as mentioned the board also received a letter of non-opposition from
councilman young's office as well i don't know if our architect is on
but i'm happy to go through a bit of the plans there's a site plan showing our proposed project
again there's no other dimensional variances requested it meets all within the considerations
of RC5, again, existing conditions.
Again, existing conditions, front facade, we're proposing a brick facade, similar to what, as you can see from this view of south, there's a mix of existing properties and then new construction properties that have a variety of different features.
we chose to leave out the bay windows we just didn't think that that made sense a little bit
of a hodgepodge on this block so made some of the design considerations difficult but we
worked with the community on a more traditional although modern but more traditional look for this
property side elevation as mentioned we meet the setback requirements
and the height. I think we're a little bit short of the 38 feet, 33 feet with the 10-foot pilot
house and the five-foot setback as required by the code. And then just to go through floor plans.
a little bit
um this is a basement um two-story unit
you have the mechanical room family room bedroom bathroom
it's unit front of unit a living room rear bathroom
bedroom, trash, tier with ventilated closet, second floor, we have unit B, two-bedroom
unit, kitchen and bathroom, and unit C, kitchen and bathrooms, and then we have the roof deck
as well.
um do you i wonder if uh our architect is available i just want to make sure if the
board has any questions um my client is um that's a great question
do we have an architect in the audience for this property
um ron um a-r-r-i-a-r-r-i-g-h-y on behalf of here's the plan llc
how about your owners your owner here no he's currently not here so as a officer of the court
I would like to be able to have my testimony adopted
if that's okay, Chairman.
Okay, we'll adopt your testimony.
No architect, right?
I don't know if Ron is supposed to be on the call.
I see no one with their name in the audience.
Questions from the board.
Yeah, I have a question.
So you said that the block is a mixture
of multifamily duplexes and triplexes.
Do you know how many triplexes are on a block?
Or the ratio of triplexes to duplexes?
Yeah, I can pull the sample that we,
whenever we do these appeals where we have multifamily,
we always pull as much as we can for the appeal
just to make sure that it is in character.
So this is just a one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven, eight, nine, 10 properties on that block.
um one two three four half of them are triplexes one two three four five five half of them are
duplexes and do you know if any of them have roof decks too um that's a great question
i believe in the plans i think the new construction ones do some of the older ones don't because
they're just um those like brick ones that we showed say these i don't believe have but i also
can't see on top of them but there was ones the newer construction ones um down the street
down the street and the roof deck is by right and rsa5 so i understand why you're asking
what's the plan for trash management there's ventilated trash for the floor plans um
um did i miss that yeah sorry i went really quickly i apologize oh on like outside the
building right i got you the one under the stairs okay yep and then where are the meters going all
the meters going to be placed for each individual unit the mechanical room for um the basement will
have a mechanical room as per the the plans so is that for all three units i believe so i didn't
design these plans so i had hoped our architect was going to join yeah i mean i just want to
I had hoped our architect was going to join.
Yeah, I mean, I just want to say for the record,
it's really hard when you have a triplex
and all of the meters are in the basement
to service the units
because two units have to coordinate
with the renter on the first floor
or the owner on the first floor
to access the basement to be able to do any updates.
And it does make, it's like a regular maintenance issue.
The other question I have about the basement
is the only light in the basement now coming from that singular window in the rear bedroom
yeah it looks like it's going to be a very dark space i think also knowing that there was a notch
there was an opportunity to do even like glass block or higher windows it's going to be a very
dark space and i would have concern about having a well i mean a bedroom in the basement yeah i
think that if the board is um inclined that we could add that to the plans i think that's a
reasonable request and i would agree with you that that'll make it a nicer environment as well
so the questions the face of the face of this building is the same plane as the adjacent
buildings except that there's no porch yeah it was a sort of a mix as you can see on the block
on the south view i'm just trying to i'm just trying to understand that this your new building
will be not will not sit out like this guy it'll be back here with the plane of the adjacent you
houses yeah but it will have the three feet um steps if i can go to the um from facade
and that that was my question if if the property is going to kind of mirror the one that we were
looking at there where it's um not in line with the adjacent properties or how are you going to
do this right i thought i heard and i thought i saw on your site plan that you're the face of
your your um brick facade aligns oh so no you are sitting out so you're sitting out
yeah you're gonna sit out it's gonna basically mirror this one that's in this picture where it
says this adjacent one yeah where it says view south and there's two houses and then there's
the one the newer looking one with the steps is that this building yeah just without the bay
window okay if you look to the other side of the block too there's a couple new ones that are
actually red brick similar looking so we're kind of looking at this hodgepodge of what's there
what's new what you know that was what we had come up with that the community had liked as far
as they wanted the red brick we didn't want to include the bay window um but they but it was
going to meet more of the new construction than the directly adjacent with these porches i mean
And I understand that's the plan, but it does stand that this is infill lot in between everything that has a porch, like the section of the block that is more intact is exactly where this is sitting.
And while it matches the flatter facades of the new construction across the street and at the end of the block, that's not its immediate context.
So it is not in context with its immediate surroundings.
and there was no
and there was no refusal for a rear yard setback
right? No we're not
no dimensional
I mean it could be
it could be in line with
the fronts of the other buildings
which would require a rear yard
setback. I don't think so
because they have 16 feet in the back and it looks
like the others
are only setback like 5 or 6 feet
yeah again like we when we met with the community there was such a difference between
all these different like this block has such a random aesthetic like something throughout the
entire thing i don't know that it's that random i think the two new construction that you used as
your precedent are the randomness at this point there's like half the block is in line with the
red brick and the other half has porches and the the precedent that you guys used is the anomaly
across the street so are you able to see project not to assess this to you obviously council but
is there an opposition to moving it back so that aligns with the face of them i just don't i think
we went through that exercise with l and i because we were really not understanding originally like
what they were looking for with how the code provision was and we ultimately just moved
forward with something that sort of worked for this project. So I just don't know what,
So I just don't know what, if that will trigger additional refusals to go back through with that. And again, like we did meet with the community and that wasn't a concern of theirs at the meeting of the things that mattered. So I just don't want to have shown them one thing and then get approved something different because I've had that problem before where we've shown them something and then we do something different and we didn't go back to them.
if that will trigger additional refusals to go back through.
So it's not that I don't understand the concern. It's just we go through this process and we get to OK with people. And then there's other way in, which I understand. It's just I don't want to have issues with providing something different than what we submitted and got approved.
All right. I guess the one thing I'm trying to understand is the code says that you should be in line with the primary facade of the adjacent properties. And the primary facade is the masonry facade, not the facade of the porch. Correct?
Right. But then we would have to set the building back and then you'd have no porch.
So then you just have like this weird opening with grass in the front.
I'm just trying to get to what it is that I understand about the code.
Yeah. And we went back and forth with the L&I examiner because it was confusing as to like, what would a buy right look like for what they were trying to accomplish here?
So then there, but there wasn't a refusal for not aligning the.
no no that's not what it the code how the code reads maybe that's the what the original intention
of what the code should be how it should have been written but that's not how it was being
interpreted which is what caused a bit of the confusion you know the one that was written
in strawberry mansion is a lot more clear to understand what they were looking for aesthetically
that's not what how it reads here oh i've seen refusals for that so that's why
okay that's that's that's my question okay but in this case your only refusal is for the
multifamily correct no it's for not it's for that and to um board member john's comment it is for
lining up the front facade with the front of the adjacent structure but it's not for the not
including a porch okay there's a refusal for this oh you do not aligning with the front facade of
the adjacent property yeah that's what i said it but it doesn't have anything to do with the porch
okay right okay yeah you know i'm agreeing with you i'm just saying it doesn't specifically call
out the porch as in some of the other like aesthetically focused legislation that we have
in the city or some design controls this this doesn't have the porch line but i'm agreeing
with you that that the other refusal was related to the facade yes yeah yeah oh i mean similar to
the last case from last week if the board's inclined that they want us to to take a look at
that you know i'm happy to bring that back i don't disagree with any of the comments made
i'm just not an architect and so i don't want to speak to that or provide you know uh information
that might have other considerations but but your your points are well made and i don't disagree
with them i just that's not my expertise professionally right so i just want to
allow someone else to look at it if that would you know please the board that just is your
life the only vacant lot is there another vacant lot next to your life adjacent to it is vacant
as well yes two vacant lots then they're occupied then they're essentially buildings on either side
of that correct all right thank you that's it all my questions do you know if those uh adjacent
properties are occupied or not directly adjacent one to us is vacant i'm not sure if people are
living in the other the you know the existing structures but but to remember john's question
the directly adjacent one is vacant like it's a vacant lot there are the rest of them are
structures i'm just not sure of if anybody's living in them or not
questions or comments from our attorney not at this time mr chair questions or comments from
the virtual audience i see no he's at this time chair any commission amy boyd with the planning
commission this property was remapped in 2017 from r1 residential multifamily to rsa 5 residential
single family the change aligned with the district plan while many homes on this block
don't have front porches the adjacent property and the next closest developed property do
the proposed lack of setback of this project would be out of character
the proposal for multi-family is in character with the block the planning commission recommends
that the board deny their requested variance for a front yard setback but grant their requested
variance for multifamily. So, Rachel, we'd like to do a resumptive hearing here. Sure. Take a look at what
We'd like to do a resumptive hearing here.
Take a look at what it would be if you moved it back.
Happy to do that.
I appreciate the conversation.
I guess my only date is 10, 14, 25 at this point.
So if you would come back with what you put plans that would move it back.
Absolutely.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate the dialogue as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number nine, MI-2025-000477-2817, Amund Street.
Byron Anastasio is the attorney.
Byron Anastasio will be rejoining us as a panelist.
good morning mr chair good morning council could you please state your name and spell for the
stenographer yep it's verna anastasio on behalf of mr charles whalen a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do you waive do you waive
the reading of the refusal to agree with its accuracy i do there's a recommendation of support
from Southport Richmond and non-oppositions from Council Member Squill. There's also 34
signatures from neighbors in the immediate block. Please start your presentation, sir. Thank you.
2817 Allman Street is a very unique property. There is, in fact, a unique physical condition
to the property that renders doing anything with it impossible. We are asking for a parking pad
in front of the home. And the home is set back, and you'll see in a moment.
And that's the refusal, by the way. So let's take a look.
This is the home itself. It's got the parking pad in front.
there currently is a utility easement that runs across the front here, the electric company. So
because of the utility easement, my client cannot build on this space. He can't bring the house up.
He can't build a larger porch. And so it is set back, whereas the neighboring properties,
of course, are not. So what he's proposing is to be able to put a car here.
one car parking in front of his home that would align with the adjacent properties as you can see
here it is mid-block and it has been approved by the planning i'm sorry the streets department
let's take a look here we have streets department approval
in addition we have the signatures of everyone who lives on almond street everyone who we could
reach including the neighbors on both sides of the property overwhelming support for the variants
and 34 people showed up at the rco meeting 32 of them voted to support the position taken by the
rco is full support and of course you received the letter from council member mark squilla
in accordance with the support of the rco