14:26The discussion surrounding the variance application revealed complexities about the property’s history and current use. The property, which currently functions as a two-family dwelling, was built on an undersized lot, and questions emerged about whether it had been converted into an apartment from a den or recreation room without proper zoning approval. Despite the applicant’s argument that granting a variance would not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the zoning ordinance’s intent, council members expressed reservations. Concerns were particularly centered on the ethical implications of residents potentially living in the unit without necessary approvals, as it appeared the current occupants might have been residing there without proper zoning compliance.

The lack of an easement further complicated the situation. This prompted questions about adequate access points, with a side door identified as the primary entryway to the apartment, bypassing the main entrance. Additional inquiries were made regarding the apartment’s utilities, specifically the presence of separate electrical and gas meters, which could imply that the renter’s utility costs were included in the rent.

Council members voiced their ethical concerns, with one member explicitly stating a reluctance to support the application due to fears of setting a precedent for “rewarding people who have built things in and then have since… asked for forgiveness.” Another member shared similar views, questioning the applicant’s awareness of the situation given the current occupancy status. The consensus leaned toward postponing the decision to gather more documentation on the property’s original construction and history. A motion to carry the vote to the next meeting was made, allowing for further investigation before reaching a conclusion.

In contrast to the contentious variance application, the council smoothly adopted several resolutions. Among these were variance applications for the calendar year 2024, with specific resolutions for properties including those on West 18th Street, 204 JFK Boulevard, and 187 Broadway. Each resolution was moved, seconded, and received affirmative votes from the council members present.

0:00Earlier in the meeting, the council conducted its annual reorganization, electing Nicholas Dulo as chairman and Joseph Panero as vice chairman, both unanimously approved. L. Lombari was nominated and approved for the secretary position. The reorganization also included appointments of board personnel, such as Richard Camp Pano as board attorney, Alicia Lanzi as board administrator, and Suzanne Mack as city planner. These appointments were approved unanimously following motions and seconds.

The council also addressed a request from Christopher Coochi for an extension of construction time on Broadway. This request was met with a motion and subsequent approval. Additionally, a public hearing took place regarding Lou Sherazi’s application to convert a one-family residential building into a two-family dwelling on Avenue F. The applicant’s representative, Andrew Tadros, explained that the conversion involved minimal structural changes, except for the planting of a new street tree. The property, situated on an undersized lot in the R2 Zone, required bulk variance relief for factors such as lot area and frontage, with no substantial modifications to existing conditions, including parking.

As the meeting progressed, concerns about zoning regulations and municipal compliance became apparent. The council’s deliberations on applications were structured, with motions, seconds, and voting processes followed as outlined in the agenda. The procedural focus ensured that each application and request was given due consideration, particularly in terms of zoning compliance and municipal standards.