And when I show you the site plan, you can see that we're going to be one foot longer than the houses on either side.
Both neighbors are aware of that and they're happy with that.
And we're going to be one foot less than the depth of a property at 1720, a couple of doors down.
And here at the bottom of the screen is Bainbridge Street.
And this is the neighbor that actually has access through our Baker's Alley to put his trash on Cater Street.
This is a view that I've actually personally took sitting on the step of 1720 to show you, you know, the monolithic structure that's across the street, which is the parking garage.
Again, some views just to show you that we did post the placards.
Both of Sazna's has their own placard, and this is the placard recommended by the ZBA, which we posted on the property.
Here's our proviso plans if the board looks kindly upon this application.
So I'd just like to direct your attention to the site plan.
So the shaded area is our proposal.
And you can see from the depth of the property that we are a foot longer than 1718.
The proposal is for a foot longer than 1718 and a foot longer than 1722.
And we're one foot less in depth than 1716.
So when we looked at laying out this property and the floor plan, we looked at the adjoining
properties. My client has talked to the owners of the adjacent properties. They're okay with
the depth. We saw that 1716 was a little bit longer than ours. We really didn't want to
overreach. So we kind of split the difference between the properties and the very large that
are already there. The elevation, again, we're going to maintain what's there. So we're adding
the mansert roof on the third floor. Again, just some photographs to give you a contextual view.
This is looking south from the top of the garage that is Penn Medicines. This is the floor plan,
basement, two areas of flex space. Again, whatever the owner is going to use them for, an office,
gym, exercise area, a living room, dining room, kitchen leading to the back,
second floor, two bedrooms, third floor, one bedroom with access to a rooftop deck.
Again, just another closer view of what the front elevation is going to look like. It's
really going to fit in nicely with everything else that's there. And again, the mansion roof
adds a certain level of detail rather than having the eight foot setback or even as i saw at the
end of the corner as i showed you just that straight up uh brick look that's really amassing
that's uh at the far end of the block rest of the documents for the pro forma documents you'd
usually see an application or tax center document indicating all taxes are paid and up to date
Zoning map, again, you know, this is an RM1, ironically, zoning district, but almost all the homes that I'm aware of are single family on the block.
The deed indicating ownership, our zoning notice, and proof of mailing.
So, in summation, basically, we are not changing the character of the neighborhood.
Our project is in harmony with the code.
It's in harmony with what two neighborhood groups want, with what the council president supports.
We're not impacting any lighter air.
The sun is rising towards the south and then coming against the rear of our property.
It's not affecting anybody across the street, on Cater Street, because that's the four to five story garage.
With that, I would rest my case, Mr. Chairman, and ask my client to adopt my testimony.
And the architect, Andrew Menia, is also available for any questions or comments.
What's your client's name, please?
My client's name is Alex Clark, C-L-A-R-K.
Alex, can you unmute yourself?
He's been allowed to speak.
Alex, could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
yes my name is alex clark a l e x c l a r k you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
Yes, my name is Alex Clark, A-L-E-X.
nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel uh alex were you on the call when i presented
your project yes i was and if you had the opportunity to testify and tell the board
your story would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct yes is there anything
that you would like to add that i i didn't bring out that the board should know um just that i
am planning to live in this property uh and stay on this block i've met everybody on the street
and um have amazing experience with them they're uh here to support me which is excellent i thank
them for that um but just excited to uh excited to be a part of this project and um hopefully be
able to raise my family in this home thank you alex question questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes there's a hand up from murray spencer hi could you please state your name and spell for the
sonographer. Murray Spencer, can you unmute yourself, please?
Is that good? Yeah, just, just state your name. Murray, yes, Murray Spencer. Again,
SOSNA zoning chair, the applicant met with the zoning committee the same day as the last
applicant did and again as with the previous application the sasno zoning committee likes
the fact that the applicant is maintaining the facade the corners and doing the uh third floor
addition with the master roof which has become our neighborhood standard uh and there's a project
down the street that was approved two years ago that also had the master roof so we're trying to
you know, maintain that as people add on to their houses on this block,
that they do the mansion roofs,
that there's a uniformity as houses expand this neighborhood.
There is a,
there are neighbors on Bay and Mr.
to express displeasure,
not so much with the facade,
but with the depth of the rear yard and the height of the building,
but there's no refusal for the height of the building.
And I'm sure that one of them,
if not both of them are on the call and I will stop speaking at this
point, but SOSTA supports this project wholeheartedly.
and neighbor state as well thank you for calling we appreciate it anyone else in the virtual
audience yes samuel or donnie collie will be allowed to speak i could you please state your
name and spell for the court stenographer hello good afternoon my name is samuel bordoni hyphen
cowley that's s-a-m-u-e-l b-o-r-d-o-n-i hyphen c-o-w-l-e-y you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor
Yes, I am the adjacent Cater Street neighbor at 1718.
Okay, please proceed, sir.
I have no questions, just a comment that I am fully in support of this project.
It's a wonderful looking home and wonderful people, so I welcome them very much.
Thank you. Thank you for taking on time to call us. We appreciate it.
Anyone else?
There are no hands.
Planning Commission.
thank you chair keith davis hold on sorry hold on one second sorry there's a couple other hands
that were raised i see john layman and i think um ms shakumba is trying to speak this is one of
the cases her rco i was impacted by okay okay yeah those hands um went up afterwards the first
be john layman will be allowed to speak john could you please state your name and spell for
a court stenographer. Good afternoon. My name is John Lehman, J-O-H-N-L-E-H-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Please proceed, John. Well, first, I want to say thank you for your time, Mr. Chair and
the other board members. I'm trying to figure out if I can share a screen on this.
you will need to be promoted to share
mr layman john do you want to promote
uh so join as panelist i can promote you
excuse me chair he's been promoted thank you very much please proceed john
Please proceed, John.
Here you go, John.
Go ahead.
Let me just see here.
Sharing a screen.
Can I do that?
You can, I hope.
Trying to find where it is here.
The green button on the bottom, John?
Oh, right there. Oh, okay. I didn't see it. Thank you.
Mr. Layman, can you please turn on your video since you're testifying and sharing your screen? Thank you.
Is it working? Let's see. Start video. Let me see here. It's all right.
As you can tell, I'm not used to this. My name is John Lehman. I am the neighbor and property owner of 1729 Bainbridge Street, which is the lot directly to the south and to the rear of the subject property on Taylor Street.
What I'm sharing here is simply a letter that I submitted earlier yesterday to the board.
So I am here writing, or let me say, there are two variance requests for this project.
And I am here to object to the requested variance of the code required maximum area,
which is in the section 14701-2, commonly known as open space.
The other variance, which is for the eight-foot setback, I support.
The owner's front facade design includes several mitigating features, including, as has been discussed,
A handsome third-story mansard roof, restoration of the original masonry below, and an open roof deck rail.
I would note that Sosna's position on these projects does not address individual variances and is focused almost entirely on the facade issues here at the eight-foot suspect, which I support.
However, on the rear of the property, the design both fills in the original open L shape of the existing footprint and extends the new construction beyond the maximum occupied, the current occupied lot area of 75%, placing the rear wall one third closer to our property line, nine feet instead of 12.
of the 12 feet that would comply with the zoning.
The work guts the existing house structure.
So this is all new construction
and therefore absolutely no need
for the extended building length.
I'm actually happy to assist their architect
to revise their design to comply
with almost no disruption to the home design.
What would be required to comply with the open space would be either to maintain the
existing open L-shaped footprint or shorten the 39-foot house length to 36 feet, simply
a three-foot change on their design.
Further, unlike the front facade, their rear design provides no mitigating features to offset the open space encroachment.
Instead, the rear is a solid wall of vinyl siding nearly 40 feet high, including the roof deck parapet.
On this basis, I ask the board to reject this unneeded and unnecessary maximum occupied area variance, and I call on you to enforce the open space zoning code requirement when there is no hardship and no need. Thank you very much for your time.
John, just for curious, that's like instead of 75%, it's 81.2%, is that correct?
uh the open space is six percent more than it should be you're saying uh well that's what i
think their um documents okay all right in in the cape i don't have them right and all right thank
thank you john for taking time to call and we can i just address a couple things with mr layman
why don't what henry could we wait to see i think there's someone else with their hand
Why don't, Henry, could we wait to see?
I think there's someone else with their hand up.
So you can dress it all at one time.
Is there anyone else in the audience?
Yes, it was Madeline.
She'll come by, but she's back.
I'm going to allow her to speak.
She left again.
Thank you.
Henry, go ahead.
Mr. Clinton, respond.
Not Madeline.
You want me to go, Mr. Chairman?
Yeah, please.
Madeline's not here.
She's back.
She keeps, I don't know where she's going.
MR. LAMON, YOU'RE ASKING THAT THE PROJECT I PRESENTED BE MOVED BACK THREE FEES.
IS THAT WHAT I UNDERSTAND?
WELL, I'M SIMPLY SAYING THE DESIGN CAN AND SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE ZONING CODE REQUIREMENT OF 25%.
Otherwise, by accepting this variance, the zoning board is essentially saying the open area requirement is not 25%.
It's only nine feet, which is what this design provides.
So if we move the property back three feet, we would be less depth than 1718 and 1722, since we're only one foot longer than that.
So you're aware that 1718 and 1722 don't meet your criteria either?
Yes, they do, because it's either three feet shorter or maintain the existing open space L of the existing footprints.
In other words, it could be 39 feet and maintain the L to provide the 25%.
You have a couple of hundred dollars.
That wasn't my question.
I'm only asking you, you understand that 1718 and 1722 are only one foot less in depth than ours,
and then 1720 is one foot greater than ours, so that there's a multitude of depths on Cater Street.
Would you agree with me, yes or no?
You are not cross-examining me for the council.
Yes, I am.
The 1718 is an L-shaped footprint.
So about three-quarters of its rear wall is one foot deeper, I guess, than what you proposed.
But the other one-quarter of the wall is something like eight feet farther away.
So it provides effectively the required open space and reduces the mass of this building against the property line, towards the property line.
Mr. Lehman, isn't your real argument here that you don't like the back of my client's property?
And isn't that what you told him?
And didn't you tell him if you put stucco there, you'd be okay with the debt of the property?
I remind you you're under oath.
That is true.
in the sense of a mitigating offset to your uh requested variance all right so there would be
i thank both of you i really do i thank you both i have your comments thank you
is there anyone else in the virtual audience
Planning Commission
Madeline
She's allowed to speak
Could you please state your name
As spelled for the court stenographer
Hi my name is