So long.
Right.
Good night.
So number four, MI 2024, 007382, 736 Medina Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Unanimous non-opposition from Passion Square
and a letter non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Good evening.
Council, you are our last case of the day.
If I remember, you were already sworn this morning.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Ms. Reagan Cooper, who is the owner of the property.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I'm going to share with the board what was previously submitted as exhibits.
This is an application before the board for dimensional variances relating to a property owned by my client.
She's looking to expand the property, the actual building to the rear to give themselves a little more space.
The dimensional standards for RSA 5 trigger two refusals, one of which is a rear yard setback of nine foot.
We're asking for six feet and a proposed occupied area of 76.19% where 75% is permitted.
This property is a very small property.
It's part of the reason why we received unanimous support from the community.
If you look at the zoning map, actually, it gives you a good feel for what we're seeking.
This is a small lot on a small block, and this is our building, my client's building.
As you can see, it has never been extended.
It came with its original small size.
Most of the block has had some kind of extension done.
What we're asking for is actually less than what many have already done on the block.
This is the property in question.
Here's the front.
this is the rear. An extension would actually put it kind of in line and not even past the
building that's already present there. And then the next door's first floor would still extend
all the way to the property line, which is further than ours. But there's still a little
side court between the two. This is my client's rear yard interior. Now, my client does have some
medical conditions that's making it harder for her to go up and down the steps to her second
floor. One of the main reasons for the extension is to add a bathroom on the first floor and also
to allow the second floor to have a little more space. I'm going to jump to the plans and
show the board what we're looking for. So from an extension standpoint, we're not extending
the basement. That'll essentially be a crawl space, not an actual basement. And then the extension
really covers this portion. These two-floor extension allows the bathroom to be added and
extends the bedroom. One of the things here I want to point out to the board is that under the zoning
code, had my client's lot been 45 feet deep, then we would have not had the occupied area refusal at
all, and we would only need to have a one-foot variance for the rear yard, my client's property
happens to be 45 feet, one inch, and five-sixths too deep. So it's one inch too deep, essentially,
which trigger both refusals. I want to point out that it really is a hardship to have enough
living space for my client without the extension, and the dimensional variance would not negatively
impact any of the neighbors. As you saw from the earlier map, most of the neighbors are actually,
their properties are deeper than my clients. So given that we're asking for the board's
favorable review of this request for a dimensional variance for both the rear yard and the de minimis
occupied area change. I'm happy to answer any questions and my client is here to verify my
testimony. Why don't you bring your client on? Sure. Reagan, can you please raise your hand
virtually to be identified?
They have been promoted to
penalist.
Aye, Reagan.
hi Regan can you unmute Regan sorry hello hi how are you could you could you turn your video on
please yes I just did sure thank you very much could you state your name and spell for the
court stenographer um it's jennifer reagan cooper um reagan is spelled r-e-g-a-n and cooper is c-o-o-p-e-r
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you uh reagan did you hear my testimony before the
board and see my presentation on the screen? Yes, I did. Can you verify what I have represented
is true and correct and adopt my testimony as your own? Yes, I do. Thank you. Questions from
the board. I just want to confirm that we're no longer doing the roof deck. There's no roof deck
on the plant. I don't believe there was
a roof deck
proposed.
On the second floor,
there's going to be a small...
I'm sorry, there is a balcony.
Yes, the balcony is still
included in the plants.
There is.
And there's no refusal for that.
There's nothing on top of it, though.
It will be
essentially like
a small balcony outside
that's uncovered so it is open to the sky um if that would arguably can be considered a deck
it is not part of the refusal on the that's not what the notes say well yeah so if you go go can
you mind going back to the plans let me go back to the plans because the refusal the refusal says
a two-story edition and then a one-story edition with a roof deck like on top of it
yes that's access from the balcony
that's well that's access
from the second floor
so that's the balcony
right there yes that is essentially
the roof deck as well on the first floor
there's something
there's something under it
it's on top of this part of the building
got you okay
it's part of the extension
okay other questions
questions or comments from our attorney
not at this time
questions or comments from the virtual audience
no chair
planning commission
Amy Boyd with the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends
no change in zoning at this location
from the existing residential single
family RSA 5
the requested occupied area
occupied area variance is de minimis
and requested rear yard depth is
characteristic of the block. The Planning
Commission recommends the board grant the requested
variances for occupied area and rear yard depth.
Thank you. MI 2024
007 382
736 Medina
Street. I vote yes.
I vote Johns. My vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston. My vote is yes.
Tayewan. My vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid. My vote
is yes. Thank you.
Have a good evening. Thank you, counsel.
is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called
no he is here and we're getting done early tonight this is great
baby said said to the father the other night could you tell that good night