floor at the front for each of the properties. To this area right here, where my cursor is,
is the plot plan which shows a large rear yard and there is a small alcove on the left side
of each of the properties. We don't see the plans. Okay, let me share that one then. Okay,
so you're still seeing the old one then. In this one, the plans are exhibit F.
okay can you see them now yes okay all right my apologies for that large can
you enlarge the plans I can and so here is are you able to is it a little bit
better now for a little larger okay thank you okay
Thank you.
So to the far left, and in each of these plans are identical.
I mean, I mirrored what my clients did is they found me through the 1726 or 28 approval.
They obtained the same architect, copied the same plan that was approved in 2019 by this board, and all they're asking is one year later for the board to approve, in essence, the same plan that this board previously approved.
So what it is, is each unit one is the basement and the first floor, which is, it's obviously a very large three bedroom unit.
Then you have the entrance to the second floor is through the first floor.
There's, I don't know whether this is where my cursor is to, I guess.
Let me interrupt if I can. I'm sorry because I had to sign off and sign back in. My volume was something was wrong. The plans that you're showing us, are they consistent with the plans that you keep referring to that were approved back in June of 19?
Yes. Yes. These are identical. So what my clients did was they went to the same architect here.
Originally, they went in front of the board. They had a different attorney.
The attorney presented the plans. The board, the community group, the attorney went without them.
The community group declined approval. They didn't want another.
another, and I believe that they've submitted a letter, which I didn't attach. They can attach
it, but I'll let you know. I mean, they were not in approval of another set of five, three-unit
properties. All we've done is, what my clients did, again, was they select, they found out who
the architect was. They found out that I was the attorney on this matter. They hired me. They hired
the architect. They presented these plans. And this is what we've presented to the RCO at our
meeting last month. They're not in approval, but I'm just asking that this board be consistent
with one, the neighborhood, two, the historical use of the property, the historical use of the
entire neighborhood. Unfortunately, it was rezoned and it went from multifamily use zoning to an RSA
five, but since then, multiple properties, one, the board has agreed with, but two, the actual
RCO had sent in letters of support, including 1726 and 1728 Master Street. Letters of support
went in for the board to consider when they granted the other variances. And all I'm asking
is that my clients not be prejudiced by a refusal because now, you know, for some odd reason,
they don't want any more multifamily dwellings. These are going to be brand new homes. They're
built from the ground up um they're going to be using uh quality material i mean that they're
going to some of the owners intend on keeping some of the units for themselves most of them
are not let me interrupt you just for a minute all right um so basically it's the same layout
as the other ones that were approved correct is there anything else you need to before we move on
no not at all i just asked that you you be consistent with these um let's get your client
we'll swear your client in i believe her name is spelled c-h-a-i-a last name is l-i-u yeah can you
hear me yes my name is chai ling i'm the owner of the message 1710 master street
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do all right before you begin uh just again for the stenographer the lady's name is
first name is c-h-a-i last name is lou l-i-u
thank you that's why you want to ask your client if she adopts your testimony
Escher, client, if she adopts your testimony.
Yes, I do.
Yes, I understand.
I'm sorry, I can't hear.
We can't hear you, Pat.
Pasquale, we can't hear you.
We can hear Ms. Liu.
I don't know.
This makes no sense.
We're two feet away.
I don't know.
Listen, I'll plead ignorance on this one.
No problem.
and uh do you adopt my testimony as your own yes we heard that okay okay all right and i'm loud
questions from the board no yes no yes uh what is the hardship
that they're being prejudiced because a a single family dwelling
on a $5,000.
Pat, we're not hearing you again.
Try that again.
The hardship is that it is not consistent
with the neighborhood,
that there's a selective enforcement
of the RSA 5 zoning in this matter, that a single-family resident does not fit in this neighborhood
surrounded by all entirely multifamily dwellings, that the lot size is enormous for a single-family
resident.
Tom, any other questions, Tom?
Yeah, could you reduce the number of units?
You're running into the same issues.
I mean, can they reduce it to what, to two?
I'm sure that they can attempt to do it.
It would just make it a massive, it would still have the same number of bedrooms.
It would still have the same number of the size would still be the same, but it would you're not changing the number of individuals that go in and out of the property if you're doing that.
I mean, the only I understand the fact that it is RSA five. I just unfortunately believe that this thing was missed zoned at the time that they should have left it in the at the proper zoning where it was with all the multifamily dwellings.
there are you go up and down the block you don't see any single family residences on that block
so so what they would be doing is it would make it very difficult to live in a single family
dwelling when you have all multi-family dwellings around you so all i'm asking is to be consistent
with with the prior uh requests submissions and approvals uh that have some of obviously as as
recent as 2019 just on that hundred block I can continue and go on around the other corners
which this board has approved others that were even more recent as far as past the June of 2019
so we're less than 12 months I mean then 18 months from the two approvals on both of these
I think that that's sufficient of a hardship here.
Thank you.
All right.
Anyone else wish to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Here we have Mary Jones.
Mary, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good morning, Ms. Jones.
please identify yourself with a record good morning my name is mary jones i
work for council president daryl clark room 494 city hall uh 19107 and you swear and affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed
Yes. Today, I'd like to put on the record that our office echoes the community sentiment
in opposing the granting of these variances. Every zoning case is unique. And despite the
fact that there's a presence of other multifamily housing in the area, it does not mean that the
neighborhood wants more multifamily housing they have expressed a desire for
more single-family housing and further the applicant has not expressed a
expressed a hardship for this variance um so we like to support the opposition thank you
hardship for this variance.
thank you anyone else
that's all uh actually one minute yes yes am i still on yes okay i wanted to just
swear in the other uh owners of the property so that way that they're they're going to also
So, adopt my testimony.
I'm assuming you want that for the record?
Well, I think Ms. Liu, is she the principal?
She's of 1710, but there are five.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I thought she was.
Yes, there are five separate owners.
All right, so let's get them individually, yeah.
And it was Ms. Lin.
Chai Lin was 1710.
And what I can do is I can ask each,
I can ask the same question one time
and have each of them answer yes.
Yeah, well, let them get their names
and then ask you in unison
if they adopt.
I'm going to call Mr. Hang Yang,
the owner of...
We're having a hard time hearing you, Pat.
You've got to get closer to that mic.
1710 Master Street, Hang Yang, the owner?
1712, I'm sorry.
Would you state your name?
Yeah, my name is Hang Yang.
Okay, now I'm going to call...
Please spell it.
H-A-N-G-Y-A-N-G
is the owner of Yang Partners,
the owner of 1712 Master.
have a seat um the owner of 1714 i paul pat you you're still you're drifting away we can't
i'll deal owner of 1714 is sue chung chan spell his name for us
pat you got to get closer to the mic
i'm sorry i cannot hear i'm sorry
Pat, you're having problems with your service
I believe it's probably your service
That's good, right there
1714 is
S-I-U-C-H-U-N-G-C-H-A-N
That's Mr. Chan right there
Now I'm going to call
Benson Jang
The owner of 1716
It's B-E-N-S-O-N
J-I-A-N-G
You can sit down
And now Rang Zhao
R-O-N-G
Z-H-A-O
The owner of 1718 Master Street
Thank you, now you can just ask him in unison
Has everyone
Heard the testimony
That I provided on your behalf
Do you adopt
My testimony as your own
yes okay okay all right thank you frank did you want to just swear in the whole group
yeah the this okay that everyone who's just been introduced all the owners of the master street
properties is swearing for them to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you
this is unique unique uh i tried i tried i tried even the social distancing the mask everything
is possible uh understood uh planning commission i'm sorry excuse me before that anyone else wish
to testify in this case no and sharon we have a letter in the file from the rco
I looked for one and couldn't find it. What is the name of the RCO? What is the coordinating RCO,
Mr. Colavita? Bear with me a moment.
While he's looking, can I say that we did receive refusals for each property, and we received the notices the only refusal was a use refusal. They meet all dimensional requirements.
It's Ms. Van Story. I'm trying to remember the name of her group.
my apologies that i don't have their information immediately ready no problem no problem
um anyone else want to testify i think tom you said no hands were up
no hands at this time thank you planning commission good morning david fecto city
Planning Commission Mr. Chairman and members of the board these properties are indicated for residential single-family youth
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, these properties are indicated for residential single-family use in the city's comprehensive plan.
Since the 2014 zoning map changes, the nature of the block has changed from primarily vacant land to a mix of single and multifamily homes.
However, we do not believe the applicant has proven that there is a hardship.
Accordingly, we do not recommend this application be approved.
Would you happen to know how the Planning Commission, what their decision was back in June of 2019, when our board, this board, approved the other multifamilies?
I don't have the recommendations from the, from the zoning board applications, Mr. Chairman, but I do know the planning commission itself recommended approval to council for the, for the original zoning map changes in 2014
Yeah, I can understand that. But I'm just curious because there's been so many multifamilies over the last several years on that block and in close proximity.
um hold on uh i would i i'm sharing if i want to i want to i'd like for the executive board
to have a discussion on this and we can render a decision next wednesday is it okay if i use
language pending a letter from the rco um if you are you would have to leave the record open then
and mr colavita would have to come back if you are uh if you close the record you cannot then
receive the letter from the RCO. By the way, I found it. I found it. Okay, here we go. Community
Land Trust Corporation. And let me see if I can share this. And took a while.
I'm just trying to find it on the shared, here it goes, is it shared?
Yes. Okay. So, I will reduce this so you can see. Came in to me on 921. And here's the community land trust.
10 to 10 oppose, zero support. Is that correct?
Correct. There were board members. More than less, I should say.
Understood. I would recommend to my board member and fellow board members that the record be closed and we render a decision at our next executive meeting, Wednesday, the 21st.
You could also do it tomorrow if you'd like.
Tomorrow. Okay. We can do that tomorrow. That's the 14th tomorrow, correct?