of materially higher construction costs that then existed in 2019 when this was first approved,
and most importantly, given the types of units that are typically marketable in this particular
area. My client has been developing and renting in this area for nearly 20 years and has significant
experience to assess the viability of any particular proposal. As previously designed,
each of the two units were nearly 2,000 square feet each, which is entirely out of character
for this area. The prior zoning permit, as I referenced, is shown on the screen here
at Exhibit 8. And this application does not propose to change anything about the structure
that was previously approved. And again, you can see here the refusal that was previously issued
and approve the notice of decision. Now, prior to the 2019 approval, and I'll scroll back up here,
the property was historically used as a three-family dwelling dating back to 1963,
which is consistent with today's request. And again, you can see that historical permit here
shown at Exhibit 8. And again, back in 1963, up until the structure was demolished,
it was used as a three-family dwelling. Now, in light of the owner's determination that the prior
approval is not constructible, the owner sought to redesign the interior to create more marketable
and affordable units for this area. The most efficient redesign ultimately resulted in just
one extra unit. The new floor plans are shown in the packet at exhibit 11. This design now has a
mix of unit types including one, two, and a three-bedroom unit. Each of these units is bi-level
and they are still extremely large. Unit one, which is shown in green here in a closer view,
is a two-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath unit of over 1,300 square feet that spans across three
floors. Unit two is a one-bedroom unit, one-and-a-half bath of 898 square feet spanning two
floors. Unit 3 is a one-bedroom, one-and-a-half bath unit. Unit 3 is a three-bedroom, four-bathroom
unit of about 1,500 square feet across two floors, which also has the use of the private
roof deck. And let me zoom out just so you can see Unit 3 a little bit better. This unit
mix is far more consistent with the Mantua community's desire to see a mix of unit types
and price points. Trash will be stored in the rear, which can be accessed given the
Trash will be stored in the rear, which can be accessed given the property's location on a corner.
We have also included a rendering of the structure, and as I mentioned, the zoning dimensions of the structure are not proposed to change from what was previously approved, so this was filed as a change of use application.
We do have the project architect here in case the board has any questions on the new design.
Now, regarding the refusal, the proposal received only one refusal for the proposed multifamily use.
The refusal is not specifically for the additional unit, but is issued, as is common, as if the entire proposal is prohibited.
You can see here it's issued as if the four units are entirely prohibited.
As the board has seen, this proposal is fully permitted for two units, and the scope of the board's review today is just limited to that one additional unit.
This is how L&I issues these types of refusals, so I'm just making this note so that the scope of review is clear.
As I mentioned, the structure itself is not changing.
So this change only impacts the interior layout and, again, is being done to create much more efficient and marketable units with a much more desirable design with a wide range of unit types.
The applicant submits to a hardship given the history of the property, the size of the property, as well as the context of this neighborhood and block.
As I mentioned, the multifamily use is not in question today, given the applicant's permitted right to build a duplex.
Even putting the current approval aside, proposing a new single-family or two-family home on this block would also represent a deviation from the predominantly higher-density multifamily development at this corner.
As I referenced earlier, this corner has multifamily densities ranging from 5 units all the way to 14 units directly across the street from this property on Mount Vernon Street.
The additional density will directly contribute to the vitality of this neighborhood and create a more desirable living space for the future tenants.
The property is also uniquely situated in that it has a nearly six-year history of an attempted development that has never been achieved under the former owner or the now current owner.
The applicant is confident that today's request will finally achieve the missing balancing unit types that will enable this project to come to light.
The applicant submits the number of proposed units is the least minimum, and this is a
de minimis increase in just one unit that is directly driven by design and unit feasibility
considerations.
Furthermore, as I mentioned, the project was designed to include a significant mix of unit
types, sizes, and layouts to encourage a variety of different price points and tenancies.
We submit that the proposal will not increase congestion, harm neighbor's properties,
or impair light and air. A full analysis is provided in the memo of law submitted to the
board at Exhibit 12, and I'm happy to touch on any particular point in additional detail.
With respects to the community, as Mr. Chairman mentioned, we did meet with Mantua some time ago
and they did issue a letter of support for this one unit increase. So at this point,
I would ask if the administrator could look for Rami Shrine and have him unmuted.
Do you see him, Jason?
I don't see that individual in the virtual audience, but I see Waleska Stanka.
Waleska is the architect.
If the board has any questions for her, Rami should be there, unless he's with her.
You know what?
He may be with her.
Why don't we unmute Waleska, because I think he might be with her.
i've been allowed to speak hello please hi yes name and spell it please sure ramy shrine r-a-m-y
s-h-r-a-i-m right do you swear or affirm tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed counsel thank you uh rami have you heard all the testimony and evidence
offered before the board today yes do you adopt that testimony as if it were your own
And was there anything else that you wanted to add before the board asks any questions they have?
Thank you.
Just out of curiosity, did you go from four to three as a result of RCO?
Mr. Chairman, actually, no.
That was really just done as a result of further design considerations that four units was really not going to be feasible or desirable here.
So it was really ultimately just driven by good design.
Questions from the board.
Questions from the board?
Speaking of that, can we go back to the floor plans?
Speaking of that, can we go back to the floor?
A question for the architect.
What's the height of the basement ceiling?
And what's the depth of the slab of the basement below grade?
Yes, this is the architect.
Could you please state your name again and spell for the stenographer?
Valeska Stantke, W-A-E-L-E-S-K-A-S-T-A-N-D-K-E.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Michael.
Yes, what is the depth of the basement below grade?
It's nine feet, usable space.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
What's the depth of the basement?
Below the ground is four feet.
We have five feet raised from the ground.
Okay, so you're five feet above the ground, and the egress wells, can we see the elevation?
Yes, give me one second.
Yeah, Mr. Johns, this is from the original approval. This was not updated since there's no
change to this so this was this was from the original approval here okay so so so based on
this there's really no egress well that's uh i guess needed i mean you show it in the you show
it in your plan but yeah we have that on the plan maybe to raise a little bit the height of the
windows just in case okay but you have a nine foot ceiling height and your windows are fully
above grade exactly correct the 3d shows it right okay can you go back to the floor plans again just
for a second okay and each one of these units are bi-level all them are bi-level all of them are
bi-level okay only the third floor unit has the uh access to the roof or do they exactly okay so
just the third floor unit okay when the one bedroom is spread over three floors though
is that correct that is the two bedroom unit the two bedroom is spread over three floors
yeah the basement is just mechanical we create like a small office we have the water meter that's
the front of the building a small powder room laundry and the the second floor yeah better
so the first floor the entrance is from the street we have the living kitchen and a big pantry
the access going down and up then the second the third floor or second of the building we have two
bedrooms two bathroom spaces trash storage how are you storing your trash it's in the backyard
if you go to the plans again you can see the backyard there so we will have a gate
from Union Street, accessing that area
and that will be the trash area.
I'm sorry, Mr. Jones.
There's also a common alley in the rear there as well.
And one quick question.
The entrance is on Union Street or Mount Vernon?
We have an access from Mount Vernon to Unit 1.
We have access on the Union Street
towards the other building.
towards the other two units so on the other side of this diagram there's uh entryways
yeah this this 3d was the the previous 3d that we use for two units so you can see that the
windows are like on the ground but it has two axes right but this this rendering doesn't quite
match yeah i was gonna say it doesn't match exactly right because we are not changing the
structural on this just the layout when we get the approval we will do that again right so you
got to do in the front and you got to do on the side exactly then we kept just one on the side
that will access the unit in the rear and go up to the third unit okay and the unit that's in the
rear that where you have your that the pointer is that that front's what street that's the front
unit that's the green the green one is the front unit okay and union is on the left exactly
the questions from the board i guess to continue so where for unit one are they taking their are
they supposed to take their trash all the way around down union street to the trash storage
all the three units have to do that yeah but the other ones have exit and egress closer to the rear
that so that they're they're kind of pulling their trash all the way around the corner
So that they're kind of pulling their trash all the way around the corner.
No, they don't.
Or is the assumption that they'll, the front unit has no access to the shared stairwell.
So their only exit would be onto Mount Vernon and then to walk around the corner.
So Waleska, can you just address, because commonly units, especially of this size, would have an interior trash storage area.
So that, you know, to address board member Wynne's concern that if, you know, this very large 13, almost 1400 square foot unit, if they were not interested in walking their trash all the way around to the common area, can you confirm that there would be an interior ventilated trash storage area within their unit, you know, so that they have somewhere to stop?
Yes, we can make it. Yes.
And then, just to be clear, I want to know where, how are the mechanicals being accessed
for the purple and the blue unit?
Each unit has mechanical spaces.
So this one, the green one, we have it underneath the stairs, you can see that.
For the second unit, we also have it underneath the stairs and against to the unit one, you
so we have a laundry under the stairs
and we have a big mechanical area
for just HVAC and the water heater
I was thinking more electric
where are their picometers going
and their panels
the panels will be outside
on the facade
on which street?
on the Union Street
towards the rear yard
and the third unit
you mean the meters
the meters
yeah I asked about the meters and the panels and then we have the mechanical over yeah towards the
front of the building and we have the laundry room exactly on the same point in the back yes
okay other questions from the board question are the units all electric or yes all electrical
and so the pico meters you said are going to be on the outside of the building where are the
so there's no pgw service no no we don't have gas in our units okay
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson i'm only to note that the because the
refusal does say four units if the applicants now are requesting three that would require
a proviso if the board decides to grant the application thank you questions or comments
from the virtual audience.
Yes, Chair.
We have Wendellin Morris.
Why could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Wendellin Morris,
could you please unmute yourself?
I'm sorry, Chair. She's unmuted, but she's not responding.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshake.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The city rezoned this block in 2017 in a community requested map change.
There's no unique physical circumstance or condition of this property.
We're prevented from being used informally with the code.
This is primarily a single family block, but we are aware of the approved duplex.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variance for any additional dwelling units.
Mr. Chairman, just very briefly, this is not a predominantly single-family block, as the evidence I presented today shows. I would also just like to note that Gwendolyn Morris is one of the board members for Mantua, so I suspect she was just here to reconfirm their letter of support.
MI 2024 002 378 3943 Mount Vernon Street I vote yes with proviso maximum three units
uh Michael Johns can I ask but my vote will be yes also but I just want to ask can we
um ask that they uh work with Pico to try to get the meters on the rear as opposed to the front
I don't know whether we could do that as a proviso, but can we ask that?
I don't know whether we could do that as a provisor, but can we ask that?
Yeah, I don't know if we can do that as a proviso.
I know that is the case in some overlays, but technically I don't know what PICO requires
and where they can put things, but I think it's fine if the board would like to put that
on the record as a request to the applicant.
But I'm a little hesitant, without further research, to include that as a proviso.
Well, thank you.
I take that as advisement to work to try to get those meters on the back.
They look horrible everywhere.