a three-unit building uh it's
currently zoned as rsa5 however the property to the right uh which in in this uh photo is empty
is being constructed as an 11 unit building and the property to the left which is this one here
with the the newish bump out is a seven dwelling recently approved building and that building has
the exact same 1767 square foot footprint as does the property that we're here today to talk about
which is 705 North 40th. This property was approved for a four-unit building as far back
as the 1940s. As recently as 2007, this property had a four-unit rental license. However, at some
point after 2007, the property fell into dereliction. And because of that, and because of
a single-family rezoning that kind of blanketed this whole area, any previous approvals for
multifamily use were lost. We were originally proposing, so we're proposing, I'll pull up the
plans right now, rehabilitating the structure to have some closer views of it, weave from across
the street down block plans the plans show that each floor will be one two-bedroom unit
so that's a total of three units um we believe this is reasonable for a structure this size
again it's almost 1800 square feet as a footprint we're not trying to cram in
units. It's a large footprint, and we believe that a single-family home squished between
those other high-density multifamilies would be inappropriate and likely to generate little
interest to a potential homebuyer. Not only that, up and down the block and across the street,
not only that um up and down the block and across the street there's several other multi-families
there's several other multifamilies.
uh i didn't think i needed to to list them all out but you know we're squished between the 11
unit and the seven units so my clients thought three uh was a reasonable uh number to generate
here and they can make three two-bedroom units which are uh quite sizable we met with uh
manchua civic on the 13th of january and we received a letter of support all tenants had
access to the backyard by way of an existing alley for trash storage uh and the basement uh
which is here is going to be just for mechanicals and um storage only no living space uh and with
that, I'll call my client. It's Mr. Momandar, M-O-M-I-N-D-A-R.
And he has been allowed to speak. Good afternoon. Could you state your name and spell for the court
reporter. My name is Momin Dar, M-O-M-I-N, last name Dar, D-A-R. You swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, Counselor. Good afternoon, Mr. Dar.
Did you hear my testimony today regarding 705 North 40th? I did. Do you agree with my testimony
and do you adopt it as your own? I do. Do you have anything you'd wish to add? I do not. Okay,
Thank you. I have nothing further for Mr. Donner. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. David
Fecto, City Planning Commission. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location. However,
this is a predominantly multiple family block. The proposed three units appears to match the
character of the block. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the use
variance. Thank you, David. MI 2021 004529 705 North 40 Street. I vote yes. Thomas Holliman. My vote