the courtyard a view of the courtyard of the existing building the rear elevation of the new
carriage house structure and i'll leave it on this view which gives you a a good sense of how it sits
into the site. Thank you.
Council. Yeah, I think the board has questions for the architects.
If not, why don't we do why don't we bring your client on and then we'll give it to the board.
Yeah, if Anil or Laura Nanda could raise their hand, please.
i see no one in the audience with that name at the moment it might be one of the numbers
or chairman if it's okay as a as a uh officer of the court as an officer of the court we'll
we'll uh accept your testimony thank you demarca do you have any questions before we
move forward uh no if you want me to make my statement now i can by the way thank you for
the accommodation that i greatly appreciate that sure why don't you why don't you make your
statement and then okay yeah agreed on the variance the position of the home of the not
the home the the new addition is what we negotiated and got approved by the historical commission so
the applicant was always wedded to that positioning and it resulted in the refusal. So obviously
we are not, and I represent the next door neighbor, Mr. Leonard, Tom Leonard, who's next
door. Obviously we're okay with the position of the addition. It's what we negotiated. The only
thing I wanted to add, and Rachel did say it, but the other reason why the variance is appropriate
is because the applicant has committed
to signing a written construction agreement
with the Spring Garden Civic Association and my client,
which involves some reasonable concessions
on the construction process,
which are obviously very important to Mr. Leonard.
Rachel's client has committed to that.
An agreement will be signed.
And based on all of that,
we are in support of the requested variance.
Pat, I think, may want to speak as well,
But the three parties are involved in a discussion.
We'll have a written agreement.
And Rachel, if you could just confirm that, we're in support of the variance.
So thank you.
As mentioned, Chairman, and I know this has nothing to do with zoning, just for everybody's
comfort, and working with Evan and his team and the contractors and the client, we are
committed to a written agreement on the construction.
And we want to make sure that it goes seamlessly.
And we continue to have a good relationship with our next door neighbor.
So we appreciate it.
Questions from the board?
I have no questions or comments from our attorney.
No, not at this time.
Questions or comments from the audience or the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission, A-M-Y-B-O-I-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing R&1 residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The proposed structure has the same footprint and location as the garage existing since at least 1996.
These tenants would have access to the public right away via Wallace Place.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant their requested variances for multiple principal buildings and rear yard setbacks.
Thank you.
MI 2025-000-306-2313, Green Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
thank you for your comment council thank you number 10 mi 2025 000 303 26 20 east ontario
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2025.
street vernon anastasio is the attorney there's unanimous support from port richmond on patrol
and civic association and a letter of support from council member driscoll
ver anastasio will be rejoining us as a panelist thank you good afternoon mr chair counsel you've
already been sworn just for the record please state your name yep it's ver anastasio could
you identify your client a relationship to the property uh yes anthony corsi is my client and
And he is here present virtually at the hearing.
Right.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal and do you agree with its accuracy?
Please start your presentation, sir.
Thank you.
Okay. Back in 1963, as my cursor shows, this property went from a vacant store and a one
family. It was supposed to be turned into a one family with the store being removed.
Well, that never happened. And as a result, the two units stayed in the property since before 1963.
it's a corner property
and over the years
before my client purchased the property
that store was converted instead
to, I'm going to stop sharing for a moment
and reshare, to a unit
a residential unit
this went blank for some reason
And my apologies, I'm going to try this one more time.
So my client purchased this property just several months ago
and wants to legalize the existing two-family dwelling.
And please excuse me, I'm going to pull up the binder one more time here.
it's coming out yep thanks for your patience um so nevertheless
Nevertheless, it has been refused because the property is zoned RSA 5, but as stated, it's a pre-existing two-family dwelling that's been a part of Port Richmond for, you know, 60-plus years.
Everybody in the neighborhood knows it, and as a result, we were able to get unanimous support from the community.
I'm going to show you the plans.
I'll have to pull out a little bit.
So this is the first floor.
I'm sorry.
This is...
and that's the first floor plan
unit one
come in through the side instead of going up the stairs you come into unit one it's 1303 square
feet you've got two bedrooms to the right one bedroom to the other end and in the center
a really nice open concept living room, dining room, kitchen, washer, dryer, and a full bath
on each end as well. This is the trash chalet that will be used on the side of the property
to house both units trash. Both tenants will have access to it. And here's unit two, 1,408 square.
Tenants will have access to it.
And here's unit two, 1,408 square feet.
Again, with the primary bedroom on one end, two bedrooms on the other,
and in between, really nice open layout concept living room, dining room, kitchen.
This with a nice laundry space and a full bath on this end as well, and a linen closet.
these are again existing conditions here's the property again
and let me show you some
there's the side of the property as you can see it's pretty deep
and here's the interior photos
clients met with the rco we have proof of mailing i have an 84 page exhibit packet that i'm going
to move into evidence right now and this is what we're dealing with as far as the interior is
concerned because my client purchased it with the two separate units already built out because the
neighbors and the rco in particular um have a long history of this property being two units
well before 1963, when one of the units was commercial,
and then subsequently when both of the units were residential.
And because we've enjoyed the support of the RCO,
and I believe Council Member Driscoll also sent a letter of support.
And here's the proof of mailing.
158 individual households were mailed but for all those reasons we're asking respectfully
that the variance be granted in this case and with that I'd like to have Mr. Corsi please
raise his virtual hand as you can see here on the corners most of them are CMX1 this one would be an
anomaly. Anthony Corsi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yeah, Anthony Corsi, A-N-T-H-O-N-Y-C-O-R-S-E-Y. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Counsel? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Corsi,
did you hear my presentation today? Yes. Everyone accurate to the best of your knowledge?
yes and do you adopt it as your own yes thank you i have nothing further mr chair questions
from the board i have a question could you let me know where would the trash structure go
um in relation to the diagram of the picture that you showed us on the outside uh this
not this side but the other side the uh the longer uh section let me see if i can show you
let me get to it for you unless of course you have a other recommendation but it would be over here
and there is no outdoor or rear yard space no no if there was believe me we we would prefer to keep
it inside other questions is there streets approval to place that enclosure in the side
in the right of way well so long as it's against the property that it's i don't necessarily think
that that's an issue that's not really an enforcement issue it's a depth thing um because
it's but okay i think if we had the we didn't have the neighbor support for it i think that
you know it's not the neighbors it's a wheelchair access and ada accessibility on the sidewalk
so there's an encroachment zone and yeah that's yeah a wheelchair isn't going to
have any problem getting through here with the with the chalet that we've come up with
however um and there won't be any my point was there won't be any enforcement unless
it wasn't agreed to by the neighbors but yes i i hear you that's where it would go and then
what's happening to the front door at the original property address if you're going to use the side
door now as the primary entrance the front door is just going to be part of the the front bedroom
it's just going to be closed off and it's going to be a window so it's not going to be a another
form of egress for the first floor unit no there's gonna be one door for first floor and then if you
make a left up the stairs it's it's for both units so this will be the this will be the primary
so this will be the this will be the primary entrance and exit
entrance and exit. Understood.
understood okay can you go back to the floor plan to show that i think that make it clearer
you want to see the plan itself right like because you yeah because you got it first
so you can i mean zoom out so you can see the whole thing okay
it still doesn't show the whole thing
I think what you're looking for is this here.
Right, right.
By the way, here's our chalet over there.
It's a trench location, right?
Right.
Any other questions?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the audience or the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
um planning commission amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plans
recommends no change to the existing rsi 5 residential single family and zoning at this
location the structure was previously one family ground floor commercial the conversion of the
ground floor commercial into residential is more in the spirit of the residential nature of the
zoning the planning commission recommends that the board grant their requested variance for two
family household living thank you mi 2025 000 303 2620 east ontario street i vote yes
johns my vote is yes cheryl gaston my vote is yes tanetta graham my vote is yes i win my vote is yes
thank you all thank you see mr knockamson stepped out for a minute
Mr. O'Brien, why don't you come up?
Number six, MI 2024-007-538-1318 McKean Street.
William O'Brien is the attorney.
Mr. O'Brien, could you please state your name and spell for the court's stenographer?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
could you identify your client the relationship to the property excuse me chair this is the
court reporter i did not hear any responses from the attorney okay let's it's just is the mic one
bill here you go good uh good afternoon mr chairman members of the board william o'brien
W-I-L-L-I-A-M
O-B-R-I-E-N
the Manioc Law Office
for Derek and
Maria Baker, owners of
1318 McKean Street
and we'll do this over again, do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth
do you waive the reading
the refusal to agree with its accuracy
starting your presentation
sitting to my right is Derek Baker