so what's the height of the the new kitchen portion now
yeah i have it say it again i'm sorry um mr rodriguez you can answer that question
yes 10 feet high okay other questions from the board yes can we
I see part of the kitchen here, the wall there.
What's on the other side there, or is that the entire space?
Where's the refrigerator?
If you can see it on your left-hand side of that picture, right there,
it's right there the kitchen is there right now.
It's the L kitchen.
so there's no okay so all them okay so that's where the refrigerator and the stove and the sink
So that's where the refrigerator and the stove and the sink and all of that is?
and all of that is
Yeah, that's correct.
That's behind that wall right there.
And what's on the other side of this wall?
That is the addition.
That's like extra family room.
That's the addition that was already added to it.
So that additional family room, how high up is that?
It's 10 feet high.
You can see it in that picture below.
Wait, so just for clarity, so the addition extended the kitchen and also created space for this family room.
Is that correct?
It's more as an extension for the family room.
The kitchen stays the same size.
So you made a family room in the rear, and you made a bigger living room in the parlor area, right?
That's correct.
And no permits with anything, right?
Yeah, it's being legalized.
What's that again?
That's correct.
When it was done, they didn't know that they had to get a permit.
So no, it's not legalized right now.
Is that true?
No, I have a question, because when you came in before, you testified that Mr. Rodriguez was an architect. And so I want to know, like, what drove the decision or the assumption that no permits were necessary? And did you use a license and bond electrician in the city of Philadelphia to do the electrical work? Because Atlas shows you having a violation for all three.
and that the violation happened in august of 2023 so then my my secret question is
what took two years for us to address this well the one thing i'll say is i know that mr rodriguez
wasn't involved with the he wasn't the architect that was involved with this i believe they did
this without I think they I don't know uh Mr. Rodriguez did was this done without plans
yes it was done without plan and then the client contact us so he can go to the procedures
the process to have everything according with the city so that's how we became involved
okay and you did the as built to document the conditions as they were
Did you do any physical needs assessment or structural review of what was built when you did those plans?
When we did those plans, we weren't based on what was done already.
And then our knowledge, when everything was done, it was according to the code.
So that's why we was involved with the case.
Both building and electric?
Building and electric, that's correct.
Okay. And was any plumbing or HVAC run to the new parts or the new extensions?
No? So how are they heated and cooled?
It's the open area. So they're still using the one that was for the kitchen.
It's still able to use that for the back room. So it was not addition or nothing.
It was just the same assistant one.
Other questions?
Questions from our attorney?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission. Thank you, Chairman, and good morning. David
with the City Planning Commission. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the RSA3 residential
residential single family zoning at this location, the appellant appears to have built in addition without the benefit of permits proposal for parking in the required front yard is an existing condition and is unlikely to injure the use of adjacent property.
The city planning commission recommends of the board grant requested dimensional variance for parking in the required front yard, but deny the proposed dimensional variance for rear yard depth.
I see you looking and I didn't note on the refusal that there was a variance for parking,
but this is an RSA three so parking would be required.
They eliminate the parking space as part of this application, Mr.
I don't see here.
I don't see here.
you know
I don't see that there was an elimination of a parking space.
No, parking space is still the same.
There was no elimination of the parking space.
Can you just go back to the refusal for a second?
To maintain a system parking.
It wasn't noted on the refusal, but there is one accessory off-street parking space still
at the property?
hold on let's go to the front again
hold on let's skip this
did the additions change where the parking was located no hold on i don't think it did
utilizing an existing condition okay
all right that's right that's okay all right thank you all right so great so mi2024
004-331-1900
Hofnagel Street. I vote yes
with proviso.
Certificate of occupancy must
be obtained.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanada Graham,
my vote is yes with proviso.
Taya Nguyen, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Yarno.
Is there anyone in the audience
whose case has not been called?
Thanks, everyone.
I see no hands.
Okay, thank you all.
Thank you.
We appreciate it.
Went a little bit longer than we thought.
But thanks, and we'll see everybody tomorrow morning.
All righty.
See you then.
Take care.