the window sight lines still line up so with all the changes that they had
requested we had added additional tearing in the back from the rear setbacks
from the second third fourth so with all these recommendations from the plant
historic Commission we ended up with the final design is it your testimony that
the massing of the building was reduced as a result of the historical review process.
And I believe you just said that the setbacks on each level were increased through that
process.
As the building progression happened, we increased more and more.
Now, do these, does this progression exhibit show that progression of increased setback to the rear?
Would you please use your cursor and point that out to the board?
So in concept one, we're just rear decks with coverings on the roof.
And are those vertical in arrangement?
Yes, vertical in arrangement.
So they all reach the rearmost setback?
Please explain how that changed.
We took direction from what they considered historically sensitive and more accurate projects,
such references as Green Street and other previously approved projects.
and tiered them kind of accordingly okay and the final plan could you please use your cursor and
show the board how the setbacks appear in the final plan so in the final plan it goes five feet
on the second floor 10 feet on the third floor and 12 feet on on the fourth floor setback
And so now we have a stepped appearance?
Did the historical review process change the number of units in your plan?
We reduced the density from seven permitted by right to five.
And what was the feedback that you received that prompted you to make that change?
We didn't want to cram a bunch of units in.
We wanted them to be comfortable units, not a bunch of one bedrooms.
So is it fair to say that the height was reduced as a result of the historic review process?
Is it fair to say that the massing was reduced as a result of the historical review process?
as a result of the historical review process?
Is it fair to say that the number of units were reduced
as a result of the historical review process?
Did you attend the public hearings on this matter?
Were there representatives from the Spring Garden Civic Association
at those hearings?
Did those representatives speak?
Did you attend a meeting with the director or executive director of the Spring Garden Civic Association, Pat Freeland?
Did you discuss these plans with Ms. Freeland as part of the historical review process?
Can you tell the board what the priorities of the Historical Commission and its staff were regarding the height?
That we match and very sensitive to 2002 Spring Garden.
Laura, you've seen the exhibits presented by Ms. Woodcock, the expert hired by the next-door neighbor.
Have you not?
Yes. Do you believe that those images presented by Ms. Woodcock fairly and accurately depict the proposed structure?
Please explain your difference with her renderings.
A couple. One of the renderings that has the perspective from the rear, looking from the parking garage.
she has uh the one that uh demarco pointed out has um sight line issues where the building does
seem a little skewed and distorted to make it look larger than it should be um she also has
reference to uh light and shadow diagrams where in one of them it specifically says
our design can't cast a shadow on 2002 but on her historically correct or
appropriate diagram shows 2002 casting a shadow on 2000 spring garden so if I
understand what you're saying the opponent believes it's okay for shadow
to be cast from her property, but that no shadow should result from our property to hers.
Objection?
Objection?
Objection?
Declatation, calling for a legal conclusion, leading the witness, all sorts of
improper questions. I've kept quiet until now. That's an improper question for Mr. Kang.
Just saying.
Thank you.
Well, we can, we can address this on Revolve after we hear Ms. Woodcock.
If someone is speaking, we can't hear you.
Are you?
I can.
Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry.
I'm speaking through the witness's computer, so I'll restate my question.
Can everybody hear me?
Thank you.
Mr. Kent, would you please explain the code difficulty with 20th Street being deemed the front of the property?
20th Street being deemed the front automatically creates a height variance.
To line up with 2002 Spring Garden, the building is 49 feet to the top of the roof.
so sorry i'm talking i'm talking about not i'm not speaking about height now i'm talking about
access from 20th street for vehicles so access from 20th street um
Access from 20th Street, there was an existing curb cut, so if it is deemed a side street or rear street, parking is permitted.
By calling 20th Street another front, it triggers the parking refusal on an RM1 law.
do you have an opinion to a degree of certainty as an architect what the front of this property
is 25 spring garden is absolutely the front and can you explain your answer
it historically matches all the buildings on on spring garden
um this side as it goes down 20th street is as a side facade i mean historically it is not
considered a primary frontage can you comment on the similarity between this property and the
property across 20th street yes um we have similar i guess stepping tearing um that they're not exact
but also the property across the street has a garage access directly off 20th
Street it also treats it like a side yard or side property line now can does
the five-foot setback issue for the balconies follow the same logic
Are any of the balconies within five feet of the front of this property
if Spring Garden Street is the front?
And again, what is the front of this property?
Spring Garden.
Thank you.
Now, you heard a representation made by Mr. DeMarco,
that the historical commission did not require that this property be 50 feet high.
Do you agree or disagree with that statement?
I disagree.
Historic was very adamant about us lining up and showing sight lines that are similar to 2002.
Mr. Chairman, if I can have just a moment, I think those are all my questions, but I just need to tell myself.
Okay, can you mute that, please?
Mr. Chairman, those are all my questions on direct with this witness.
I have a witness, a neighbor, the manager of the neighboring property, who will not be available to us after 12 noon.
I don't know how long cross will be, and I don't want to limit anybody's cross.
But I'm wondering if I could take that witness out of order.
All right, we'll do that, and then we'll come back for cross on Mr. Kang.
Thank you.
Is Mr. Honler available?
um can you please activate uh charles homler i don't know if he's
uh so that he can speak
great he can unmute himself hi how are you
can you hear me uh yes we can would you please state your name for the record and spell it
and your address my name is charles homler that's h-o-m as in michael l-e-r and i'm the
community manager for city view of the condominium association uh that's at 2001
hamilton street we share the property line with every property on the even side
We share the property line with every property on the even side of Spring Garden between 20th and 21st Street.
We'll be right back.
Thank you.
Mr. Holmer, do you swear to this firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Miller?
Mr. Holmer, have you, well, first of all, could you explain your involvement in this neighborhood to the board?
I'm the manager of City View 2 Condominium Association.
The property behind was formerly a hotel that was converted into condominiums in the early 2000s.
We have 542 individual units that are owned by different people, while some are owned by multiple.
Some multiple units are owned by the same individual a couple times.
So I represent the ownership of the property working in contingency with the boards of directors of the association
and the joint committee that acts sort of as a master association for them.
I've been there since April of 2014, so six and a half years.
And were you involved in the historical review process?
Mr. Miller, I need to interrupt you. I apologize.
You're not coming through clear. You're a bit muffled.
I apologize, Mr. Chairman.
That's much better. Thank you.
I apologize.
Mr. Homler, were you involved in the historical review process for the plans that are before the zoning board?
I appeared with the president of the City View Two Condominium Association at a meeting at the municipal building,
municipal services building, where we gave testimony about the property and our consent for it to move forward.
And were you supportive of the project?
Yes, absolutely.
Would you comment on your support and the reasons for it?
Well, we've had a multitude of issues that have come up over time.
And it's just because when the hotel was there, maybe they really weren't enforcing their property boundaries.
But the properties on the 20th block of Spring Garden have allowed a lot of overgrowth on our structure and encroached on the property line over time.
And in 2016, when we were doing a major repair of the garage structure, which you see very clearly in the pictures that have been shared earlier, we had to remove a lot of ivy and repair some masonry work there.
At that point in time, we became aware of the scaffolding situation in the parcel behind.
And we've had some garbage issues and whatnot as well in this right of way.
And they've also attached things to our physical structure.
So when we found that there was an opportunity for someone that's developing the parcel to
improve that corner's attractiveness, to clear up some visual obstructions, and that
they had made overtures to try to be a good neighbor, that was something that was warmly
received by directors of the boards of City View and City View 2.
can you characterize the current appearance of the property at 2000 spring garden street
mr miller i think that the photographs you showed give us a clear indication of the condition
i don't mean to be disrespectful but um thank you mr chairman so thank you understood uh mr
Mr. Hummler, have you have you carefully reviewed the proposed plans for this project?
As carefully as I can, not being an architect, there are certain things that would, you know,
I can I can do it from a qualitative more than a quantitative view. I'm not looking at things as
detailed as you or the zoning board are. But from an aesthetics perspective, the consensus is that
it's a very attractive building. We believe it'll enhance that corner and enhance property
rights, property values for the 542 unit owners that we represent as well as other people in the
community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Boland or Mr. DeMarco, any questions for this
witness? I have a few. Thank you. Mr. Hamler, can you hear me? Yes, absolutely. You're the
building manager of city view uh yes do you live in city view no but for two years i did live in
the neighborhood before i got married and i just answered a direct thank you yeah that's fine i'm
going to object to the standing of mr homler to testify he doesn't even live in the property
uh but i'll continue with my questioning but i want to note that for the record
mr homler the city view building is a high-rise building right yes there are two separate
towers. Okay. And those people are in upper floors, correct? They look down on these properties,
right? Yes. So they're not adjacent in any way to the proposed development, would you agree?
Yes. So they're not adjacent in any way to the proposed development. Would you agree?
No, absolutely not. They are. They are. They are adjacent.
I'm sorry. They're up in the air, correct?
They look out their window. They see it. And it's the garage, which is a common element, is actually the entire border for every single parcel along the 20th to 20th, the 2000 block of Spring Garden.
Right. Let me ask you a question, Mr. Handler.
What floor do the residential units begin?
They begin at the third floor.
What is the height of the – what floor – compare that to the height of the garage.