So younger, younger kids classrooms on the first, on the second.
The older kids' classrooms are to the right.
We met with the community on September 18th at 7.30 p.m.
We emailed that notice that we sent out along with proof of mailing of that notice to the relevant parties.
even though there are only nine addresses
within the affected area
we almost had attendance of almost 50 individuals
who are in support of this
our application for appeal
along with the notice of refusal
and the project information form
lead to the property
just so you have everything of the current property owner
this property is owned by a company called Star Comfort
and then you can see there's a lease
between Kinder College and Star Comfort.
And then finally, the Certificate of Tax Clearance.
So I would ask that Rita virtually raise her hand
and be sworn in.
Felix, Damarski, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair.
Could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Felix Demarski.
It's G-Y-M-A-R-S-K-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, told truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
So, Mr. Chair, Felix is the owner of the property.
I was actually reaching Farida.
I mean, he can adopt a lot of the stuff.
i don't know he's gonna be able to adopt the testimony regarding the actual daycare why don't
why don't we get rita yeah i'm here oh okay they're together could you read it could you state
your name and spell for the stenographer sure uh good afternoon my name is rita's land r-i-t-a
the last name is z-o-u-l-o-i-a-n we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth yes i do please proceed counsel thank you uh rita you heard everything i had to state today
about your zoning matter yes is it true and correct yes do you adopt as your own testimony
yes is there anything i missed about the operations of of the child care center that you may want to
share with the board you don't have to i just wanted to make sure everything was correct thank
you so much all right thank you questions from the board yes i guess i'm uh trying to make sure
I am considering this correctly.
This is it's an increase in a nonconforming use.
Is that what we're really doing here?
So when was the nonconforming use established?
Do we know?
So if you look at this, the zoning on, let me just open this up.
But in 2010, the this board granted.
And this use, I just want to get back to the front, in 2010, it granted a daycare on the first floor, a big first floor, 16,000 square foot first floor.
The second floor was a non-daycare.
So my client's been very successful over the last, over the last decade.
I'm not, I'm not going there.
But if it was granted by the board, then it's not a nonconforming use.
I'm just reading what the refusal says.
Like, so it's we're extending a use that has been previously approved by the board by way of variance.
So that's what I'm trying to get at.
This is not what I'm seeing. What I have as far as my notes are that this is a nonconforming use and you're asking to expand it. And that would run you into, of course, excessive expansion because it would be far more than a 10% than the code allows.
And so at 75%, you'd need a variance for that. But what you're really doing is the initial 16,000 square feet was approved by the board by variance. And then you want to extend that variance even further. So that has to come to us. That's what we're doing here.
so i i would defer to the board in terms of interpretation of the code and would you know to
yeah to miss emerson but i think if we would have hypothetically like added say 10 right so we're
10%, right? So we're at 16,000 square feet. If we would have added 10% more to 17,600, I don't think we would have needed a variance. I think it's a poor choice of words in the refusal, but you can extend a variance of a use up to a certain degree as long as it's de minimis under the circumstances.
16 000 square feet if we would have added 10 percent
You can, if it's non-conforming, then yes. But if it's granted by the board, by variance, then no. You have to ask for permission to expand it no matter what.
So I'm just trying to make sure that we're doing the right thing here. And what I heard you say was you were asking for a variance for this additional 12,000 square feet, which I agree with. That's what I think you need. I'm just saying that I just want to make sure that when we do this, we're doing the right thing in terms of what we are granting to you. Okay. So that was my question.
Any other questions?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Oh, sorry, Chair.
I did have a question.
Is this that the daycare is now going to be utilizing 100% of the property?
So I would defer to Rita and Felix.
Can you answer Board Member Wynn's question?
I just want to confirm.
I believe that is the case.
Are you now using 100% of the building for the child care center, Rita?
No, we're not using the 100% of the building, no.
Okay, there is a portion of the building that is not for the daycare?
Do we know where it is?
Because when you showed the plans, you showed the whole building.
That's why I understood, too.
We have a third floor, too.
We're not using the third floor.
Okay, so just the second floor.
That was my mistake.
and i guess is there another tenant on the third floor no no it's empty third floor is empty yeah
and how many square feet is the third floor
six six six thousand square feet okay so that that's basically
the 25 is left that you're talking about here yes correct gotcha okay
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to follow up on what board member Gaston said.
It does appear that this is incorrectly categorized as a non-conforming use.
It was never conforming to begin with.
It was granted by variance.
So any expansion of the use does need to come through the zoning board.
So, I mean, the result is the same either way for the applicant.
you just want to clarify because miss gaston is right this is not this is not technically a
non-conforming use thank you thank you from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends the changing
and zoning at this location from light industrial i1 to medium industrial i2 under the recommended
designation this refusal will be consistent the proposed use is not likely to impact adjacent
properties the planning commission recommends that the board grant the request advance for
expanding non-conforming daycare use all right we want to mention this is the first and second floor
we can i mean it mentions the square footage increase which you normally don't see on the
refusal but it did it because it because the person reviewing it thought it was non-conforming
but we can do that if we would like to clarify
and we clarify too that we are granting a variance for that expansion right not
mi 2024 004 340 2708 commerce way i vote yes proviso occupies first and second floor
michael johns my vote is yes with provisor
cheryl gaston my vote is yes with proviso
tennetta graham my vote is yes with proviso
ayewen my vote is yes with proviso
thank you uh thank you alan you have your votes
you have a great night guys okay thank you um is there anyone in the
virtual audience whose case has not been called
I see no hands share
i see no hands share um thanks everybody we've got a lot of work done today so i appreciate
everybody hanging in there when we're getting done a reasonable time too so everybody
enjoy the night everybody thank you thank you all be safe
have a good night good night everybody good night