Do you have anything to add?
No, other than I'm just trying to renovate the, you know, upgrade the block that's been vacant for a very long time.
And when you, upon purchase and inspection, there were, in fact, how many residential apartments in the building?
It was laid out for two on the second floor, two on the third floor, and then the store, and then the space behind the store.
got it thank you and at the time of purchase sir it was every all units were vacant uh yeah there
was one like i think it's maybe a squatter they had someone in the second floor rear but
they got them out before we got they got them out before we purchased it
anything else mr anastasia before we move on no sir okay questions from the board
no is there a proposed is there a proposed tenant for that space there are several people who are
folks who have been interested most notably a barbershop is looking at it an old school kind
of like a I guess a hipster sort of a hipster version of the old Italian barbershops you know
we don't see anymore and uh and which is why it would be a real pity to lose that facade
because it's i mean that's right out of 1950. any other questions from the board
hello someone's about to speak
any other questions from the board no anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise
your hand. Yeah we have Anthony with the that's been unmuted. Thank you sir. Please identify
yourself for first and last name. Anthony Bruttaniti, B-R-U-T-T-A-N-T-I. I am the zoning chairman
for South Broad Street Neighborhood Association. You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the
whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Yes we met with
the applicant twice to discuss this application. We also had several neighbors that have lived
on this block and around this property since they were children. The testimony from the
neighbors was that the first floor was used as a tailor shop for many years with a small kitchen
in the back of the store for use of the commercial space. And their testimony was also that the
owners of the tailor shop lived upstairs on the second or third floor and that it was never used
as apartments. Also the photographs that were by the applicant of the existing space never showed
any kitchens that were that would be indicative of multi-family use. I have to object to the
quote-unquote testimony of folks who have lived there. Yeah maybe. First of all that's hearsay
uh to say it is fact uh and what the evidence that we have that the board has to review
is the document documentation that's it's sustained it is hearsay so sir if you can speak
on behalf of yourself okay and okay um we had uh entertained um the fact that uh to use the
property as a three-use property, that being one apartment on the third, one apartment on the second,
and the first floor to either be an apartment or commercial space on the entire floor, not broken
up into a small commercial space in the front and a residential in the rear. And so we had taken
their original proposal and requested three uses, one per floor. It wasn't until they actually
refused to come back to talk to us about that proposal, and then a few days ago,
Vern and I had discussion about this option, and that was somewhat entertained at that point.
So our position from the board and from the neighbors would be acceptable to have one use
per floor, third floor residential, second floor residential, and the first floor either be an
apartment or a full floor commercial space. Thank you. Vern, could you go back to the
exhibit that shows the first floor as being partially commercial and partial residential?
Not what you're proposing, what exists now, the old photo. The current photos?
or the history
the history one
Let's give me one second.
Oh, by the way, I didn't share this with you, but I should at this point.
Here's the building.
These doorbells were installed 70 years ago.
There's one for the commercial space and one for each of the residential units.
so that's a total of five doorbells yeah but it's all been abandoned you'll agree with it right
that was all abandoned many years ago yes the megale family has not kept up with that property
that's correct for decades okay here's 1961 for family and a business we'll stipulate that at
some point decades ago this property was used uh mixed use commercial with several apartments uh
residential dwellings right yes i'm just looking for you had a diagram i believe of the first floor
uh not history the only diet the only drawing i have is the ones that we're proposing
one i saw or pictures of the interior i have pictures of the interior of the first floor
and it showed if i'm not mistaken separation between the commercial and the rear residential
of the first floor that's correct i mean it was already there um let me see if i can find it for
you i hope i get what you're looking for as you're looking uh and again we're only asking
for a three-family dwelling with the with the commercial space i know i know i get that
i'm not necessarily here's the that's the commercial front
and i think that's the door to the to the residential rear first floor rear
that's all the photos that i had all right i thought i saw something different but in
any event anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
chair we have peter zutter has been unmuted please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
um can you hear me mr zutter good morning please identify yourselves by your last name
good morning chairman to chico uh my name is peter zutter z-u-t-t-e-r and i live at 1440
south broad street we're going to affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed i i just um i'm not going to add to anthony's testimony because he has covered
uh pretty much everything um we we would like the opportunity to work with the owner to put some uh
to put an agreement in place to control uh some of the things that we sometimes have problems with
uh we would like to see things like the we've learned that the rsa5 with commercial space
allows quite a bit of signage by right um in fact it allows um um internally illuminated signage so
we'd like to see some restrictions on that we'd like the opportunity to work that out with the
applicant um so if you do support this we would like to ask that you hold your decision until we
have an opportunity to do that. There are just some provisos. This would not be a zoning board
proviso. This would be an agreement directly between us and the applicant, which you've seen
us do before. Signage, trash disposal, some of those kind of issues. We've dealt with Mr.
Anastasio before. It's nothing unreasonable that we would be asking for if you choose to
support this so we would like to have that opportunity as anthony said um you know when
we met last um they just didn't you know they didn't go for the three units and sort of stopped
talking to us after that and uh so here we are at the hearing um so that i believe is it for me
Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Anastabio, do you have any problem with maybe a resumption hearing at
which time we'll just take into consideration any further conversation with the RCO?
I think that'll be okay. I mean, if you're asking, do you want to hold off on the vote until we come up with the proviso contract, that's fine.
I think that'll be okay. I mean, if you're asking...
I mean, again, I've dealt with this RCO a lot, and I understand their concerns, especially with Broad Street, about trash and lighting and just the general look.
So my client, I'm sure, would have no problem entering into the standard agreements that we've always entered into.
Okay, so we can do a resumption hearing?
It'll just be to get...
Feedback from the RCO?
Okay, I'm just not quite sure if...
I think it's pretty clear that what we're proposing,
they're not interested in, even though we've scaled it down.
But I may be incorrect in that.
I don't know.
I mean, it sounds like there might be some wiggle room,
if you will, between what you guys are proposing
and what the community is objecting to.
And we'll only know that if you all sit down
and have a conversation.
Tanya?
Excuse me, Chair.
This is Fatina.
We have Franz Pierre with his hand up.
Okay, let's get Mr. Pierre on
from the Councilman's Office.
Mr. Pierre, please identify yourself
and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and fellow board members.
That's Franz Pierre, that's F-R-A-N-T-Z, last name Pierre, that's P-I-E-R-R-E, zoning liaison for Council Member Johnson's office.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I certainly do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Yes. I don't want to sound, for the sake of not sounding redundant, the council member office would join the coordinating RCO in their opposition to the appeal if it stands as is.
But we do support the resumption hearing to give the community and the developer a chance to work out their differences and see if they can come to a mutual agreement.
Thank you. Appreciate that.
Okay, Mr. Anastasio, you heard that the councilman's office is willing to participate in that discussion.
So we'll do a resumption hearing.
Fine by May.
Tanya, do we have a date?
May 18th at 10 o'clock.
Very good.
okay so mi2020-001522 1310 south broad street this hearing will be resumed
on may 18th at 10 o'clock a.m and if there was anyone else who wanted to testify we're not
dismissing your testimony but you'll have an opportunity to meet with the applicant and
your rco leaders to work to hopefully work things out along with the councilman's office
we go to number three carol uh chair okay i'm sorry if i could just put on the record i'm sorry
it's tuesday may 18th just so everyone's aware that's a tuesday tuesday may 18th i know we have
a couple other hearings that day yeah thank you chair thank you mr chairman should we hear from
the planning commission or do you want to wait on that yeah why don't we why don't we wait okay
All right. Thank you.
Calendar number 3167, 1515 South 9th Street.
The attorney is Zen Jin.
Mr. Jin has been promoted to panelist.
Hi, Mr. Jin.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Yes. Good morning.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to leave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exempt packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, photos, and or plans,
a copy of the refusal or referral five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with
the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to all questions. Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you.
Mr. Chen, before you begin, I have some notation that there's a letter of non-opposition with the
proviso limiting your application to three units as opposed to four. That's correct. That's something
your client and you agree to? Yes, we have agreed to that. Then you can make life easier for all of
us. Yes. By showing us the proviso. All right. Yes, absolutely. If I may go ahead and share
If I may go ahead and share the information, I'll make this brief.
the information, I'll make this brief.
So we have submitted the RCO letter from Pashank Square Civic.
We actually had a meeting and a discussion with the Civic Association.
They took the position that the first four units could be combined into one.
Rather than leaving it as four units, they voted in non-opposition to three units.
The other provisals are more construction and fire code related. I believe those would be
addressed when my client goes to certify a building permit, particularly for the exterior
staircase to comply to code requirements. The property itself was purchased as a four-family
dwelling. And it is, from the photographs, you'll see that it was actually set up some time ago.
So it does need a little bit of work on the exterior, which we had agreed to as part of our discussion with the community.
But essentially, this property's meters are separated.
There are actually five electric meters, multiple gas meters, as well as the water heater being separated.
So it's a building that was set up a long time ago and is now in its existing condition.
Again, this is an application to legalize what is existing.
There are no longer a commercial space in the front.
This has been converted to one residential unit, and there's one in the back, one on
the second, and one on the third.
So that makes up the four units.
The agreement is to kind of combine the first floor, front and back, into one unit, and
that's what the community asks for, and we're in agreement with that request.
so given that we would ask the board's consideration in a proviso maximum no more than three units
I don't believe plans need to be stamped because there would have to be changes on my
client's part to redo floor plans in order to conform to that requirement
if the board has any questions I would certainly be happy to try to answer them
Do you have your client?
Yes, my client should be here under a Zoom account of Yongchen, Y-O-N-G-C-H-E-N.
However, his name is not Yongchen.
He's working off of his son-in-law's account.
If you can, please raise your hand on your Zoom program so that you can be identified by the administrator.
mr jen in the interest of time uh the board will stipulate that you being an officer to court
your your client would adopt your testimony mr yong just uh i mean the uh the account was just
promoted because i see the name all right there he is okay yes uh mr john are you here with us
i guess it would be better to stipulate stipulate any questions from the board no no
no anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
i see no hands here thank you planning commission
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for single-family use.
There is documented history of this property for two residential units, but not for four.
We recommend that the board approve the requested variance with the provisals.
Thank you. MI 2020-003167. 1515.
I'll do that again. MI 2020, that's 003-167-1515 South Main Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. Maximum three units.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you. Calendar number 1739, 2110 North 2nd Street. The attorney is Leo Malpahill.