to opposing counsel. I've received no questions from opposing counsel about that. So here we go
at the top. We have to the upper left, pardon me, for purposes of the record, this is page
88, 87, 88. I can't see. There we go. 88. So at the top left, 621, June 21st, 10 a.m. That's what
the shadows look like no one's house is in shadow 6 21 you know that's summer solstice 12 p.m no
12 p.m., no one's house is in shadow.
one's house is in shadow 6 21 2 p.m
6.21, 2 p.m., no one's house is in shadow,
except for maybe a little bit of the rear yard of the protestant neighbor.
But guess what?
Members of the board, that shadow would be taller if we did any of the following,
which was suggested, namely put a parapet wall up, put an exterior pilot house.
It would just make the building taller, and then their entire backyard would be in shadow.
To the very bottom of this, we have during the summer, pardon, winter solstice.
So this is what it looks like at 10 a.m., bottom left. You see that? Yeah, we got shadows. 12, 21, 12 p.m., yeah, shadows across the street, potentially on the front windows of the neighbors across to the north along Master Street.
And then 2 p.m., 12, 21, you see what the shadows look like. Again, this has all been submitted to opposing counsel. I have no questions received from them.
And just for purposes of the record, now we're looking at page 89 of the Sun Study, and that's
what it looks like if we had the 38-foot tall building with a parapet, which would bring the
massing to 41 feet 6 inches, which is taller than what we were proposing before. The shadows no
longer, everyone's in greater darkness. So by asking for the 40 foot, what we're actually doing
is decreasing the amount of shadows, which was a matter that was brought up before. What I also
have here chair. I thought I submitted it in this packet, but I can't find it. Oh, right,
to chair, what we have here, because you asked at length about whether we could put a spiral
staircase. So I'm looking at page 84 of our packet. So the question was, can we reduce this
variance? And the answer, chair, is no, because while you suggest that perhaps a three-foot
diameter spiral staircase was something we could do, legally we cannot, it's not up to code.
And if we were to take back and set back the roof deck from the all sides, and remember, chair, this is only a roof deck for access to the stairs.
It could maybe fit a set of patio furniture, like a cafe table and two chairs.
That's what we look at.
And you see the red dotted lines that are to the upper left.
They run parallel to the building that we're proposing, parallel to the lot lines.
That's what we would have to set back, the dashed line for the purpose of the record.
that's what we'd have to set back to be in compliance with the code and then that circle
that red dashed circle that's chair a compliant legal staircase can't fit to be hanging over the
edge it's unsafe and against regulations we just simply can't do it so we wanted to make sure that
we gave you the visuals you understood where we were coming from here which is why we suggested
instead having the small deck for access from where I'm indicating now with my cursor these
sliding doors coming out going up the stairs and I believe Mr. Holloman also asked about that
as well. Mr. Holloman also, if I recall, asked whether we could put a pilot house somewhere to
the rear by the kitchen or maybe over here by the stairs. But again, we can't put a pilot house here
by the stairs without generating an additional refusal because it's not set back five feet
and it makes it taller. And we can't put it back here really because again, it's going to make it
taller. There's not really a space to put the stairs. We'd lose a ton of interior square footage.
I guess in theory, we could take the entire massing of the building out of the property
line, but then that increases the massing on the street, which is something the neighbors were
opposed to. So we've really done everything we can to try to accommodate the neighbors.
Before I call any witnesses, because I'm waiting for my client to come on the line, I think it's
fair at this point to address any concerns the board might have, additional comments now,
based on what I've just said, because we tried to address the board's comments.
Oh, members of the board, before we do that, one last thing. We did receive a refusal,
as you recall, for side yard, and that had to do with this. So now referring to page
80. I believe it's page 80 at least. Yep, 80. So there's a lot of hubbub made by the RCO and by
the adjacent neighbors about this easement. And the fact that we originally had this section right
here, I'm indicating it's the bottom right of my screen with my cursor. We originally just
continued this easement straight through. So we changed that to get rid of a refusal for a side
yard. So now there was an elevator shaft here. We pushed that back. So now we're right up against
the property line and our building hugs the easement. So we've eliminated the side yard
refusal. We've actually eliminated the refusal by listening to the neighbors. I believe that
Mr. McElhatton's client wants us to push everything back five feet from the property line,
which would then push us back here. That's going to generate additional refusals for side yard
because we cannot legally build in this alley
because the adjacent property owners have rights to it.
And we would have to go back and get an additional refusal
and a revised refusal from LNI, and we don't want to do that.
We're trying to help the neighbors out.
My clients tried to speak with the neighbors uncounseled.
That didn't work.
They then hired counsel.
And then hired counsel. Counsel has refused to give me any specific objections and any citations to code, whether zoning or the law, in terms of statutes or case law of any sort, to substantiate their positions here that that's what they want.
Counsel has refused to give me any specific objections
and any citations.
So we've come, we've talked to the neighbors, we did our best. We've reduced refusals now. We've indicated to the board exactly why we're looking, what we're trying to do to reduce the overall numbers and variances here.
that's what we've done now with this revised plan um uh is chris tofino on the line right now i just
can't see who's currently calling let's see i'm taking a look right now chris if you are on the
line please raise your hand it doesn't look like chris is on the line unfortunately chris is chris
tofino is my client so is martin right okay and this is our primary residence they'll be living
at this property all right and uh while we're waiting uh questions from the board no no no
now members of the board as my client isn't here yet what i'd like and he's here
yes we're here oh great there you are guys hi chris uh just wait uh state both of you state
your name spell your last name and please give your address for the record and then the chair
will swear you in thank you leo i am chris stefino my last name is d e f like frank i n o and we own
the property at 428-30 west thompson street thank you marnie dreams hello hold on one at a time
please do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you next next person marnie dreams d-r-a-m-e-s you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you uh yeah chris i'll just ask you and
marnie i'm gonna ask uh uh chris to speak for you just so we don't have a confused record
uh chris do you have an authority to speak for marnie today yes i do marnie your spouse
yes okay uh you've heard what i've had to say today uh today regarding the plans for your house
your home at this property? Yes. And we discussed at length the reasons that we've made these
amendments to this to reduce refusals. Is that fair to say? Yes. Okay. A couple more questions.
Did you try to speak to the neighbor who has objections to this without counsel involved?
Yes. What happened when you tried to do that? We reached out and we didn't hear from them for
about a week, and then they did reply via a text, and they said they'd rather not discuss.
Okay, and then as far as you understand, they hired counsel?
Okay. Now, otherwise, you've heard everything I'd say in this case, both today and at the
prior hearing, which I am incorporating by reference.
Okay, and everything I said is true, correct, and accurate to the best of your knowledge, right?
Okay, do you have anything else you'd like to add at this point?
no i just want to reiterate that marnie and i are decent people and we will be no matter what
what the outcome so thank you and members of the board i just suggest you i've represented them for
many years and some of my favorite clients now as part of my case in chief i'd like to call the
protest and she's on the line uh as in as for cross
good afternoon mr mckelhatton no not mr mckelhatton the actual client herself oh i'm sorry i
misunderstood you. That's okay. I believe her name's Rachel. I don't recall her last name. I'm
sorry. Jessica. Jessica. I always want to call her Rachel and I keep calling her Rachel and
that's wrong. It's Jessica. My apologies, Jessica. Chairman, would you mind swearing in the witness
please. I don't have Jessica. Is Jessica on the line? Is Mr. McElhatton on the line?
Okay I have a Jessica Rodriguez. Yes that's Jessica Rodriguez thank you. Good afternoon
Ms. Rodriguez please identify yourself with a record spell your last name and I'll swear you in.
um i just before i testify i just have a question may i ask a question no you don't ask questions
yet you know you uh first i gotta swear you in okay so yes go ahead uh your address 1244
north lorence street you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes thank you mr mobile hill yes now jessica uh before i start asking your questions is your
attorney on the line? I don't see him. Yes, he is on the line. Okay, so Mr. McElhatton, understand
that your witness is being called on cross if you wish, and can we get him promoted to panelists
so he may object if he wishes to? That's what I wanted to ask, yeah. Of course, I'm not trying
to do anything shady here. Being promoted to panelists now. I'm here. Thank you. Mr. McElhatton,
i have not mr mckelhatton just identify yourself with the record spell your last name and i'll
just identify yourself with the record, spell your last name.
swear you in daniel p mckelhatton mc capital e l h a t t o n you swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you mr mobile hill okay mr mckelhatton i just
wanted to make sure you were promoted so that if you want to object um please do so what one of my
questions face the objection on the records with citations and rules of evidence for purposes of
clarity. I'm sorry. I didn't understand what that was. Okay. So when I cross-examine your witness,
your client, because I've called her in my case-in-chief on cross, if you've wished to make
an objection, because I need a perfect record in this case, I wish for you to do the following.
Say objection. I will stop talking. State the basis for your objection with including citations
to the rules of evidence so that we can ensure that this record is absolutely clear. Is that
okay? Is that fair? You can do whatever you want to do. If I put an objection on the record,
it's up to the chair to decide whether the objection is relevant or not. So I don't have
to follow your instructions, Mr. Mulvihill, and I will follow the instructions of the chair.
This is not a courtroom. This is an administrative agency and administrative proceeding.
Excuse me for one minute. This is Sharon Saleta. Just to clarify that the formal
rules of evidence do not apply to administrative hearings understood um i just want to make sure
for purposes of the record that we have a perfect record uh in case we have to go to a different
higher court in this matter um i just had to stand up so i can grab my pa e um for references in case
there is some sort of rejection made and then i can make my argument as well so um ms rodriguez
we you just live directly let me get actually the sun study okay ms rodriguez are you on so you can
see the pictures? Yes. Okay, so I'm now referring to, for the purpose of the record, you see that,
right? I'm sorry, this SUN study, was that submitted to the RCO, Mr. Mulvihill? I'm sorry,
Mr. McElhatton, would you please direct your objections to the chair? I am not the chair,
I don't make these decisions. Mr. Mulvihill, was this study presented to the RCO? Yes,
they received a copy. And was the revised plan that you mentioned submitted to the RCO?
if you would please direct your question yeah i'm going to ask it was the revised plan submitted to
the rco it was and when was that they received a copy of it as soon as it came to my hands it was
copied in the same email if i recall correctly to ms suletta to mr macklehaddon and to ms ann moss
of the rco which is old kensington neighbors association if the chair wishes i can pull up
the email but i don't believe that's necessary i hope you accept my word i just would like when
was that when did that occur um it occurred when did that occur i can check my email but
ms zuletta if you have sharon if you have it someone just give us a time i'm looking for
timing on this yeah they've sure it's going to take me a minute to find it all right take your
time if i may in the meantime continue the question yeah let's let's move forward and then we'll get
back to your questions mr mckelhan sure so ms rodriguez you live in the corner property that's
located approximately uh here where i'm indicating my curse the upper right hand page of uh page
88 is that fair to say this is your backyard so i don't live in a corner property i live
okay so it's a simple yes or no question where i'm indicating right here
no no this is not you so this is the first one in right which is 100% lot coverage you're right
south of that you're one house south correct correct okay great let's start from there
So you see this.
I'm showing you 621, 10 a.m., upper left-hand side.
You see this, right?
You see the shadows that are cast, right?
Because the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
Fair to say?
Oh, so at 10 a.m., your entire backyard is already in shadow because of your house.
Fair to say?
12 p.m., that's the middle picture in the top.
This is what it looks like according to the sun study.
Basically, half of your yard, maybe a little bit less than half, is in shade because of your house, correct?
Or because of the houses directly adjacent to you, correct?
So is half of my house in shade because the house is next to me?
I wouldn't know.
That's not my question.
So listen to my question.
Just answer it yes or no.
This is your rear yard.
Is that fair to say where I'm indicating with my person?
No, that's not my rear yard.
we are. So this is, this is the a hundred percent lock coverage house right here. I'm indicating
along Thompson street, right? So that is not my house right there. So I don't live on, excuse me,
I'm sorry, Mr. Mulville. I don't mean to cut you off. I apologize. It's okay. You, you answer the
questions and I ask them and your attorney can ask you whatever questions they want when they're
done. You do not live on this first property in the second one down the second one. Yes. So this
Yes. So this is the first property here where I'm indicating with my cursor. You see that?
is the first property here when indicating with my cursor. You see that? Right.
Right. So this is the second property down, which is you, right?
Correct.
Okay. So where I'm indicating with my cursor here, this is your rear yard, fair to say.
Again, if you could move down just downwards towards your keyboard.
No, let me just zoom in.
Okay, great.
So these are the property ones, right?