ZBA Hearing - October 23, 2024

that we needed to present exhibits um we want to move forward with the case and be seen uh we were

we did go to the rco and was supported by the rco so but what we're going to do is we're going to

continue this day because there's no exhibits you're going to have to call the office they'll

tell you exactly what you need okay all right thank you miss coates are you an attorney no

okay so you cannot you cannot represent the property owners before the zoning board unless

you are an attorney they need to represent themselves or have an attorney but i can

represent myself as the applicant as the contractor going for zoning no you cannot

no you cannot you do not own the property you are not leasing the property or purchasing the

property. You cannot represent yourself before the zoning board. Okay. So they're here. If when

we go up again, they can represent themselves, correct? The case, right. The case will be

continued today because we do not have exhibits. When it's ready to be heard, they can represent

themselves. All right. Thank you. MI 2024 001 377 4742 Rose Hill Street. Case is continued. Mark

must be heard. We're going to go to our ad ones. Number one, MI 2024-003-175-6709 Essington Avenue.

The vote in this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, October 30th, 2024 at 9 30 a.m.

Number two, MI 2024-002-965-1520-30 Washington Avenue, I vote yes with proviso.

Revised plan, one page, stamped by ZBA on October 23rd, 2024.

Michael Johns, I refuse from this case.

Oh, Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.

Conetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.

Aylin, my vote is yes with Proviso.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.

Number three, MI 2023-005-977-5310 Haverford Avenue, this is a request for reconsideration.

I vote no to reconsideration and rehearing.

I recuse from this case also.

Yes.

Charles Gaston, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.

Senator Graham, I vote no to reconsideration and rehearing.

My vote is no for reconsideration and rehearing.

Ishmael Shahid, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.

Thank you.

We're going to go to our regular list.

We're going to start with number eight.

And I'm sorry, Chair, for the interruption.

We do have two hand raised.

I think Fanshawe was withdrawn, but the owner is stating that it should not be withdrawn.

Can I allow him to speak?

What case is that?

32-34 Fanshawe Street, number four.

Well, the attorney came on and said it was withdrawn.

I think we should tell them they should contact the office.

they they should contact the office we're not going to have an argument over that okay thank

We're not going to have an argument over that.

Okay, thank you.

you honey the record the recognized attorney said it was withdrawn all right we're going to go to

Attorney, the record.

number eight mi 2024 003 397 328 dawson street mary ella lerner and javier escobar delgado are the

applicants. This is a pro se. There's unanimous support from the

Wissahawken Interested Citizens Association. Mr. Chair, Mary L.

Lerner will be rejoining as a panel shortly. Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?

Yes, my name is Marielle Lerner.

That's M-A-R-I-E-L-L-E-L-E-R-N-E-R.

You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do.

So this application is for the erection of a rear deck, open deck, above the first floor level,

access from first floor as part of an existing attack structure for continuous use as a single

family household living, whereas the proposed rear deck above the floor level of the first door

on the required rear yard is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district. Our vice chair has just

a few questions for you, okay? Okay, great. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading

of the refusal or stipulate to attack the same.

I'm sorry, say that again, please. Oh, excuse me. I'm but this is a

have you know then all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case

five days in advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.

okay can everyone see my screen we can we can okay great um so please just let me know if i'm

going too fast and you want me to pause on anything so just have all the exhibits here in our power

point okay okay so i'll just start by showing a view of the front of our house this is not the

construction we're talking about but this is just to give the context of our property and our outdoor

space so we have a row home and we have a small front porch and a small yard as you can see

and when we bought the house in 2015 we saw one so as you can see on the right there we saw in

the back there are many homes on our row that have back decks that expand the outdoor space

so when we bought the house we immediately made the plan to build our own deck

okay so that's a view of our deck as you can see it's an existing construction and so it kind of

start by apologizing for asking for a variance after the fact um as i'll explain it was not

our intention we didn't realize we would need a variance when we started construction

okay um so this is just to illustrate how our deck looks along with the other ones as you can

see we're on a hill and that's the reason for the variance that we need um so as you can see

as you look up the block, kind of each home is a bit higher than the next and each deck

is higher than the next because of the slope. Okay. And the reason that we need a variance is

because our deck is higher than the first floor level. So the code requires it to be at first

floor level, but it's about one foot nine inches higher. There's three steps leading from the first

floor to the floor of the deck. And the reason we did that is to meet the other code requirement

of the six-foot clearance below the deck.

So this is to show you the clearance where a car is parked.

That's our car there.

As you can see, our car is pretty small, so it obviously doesn't fill the six feet,

but other cars need more space.

So as I said, again, the issue is the height above the first floor.

So this is to illustrate the difference between our deck and the neighboring deck.

And we don't believe that it causes any issues for the neighbors.

The height difference should not be blocking any light to the deck or the windows.

No neighbors have complained about this, but we're here seeking this variance because it was requested via the permit that we applied for.

And through inspections, L&I inspector ended up requesting a zoning application and a zoning variance because we didn't meet the code.

And through inspections, L&I inspector and.

So I'll just, let's see, back up a little bit to explain that we started out with an easy deck permit, which is probably how most of the decks on our block were constructed.

We believe that we could fit those requirements, so we applied for that.

We started construction and we were able to pass the first few inspections.

It was not until constructing the framing that we realized that some points of the ground below the deck were high enough that we could not fit six feet below.

So that's when we ended up with a modification of a few steps to elevate the deck a little bit to meet the six foot elevation.

At that point, our inspector requested that we have a structural engineer evaluate the

step construction since it's not part of the EZDEC standards.

So we requested that evaluation.

The engineer came out and requested some modifications.

We completed the work on those modifications and got out a work verification letter.

And at that point, the lessons and inspections asked us to get a regular building permit

because we were told that we couldn't use the Easy Deck permit

because of the deviation.

So when we applied for the regular building permit,

we were then also requested to apply for the zoning application.

We got the refusal for that, and then we submitted the appeal.

Yes, I'm just thinking if I'm missing anything else.

I think that's it.

And just to clarify, there's no earth disturbance

in addition to the posts there.

um and there shouldn't we we can't think of any impact to to neighbors or our neighborhood really

it's um not a very noticeable difference and we haven't um been told of any issues

you also went to the wissahick and rco am i correct it's an interested citizens association

yes we did we did attend the their membership meeting in september and presented our case and

have the results a few slides down from the boat as well. So this is our site plan.

As you can see, the deck is included there and everything you see here still follows

EZDEC standards in terms of the distance of the deck to the driveway in the back and to other homes.

This is the view of the elevation of the deck. So as I said,

It's about one, it's one foot, nine and three quarters inches above the first floor level.

That's the extra distance there.

This is just the other parts of the architectural plans.

These components are as in the EZ-DEC standards, no deviation there for the framing and the attachment to the wall.

And now these are the plans for our variance, the deviation from the EZ-DEC standards at the steps.

and you can see an image on the bottom left that's the step structure from below

and on the right is you can see the steps from the inside of the house.

Okay, this is the work verification letter from the structural engineer that I mentioned.

And this is our refusal letter from the zoning board.

This is our application for appeal.

Here's our project information form.

This is the deed of our house.

That's on two sides there.

This is the authorization letter from Javier, who's also here.

My husband, he's the other owner of the house.

So, where we look together, a certificate of tax compliance, this is a letter we sent

to neighbors to notify of the RCO meeting with Wicca in September.

We sent that to 132 addresses, not including our own, that's the list there.

Those are the certificates of mailing for those letters in three batches.

I'm here at the meeting results from the RCO meeting.

So we had 29 neighbors attending, four of whom were near neighbors, and they all voted in support.

All right. Thank you. Questions from the board?

I have no questions.

Questions or comments from our attorney?

questions or comments from our attorney no no questions but a comment thank you so much for

No questions, but a comment. Thank you.

the time and attention and care that you put into this application i agree oh thank you

it was a great presentation yes thank you very much questions or comments from our attorney uh

no no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience

mr chair i see a hand up from a daniel flesher i have allowed them to speak

hi sir could you please state your name it's spelled for the court stenographer

yes my name is daniel flesher d-a-n-i-e-l-f-l-e-s-h-e-r

where are firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth

yes i do are you a neighbor uh yes i am all right please proceed sir

Yeah, I'm the zoning chair for the Wissahickon Interested Citizens Association, and I just wanted to very quickly reiterate that we give our unanimous and very excited support for this variance, and we-

All right, thank you very much for taking the time to close. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?

No further hands, Mr. Chair.

Well, any commission?

Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.

You swear, affirm, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.

Yes, sir, I do.

Please proceed.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.

The proposed variance for a roof deck, sorry, the proposed variance for a deck above the required rear yard is minor and in keeping with the spirit and purpose of the zoning code.

The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variance for a deck in the required rear yard.

MI 2024-003-397-328 Dawson Street, I vote yes.

Michael Johns, my vote is yes.

Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.

Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.

Ewan, my vote is yes.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.

Thank you. You have your votes.

Thank you so much. Appreciate all your time.

Thank you.

Number 11, MI2024-003-408-5740 Windale Avenue.

Carol Spurlock is the owner.

We do not have an RCO letter at this point, but neighbors were sent notice and proof of mailing. Meeting was held August 21st, 2024. Winfield Community Neighborhood Association.

Carol Spurlock.

Chair, I have a hand up from a D. Dukes.

Shall I find out who this is before we proceed?

Hi, good morning.

This is D. Dukes.

I'm the president of the Winfield Community Neighborhood Association, REC.

Okay, hold on, hold on, hold on one minute.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

This came in front of you?

Yes.

Do you want to tell us what the results were?

Oh, the results were, I don't have the exact, but I did send in the letter of support.

Majority voted to support this project.

Thank you very much.

I'm trying to get the owner on now.

Carol Spurlock, please.

carol spurlock please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in and promoted

miss spurlock rejoin yeah they'll be rejoining as a panelist thank you very much