that this this has an added advantage of the city view third is the granting of this variance in
harmony with the spirit and purpose of the zoning code section 14101 lists 15 points expressing
the purpose of the zoning code the project violates three number one protecting light and air
Number two, protecting the character of the neighborhood.
And number three, preserving the quality of life of the public realm.
And here I'm referring to the streetscape and parking.
Fourth, will the granting of the variance substantially or permanently injure or impair adequate light and air to an adjacent conforming property?
Again, this project will substantially and permanently affect the views and shadows on the adjacent property at 2002 Spring Garden, which is conforming.
finally to find unusual hardship in the case of a dimensional variance the
zoning board may consider economic detriment to the applicant if the
variance is denied in the financial burden by any work required to bring the
project into compliance well there is no physical aspect of this property that
creates a hardship the lot is deep it sits on a prominent corner with again
skyline views it will not cost the owner anything to reduce the height of this
project to fit the height limit or to match adjacent structures nor would it
be expensive to design the parking properly this last point reinforces
where we started that the need for a variance has been granted by the
applicants own design has been generated excuse me by the applicants own design
decisions and not by any dimensional or physical condition I'd be happy to to
show you the graphics um but i think the board has had these for a long time and i in the interest
of time i'd be happy to answer any questions thank you any the board have any questions for miss
Does the board have any questions for Ms. Woodcock?
This will cut.
Ms. Woodcock?
This would cut.
Mr. Miller?
I'm not finished.
I'm not finished.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Well, the way Janice described it, I thought you were finished.
Well, she has to, you know, she's been, listen, Mr. Chairman, I don't want to belabor.
The problem is she's been attacked for some of her conclusions.
So I need her to explain because, you know, there was an issue with the rendering that she prepared.
Continue, continue.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
But I want to do this with all good speed.
I'm sorry?
I just hope that it can be done quickly because I have prepared comments on what was said about my graphics and about this.
Please, go right ahead.
Okay, for the graphics, I believe that both drawings are so similar to be de minimis.
and also that the the idea that that one was trying to deceive the other you can
clearly see in both renderings that were I prepared and the other parties
prepared that the building extends far beyond 41% beyond the the 2002 spring
garden so that's having to do with the rendering Janice can you show your
screen to are you able to share screen to it didn't set it no so well I mean I
I'll bring that rendering up while I'm talking.
All right.
Secondly, I want to go over the impact of sun on the, well.
Please, I can let you do your thing.
I don't need to, you can go ahead.
All right.
Again, I could show my videos and we could be entertained,
but let me just explain mathematically the impact of the sun on 2002 Spring Garden.
in the spring and fall there's a total of 12 daylight hours this project will block 42 percent
of them and another four are blocked by the tower so that means when this project is constructed
there will only be three hours of remaining sunlight that's in the spring and fall in the
summer the project only removes 29 of the sunlight on 2002 spring garden there are 15 and a half
daylight hours and zero of them are blocked by the tower and just four and a half are blocked
by the proposed project in the winter can i ask you to put that put that on your on your screen
please okay if you would are you able to or yeah it just takes a minute and i know how dear the
time is right but you need they need to see what your your work okay because i don't know we're
they're gonna have time to see it otherwise and you can during that you
can show the city view the impact of the city view and respond to the complaints
from Ms. Stanky about your shadow study, please.
Okay, first we'll do spring and fall,
and let me get my share screen set up.
Thank you.
We did show a 24-hour clock and we did that because you need to see how much daylight is
available in the whole day. We're not trying to deceive anybody about anything. But what's
amazing is when you look at the impact of the sun in adjacent buildings and we
look at the city view tower that tower is 314 feet which we also got from Google
Earth and amazingly the shadows cast by that tower do do not overlap the
shadows that are done by the adjacent project so here you can see in the red
what the impact is and what about the the complaint that your shadow study
somehow misleads because you included nighttime and the shadows classed by the
city of Utah or how do you respond to that as I said the I think that my chart
in fact was used by the other side to explain what the impact was because it
was so clear again the reason to show 24 hours is we need to know how many hours
are available and with that I just like to move to the winter sure here you can
see that there's very there's a lot fewer daylight hours and the red it represents
and the red it represents the morning sun which we all agree are the four hours that
will be taken away by the proposed project what wasn't as clear but you can see in this graphic
is that those are the only hours except for a tiny sliver here that are available to the project so
basically available to the to to the neighboring to the neighboring product to 2002 spring garden
So while we could say, well, we don't really care about the other towers,
this is not what we're talking about today,
I just want to make clear that when you have access to sunlight,
then you have this many hours, four to four and a half hours of sunlight available,
and you take all of it away, I think that is a significant impact.
And that would place my client's property into total darkness during the winter, right?
Correct. Except for that one sliver. Okay. Let's show the board where you compare
less impactful variants. And we can move quickly here, but do you, can you, you know the board I'm
talking about where you show the more sensitive proposal versus the current? Okay. Are you able
to show that board that's it
it's the wrong version well that's that's okay that's the one though i got it yeah
okay um so tell the board uh when you say when you use the term appropriate um
explain that to the board please appropriate would mean that it's fine to have a tall building
a 50 foot tall building next to another one on Spring Garden Street but the the
pattern in the neighborhood it gives the neighborhood its character is that
these buildings step down and they step back from the street in fact when we
describe the building across the street from 2000 Spring Garden is being you
know massive and tall and why not why can't we do it too we didn't we left off
a few details that building is set back it doesn't it's set back from the side
street and this building is not so it is in the details unfortunately what gives
neighborhood its character so appropriate in this graphic we're showing
a stepped building it still has it still it still has a lot of density and it's
it just doesn't go back on lot as far as the neighbors so explain to the
board you mentioned the concept of of the least minimum you know variance and the impact um
as in your analysis was there any facts that you've heard and during you've been involved
with all the testimony is there anything unusual unique about this property which would prevent
the applicant from seeking a lesser height variance and what i mean by that is where the
height variance would not be throughout the depth of the property and it would could step back like
the other properties have you heard anything to that effect no in effect the opposite is true
because this this is a unusual lot and it is a corner lot with an incredible exposure to
to the sun it it is it's it would be easy to do a lot less density but still have a wonderful place
to to live so i feel like um it is again the design decisions of the applicant's architect
that and the applicant himself that have created the need for the variance.
Can I ask a question of Ms. Wilcox?
In your professional opinion, 2000 Spring Garden,
how far back would each of the floors have to be set back in order not to,
in order to provide the sunlight to 2002?
You understand that question?
um if you don't have it now that's fine i have it here i have a site plan the the building right
now is 120 feet deep at the bottom and it's and it's the longest step yes i'm talking about the
proposed project now i'll give you the map okay it's 120 feet deep and it's its first step back
is five feet at the bottom. And the next one steps back looks like another approximately 10.
steps back looks like another approximately 10 feet, and then we're up
high, another 12 feet. If all of those setbacks were, first of all, if you
did it the opposite, if you set back a lot at the lower level so that there
would be less building mass right behind 2002 Spring Garden, that would
that would help the access to light and air and it would also be consistent with
the other buildings on the block they all step back and most of them are only
tall at the first like third of the building so that again if those kinds of
design revisions were made that would help and finally there aren't any other
hardly that I saw I mean I'm not going to say that there's not any but there
are very few pilot houses on this block and so that's a feature that is just a
brand new and unfortunately impactful element on the project so I'll uh going to ask are you
finished with that board Ms. Janis yeah but let me remind everyone we're the bewitching hours coming
up we have three minutes and we have to make a break for stay and this has to do with the city
uh in terms of employees having a one hour lunch period etc all right so we're going to have to
We're going to continue this to another date.
Right.
I just, I understand.
I just want to make sure the applicant got their full, their full time to put on their
I want to just make sure I get the same.
I'm just asking for the same.
So let me, let me ask, uh, I'm going to ask Janice to stop.
I'm going to bring up one of the applicants exhibits and ask her to respond.
Uh, so I'm going to go ahead and I've been able to share screen, right?
Yes, I am.
Janice, why don't you respond to this?
There was a lot of criticism of your rendering.
Why don't you respond and state, in your opinion, what's going on with your rendering?
What's your response to their criticisms of it?
Again, I think that both of the renderings make the same point.
but you can there's actually includes the the scaffolding on the back of 2002
spring garden so the shape of the yellow looks less deep than my rendering how I
did my rendering was I took the applicants drawings and used their
dimensions I had accurate lot lines there is a little discrepancy on the
pilothouse but again I believe that's de minimis and I'd be happy to stipulate
that their pilot house is correct. I don't think it would change a thing about the impact of the
property. It's just the way the graphics are done, the style of the graphics.
So the parking, can you comment on the feasibility of the layout of the parking in the rear? That's
one of the variances that issue in this case is for that curb cut. Can you mention to the board
your concerns regarding how uh the layout of the parking uh can be problematic well it doesn't it's
not in accordance with the zoning code it is um it's not it's got it's too deep uh according to
the zoning code's own standards so it actually should have been a refusal um there's also the
impact of having a car go off of the city street which is not permitted so um finally parking
doesn't work very well because you have to stack the cars in order to park all three vehicles let
me let me mr demarco mr i am really truly sorry to have to interrupt it is one o'clock okay we're
going to get through this so i only have about 10 15 more minutes so i can promise you that when
when we reconvene janice i'll finish with janice uh and let me ask mr miller any idea how much time
you will need and Mr. Boland going forward because we have two dates that are available.
Mr. Chairman this is Ryan Boland I need no more than five minutes possibly two minutes.
And I know it's hard to be specific but generally how much time do you think you will need?
Let me ask the three of you do you think we can get this done in one hour?
i think it can be done all right because we have november the 10th at two o'clock we can give you
one hour for testimony only or december the 1st at 2 p.m gives you a little bit more time on that
date a little between one and two hours i'll i'll uh you know i'll suggest that we take we take the
hour i would just ask the board uh you know we spend many hours on the applicant's case i would
is if we happen to run over the one hour, I'd ask that we'd be able to complete, that's all.
I'd ask that we'd be able to complete.
That's all.
But I'm happy to try to do it in an hour, Mr. Chairman.
But I'm happy to try to do it in an hour, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
Again, I didn't mean to interrupt.
We're going to have to hold off.
It's after 1 o'clock now.
So MI-2020-000695, 2000 Spring Garden Street is continued to November the 10th at 2 p.m.
Maximum one hour.