block of five feet at four percent eliminated the last the block of the last five feet
We eliminated the last block of five feet.
so that then that gives you a lot more from the end of that second block to the parking area
it adds another five feet correct which gets you to the 24 feet rather that's right and and there
is no there is that is all that would all be asphalt um at the bottom of the access ramp
and across the parking spaces and the parking aisle.
So the whole thing would be blended together.
There is no discrete structure that would, you know, provide an impediment to a vehicle maneuvering.
And the ramp itself, the only place it would deviate from the parking spaces along the side would be at the end of the 18-foot parking space, the beginning of the 24-foot aisle.
That's the only place where there would be a discrete vertical break and grade.
That's where it would begin.
So, look, this record is already completely confusing.
and unfortunately I don't understand that but well let me mr. plant let me try to understand
something because I think what you just told me is the lip of the ramp is not where it's supposed
to be on your drawing am I hearing correctly drawing does not indicate a lip there I'm simply
simply showing you the slope. But it says vertical vertical ramp to garage floor elevation
and this is the drawing that you submitted to the streets department which you're claiming
was approved correct?
This is the drawing that was approved submitted to streets and approved by the streets department
correct? No this I don't know that this drawing was submitted to the streets department.
that's what your attorney just said that no there are two there are two uh plans rich in in my
documents one this simply shows the ramp in the and it shows what the uh you know the incline and
the percentage here it also shows 24 feet between the parking spaces which is what is required by
the zoning code these other issues are not zoning issues but this shows because that the ramp is
feasible. So I'm going to object. That is absolutely not correct. The 24-foot driveway
aisle is in the zoning code. Yes. And the parking has to be accessible, and that's in the zoning
code. If the parking is not accessible, it should not have received a permit. So it is a zoning
issue. Now, what I've been told now is that this distance is not correct, that the ramp exists
somewhere else, and is not accurately drawn. Am I hearing this right? Mr. Plante, please clarify.
That is not correct.
Not correct.
I'm sorry, Mr. Plank.
Well, so what is the distance from the edge of the driveway ramp to the parking?
24 feet.
So this ramp should be back here then, right?
If you want to, yes.
The ramp starts there, 24 feet from the parking.
So this distance from the top of the ramp to this point here has to traverse 9.7 feet, doesn't it?
That is not true.
I'm sorry.
You said the depth of this parking ramp is 9.7 feet.
Mr. DeMarco, as I've said repeatedly, a portion of that dry vial is also slow.
That's why we picked the end.
And that points to 9.7 feet at the end of the five feet.
A portion of that 24-foot dry vial is sloped.
As it is permitted, even if this was a surface lot where the grade on the surface of the lot would be regulated,
we would be permitted to have a 10% grade.
um a garage is not regulated the slope is not regulated but we're
you know well under the uh allowable slope in this case so let me let me ask you this
no obstruction just to to a vehicle driving uh at the end of the ramp and into the drive-off
so let me ask you this so let me let me make sure i understand these numbers are accurate
though right these footages this five feet five feet 27 feet yes five feet five feet five feet
right all right and those add up to 52 a little over 52 feet right that's right and the distance
right? That's right. And the distance that they travel down into the depth is 9.7 feet,
that they travel down
correct? Correct. All right. When you do the math, that's an 18% slope, isn't it?
Do you agree with that? You did these measurements, right?
Let me ask you this. The run of the ramp is 52.6 feet, right? You said yes to that, right?
I'll have to add this up. It's been a little while.
All right. But we agree that the ramp travels to a depth of 9.7 feet, right? You've testified as that, right?
I believe that is true.
All right. That's 18, a little over 18 percent average, isn't it?
And that the last part of my question, Mr. Plan, is that does not match.
The drawing that you're looking at here, I believe, has a shallower or elevation.
Well, here's what I'm getting at. And I appreciate your patience, Mr. Chairman.
But here's what I'm getting at.
these percentages don't match a slope of 18%.
Do you agree with that, Mr. Plant?
The highest slope is 17%, and it's less at these levels, right?
That's right.
This drawing that you're looking at, Mr. DeMarco,
contemplates a difference from the sidewalk elevation
to the drive aisle elevation.
Because your letter states the top is 42 feet
and then the bottom is 32.58 feet.
That's what your letter says, right?
That is correct.
That's 9.7 feet, right?
yes that drawing that the letter does not reflect exactly what's on this floor
all right so the the letter but these this drawing was attached to your letter as support for the
letter right i don't know the answer to that all right well is is the number that's on your letter
of 42 feet which will be the top of the ramp is that inaccurate uh
that uh well that drawing that that elevation is not specified on any of the plans to make to the
to the uh the city um so i believe that the parking elevation could be set as needed at
that elevation, or to create a flatter ramp, a milder ramp, at a slightly higher elevation,
which is what's shown on the drawing.
All right.
But so you're basically, do I have your testimony correct?
And so we're clear for the record here, Mr. Plant, these drawings are not really what's
intended to be built.
Is that what you're telling me?
there's flexibility and you can do what you want here? There is flexibility. The ramp is not
regulated. Hold on a minute. Hold on. Ultimately, you have to construct this, right? And it has to
work. Do we agree with that? That's correct. All right. So the slope of this ramp has to be a
certain slope that will allow the cars to enter and exit without damaging themselves, right?
That is correct. All right. And the streets department, you've claimed and your attorney
has claimed the streets department has approved all this right the streets department has approved
the plans uh that were submitted i believe and that you have a copy of that uh depict the entrance
to the to the they're in my exhibit packet if you want me to pull it up but again these aren't even
zoning issues this is like it's incorrect it's incorrect let me ask the question let me just
a simple mr mr plant if this garage were built according to the plan does it work yes all right
you don't see any reason why it would not work correct or is that right all right so why are we
beating up this this beating up the same issues going on because we're meeting you they're not
going to first of all from the from a practical standpoint who would spend the tens of thousands
maybe, I don't know, a million dollars to build an underground garage that isn't usable.
I mean, no one's going to do that.
Well, here's the issue, Mr. Chairman.
That's what I want to hear.
What is the issue?
I'm going to answer your question.
The problem is, in this exhibit, there's an elevator here.
In this exhibit, there's an elevator here. You see here, Mr. Chairman, there's an elevator on the, this is what really was intended. And, you know, the architect admitted that there was a, that is, that's incorrect. Now they want to go with the ramp. The ramp, the ramp is their open space.
You see here, Mr. Chairman.
so the point we have been making and you know everybody keeps dancing around these numbers
but this is their open space in order to receive the over-the-counter permit so they ditched the
elevator and put and tried to count it as open space by including a ramp and we're trying to
tell you and our expert testified i'm sorry you don't remember it but our expert testified janice
Woodcock, testify that the
ramp is
unfeasible.
It just doesn't
work. The ramp extends
to the... The elimination of
the elevator, what harm
is caused by that?
It's by having a ramp
they can use it. It would be a structure
if it was an elevator, and it would not allow them
enough open space to appear. But they eliminate
the elevator. So where's the harm done?
Well, we're saying that
they included the ramp in order to avoid having to request a variance, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chair, there has been testimony at this. I think it was at the second hearing when the
architect testified that at one point there was a plan that included an elevator. That language
was just a carryover. The plan that was submitted and approved has a ramp on it.
But the point is, Mr. Chairman, this is how they got the over-the-counter permit. The ramp doesn't
work there's going to be a change in the future we have another appeal but i'm trying to show you
on that it's not just not accessible i mean look at the distance but richard you just said you made
a statement that the ramp does not work right the the mr plant says that it does work right so you
have a factual determination to make whether to believe our expert or mr plant i have to believe
them because i can't imagine spending all this money for something that is not functional it
doesn't make any sense i mean i'm oversimplifying it sometimes i have a tendency to do that
but underground garages are extremely extremely expensive all right let me let me ask it i can
ask a final uh a final question of mr plant so we can move on mr plant wherever this driveway ramp
ends. A vehicle, especially a handicapped van, you're showing a handicapped space right here,
correct? That's right. All right. A handicapped van, we can agree, is a larger vehicle than usual,
correct? The van, yeah. All right. So even if the ramp is somewhere where you're claiming it to be
and not right here, which is shown on this drawing, a handicapped van would have to make
multiple turns if these spaces were occupied would it not in order to in order to shoehorn
back into this handicapped space? Well it would be the same situation in really as really any
normal conforming surface parking lot or garage with a 24-foot drive aisle. So they may be able
to make that in one maneuver, they may need two.
Well, let's take the flip side.
Let's say the van somehow gets into this handicapped space.
If these spaces are occupied, how's the van going to make the turn to get up the ramp?
Who's going to have to make multiple three-point turns?
Am I correct?
I don't know that that's true.
I can't say that I put a turning template on this, but more than one,
Even if they had to make several maneuvers, there's no reason they couldn't do that.
And it's exactly the same condition that exists in every other parking lot in the city that has a 24-foot drive aisle and a conforming handicap space that's 11 feet wide.
You're saying every other parking scenario in the city of Philadelphia has this kind of a turn?
Obviously, I'm not.
I'm telling you that the dimensional issues here are exactly the same.
So even if it was a surface parking lot and we had the 24-foot drive aisle
and the conforming space, you would have the same condition.
All right.
Would you agree – this is my final question, Mr. Planck.
Would you agree that if this ramp extends into the 24 feet that you've shown
for the driveway aisle, that would be something that would be prohibited
by the zoning code?
It is not.
It is not. The ramp, because you're confusing this as though there is an obstruction, but the ramp is no more than a portion of...
But the ramp is no more than a portion of the drive aisle, which is slope.
All right.
I'll rephrase it.
I've depicted it as a ramp.
All right.
I'll rephrase it.
If this ramp extends into this 24-feet driveway, if, I understand you saying it doesn't, but if this ramp were to extend into that 24 feet, a refusal would be required, right?
It would not.
it's not an obstruction to to the uh the drive aisle but it doesn't so what it doesn't matter
if it did it doesn't all right according to mr plant's testimony i don't mean to be
curt here but we can if we can use anything mr chairman mr chairman mr chairman yes tom
it seemed like to me that the ramp overlaps with the driveway but that's not a code violation
thank you yep i know for the questions mr chairman all right mr phillips i'm sorry mr
reuter do you have anything to add because we're going to wrap this thing up uh no just uh maybe
just for the clarification of the record because i think the record's now going to be a little bit
confused i just want to ask mr plant just a couple quick questions which i think we all know the
answers to but i just want it to be clear um first of all mr plant just so we know for the record
that it's clear um how many parking spaces will be in the uh this garage four parking spaces sorry
we didn't hear that four parking spaces okay and um in terms of the philadelphia code the code
refers to a uh parking aisle and driveway and those are not the same thing is that right
Correct.
And you agree that a driveway connects to a parking aisle, which I think is also sometimes called a drive aisle.
Is that right?
That's correct.