Zoning Hearing Board - Regular Meeting

SP All right, folks. I'm going to announce the hearings for tonight. Uh, first hearing is going to be 270 East Kleinand Street. Second hearing is going to be 1141 Jackson. Third hearing is going to be 700 Davis Street. Last hearing is going to be zero Stewart Street. And we'll be starting momentarily.

I'm ready whenever you are. Are you ready? All right, I'm going to open up the first hearing. Secretary of the Purpose, please.

All right. Applications hereby made for public hearing for the East and Zoning Hearing Board for property known as 270 East Kleinhan Street, zoning district, Southside, block class B. Special exception is for a D3 personal service martial arts facility. It was noted on the buffer as a B6 athletic facility. It is actually a D3 personal services. Uh, zoning code 59510H1 proposed a D3 personal services for martial arts facility required special exception to change from an existing non-conforming use. The above action is request to proceed with requesting change of use to a family martial arts instruction uh, studio. The appellent is Eric Carner uh, PO Box 143, Soulberry, PA18963. The owner is L Club LLC, 2810 Jules Street, East NP, PA 18045. Uh 32 adjacent properties are ownih notified and it was published in the press. And then hold on Mike, I have the resolution from the Eastn Planning Commission from April 15th. Um, now therefore, it be resolved that the East Planning Commission recommends to the East Zoning Hearing Board the request for a special exception be granted for non-conforming use at 270 East Klein Street and that the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan and city codes provided to applicant adheres with the following conditions. One, the zoning hearing board has granted the special exception required with this application and is subject to any conditions the zoning hearing board may impose. Two, all additional comments and concerns of the zoning administrator and codes department shall be met.

Thank you, Mman. Is the applicant pre is the applicant present? Come forward, please. Is there anybody else in the audience here tonight for 270 Kleinhand Street? Are you going to be testifying tonight, ma'am? Well, if I just be you want to be be sworn in, please. Thank you. Remain standing.

I meant to tell him this property was posted. Yes, it was. You may sit down. If you both could just pull the microphones close to you, make sure they're on. Yeah. Just make sure that green light is lit up. You can pull it closer. It's not stuck. It's a little stuck to the table, but there you go. Got press. There you go. Oh, there we go. Okay. If you could just give first give your name and address for the record, please. Yes. My name is Eric Carner. K A R N E R. And uh my address is P Box 143 in Soulbury, PA1 18963.

Thank you, ma'am. Melanie Onesto Howard Hannah Commercial Realtor. Um the office address 35 3500 Winchester Road uh Allentown, PA18104. All right. Thank you. So tell us why you're here. Uh, I'm here to ask for the uh I believe it's a variance uh from uh an existing restaurant uh to be turned over to whatever is permissible use for my uh martial arts school. So tell us about that. Tell us why you need that that zoning change for that place.

Um okay, so I I originally was opened up in uh Bucks County in 2006. So, I've been open for 20 years. Uh, six, uh, six of those years from 2020 until present. Uh, I'm currently located in Williams Township. Um, just right around the corner from this location.

Tell us more about the about why you need the barrier or the the special exception. Uh well, I need the exception because I'd like to use that building uh for a relocation o of of the business. Uh the business is a family martial arts school. Um you know, like I said, it's a it's a uh a positive thing for the community. Um it's very low impact with traffic. Uh I have very I have set hours. Um there's no like late night disturbances or early morning, you know, uh it's very um it's very controllable traffic because of my class times. Basically, uh Monday through Thursday, um I have two days during the week, which would be 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. And then our evening classes, you're looking at from 5:00 in the evening till roughly 8:30 at night.

I'm sorry, hang on. Did you say Monday through Thursday? Monday through Thursday is our typical weekly operating. You said 10:00 am till 11:00 am just for an hour. Ye yes because I have a I have a two I have two morning classes on Mondays and Wednesdays. Okay. Right. So that would just be that that little one hour block there. And then the evenings throughout Monday through Thursday would be from 5:00 p.m. till roughly 8:30 p.m. And then anything on the weekends? Uh Saturday mornings. So, we would have Saturday morning from 10 um from 10:00 a.m. till 1 pm

close Sunday. Close Sunday, close Fridays. Yes. How many how many people are working there? Uh working or in in the classes themselves?

Uh working it's basically just myself. Um, I have a little bit of uh other and other um students that help me out a little bit, but I'm pretty much a one-man band at this moment. Um, and student wise, generally classes, while they can like fluctuate, it's generally about 20 p 20 people to a class. And um during those three hour like from the 5 to to 8 there's usually um like there'll be one class let's say there's maybe 16 people um then the next hour those people leave another group comes you know might be whatever 22 people or tw you know 20 people the next class there might be 12 so we have you know it's broken up into classes. Any questions from the board?

So, this is not something that you're going to have uh the need to have any deliveries or pickups, commercial? No, sir. Okay. Um and and you you describe it as a family martial arts. Yes. Uh what exactly does that mean?

That means um there's mother daughters, father, sons. Um There's uh siblings that that all train together. Um I'm starting to work into a uh a children's program right now. I don't have like little little kids. It's most basically from like 12 and up, but I am thinking about going into a uh you know maybe like that that four to eight year old range as well.

Would that affect the hours of operation if you did that? Uh, no. Because I still have that that five o'clock class. I is right now just a kickboxing class and I would probably eliminate that and turn that into the the children's class. There's a very small window of time in my in my business. It's not like, you know, people most people work so so it's not like, you know, I'm not open 9 to5 or 9 to 10 like a like a regular retail shop would be. I'm just very uh, you know, my hours are very limited to the actual class times. Is there parking on the property? There is. There's a very large parking lot. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I was going to ask a question. So that so that would accommodate the you said 22 people.

Absolutely. This was this was the old Castell Club. Oh, okay. Yeah. So you guys know the building parking lot and it's to itself. There's no other um building there. It's nice its own lot and it's a big parking area. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That's it. All right. Any other questions from the board? Board feel they have enough information. All right. Board has no more questions. If you have anything else you want to add. Uh, no, that's it.

All right. I'll close the hearing.

Thank you very much. to use that for something. What it was Motion by Mr. Loac.

Second by Mrs. Panto. Mr. Loac I. Mr. Panto. Mr. Civetella. I Miss Thomas. Hi, Miss Volcano Hall. Hi, Miss Granite. Good luck, sir. Sir, I just have one question. Where is Soulberry? You know, New Hope, PA. Yeah. Right next New Hope is actually inside. Lived here my entire life. Never heard of Soulberry. All right. Thank you.

Soulberry. You're too young to do that with the glasses. Let me know when you're ready, Wayne. Yes, I'm ready. All right. Open up the next hearing. Secretary of Purpose, please.

All right. Application is hereby made for a public hearing before the East Zoning Hearing Board for a property known as 1141 Jackson Street, Zoning District, West Ward, Block Class C. Um special exception for an A7 multifamily and variance is as follows. 59515D proposed an existing 40 foot wide lot required a minimum lot width of 45 ft. 59515 F3 proposed no street trees require street trees shall be planted along both sides of all streets in accordance with chapter 5541 and as determined by the city forester 59515F6 proposed a 27 foot wide driveway required driveways shall be no more than 10 ft wide 59515 F8 proposed new building is 39% larger than the Average footprint of principal structures on adjoining properties required. The new building shall have a footprint that is not greater than or not less than 15% of the footprint of the principal structures on adjoining properties. 59533J2 proposed off- streetet parking is designed to encourage vehicles to back into uh a public street in order to leave the lot. required. In no case shall off- streetet parking areas for three or more vehicles be designed to require or encourage vehicles to back into a public street in order to leave the lot. 59533 K1 required no substantial wall or landscaping enhancement proposed. required a substantial wall or landscaping enhancement where enough strength and resilience shall be placed near all lot lines to protect pedestrians and enjoying structures and properties abuing any off- streetet parking or loading areas containing five spaces or more. 59533M1 proposed no illumination of off-

streetet parking spaces required all off- streetet parking areas of five or more spaces shall be illuminated such that public security and safety is maintained. 59533 M2 proposed no planning buffers required. Planting buffers shall be installed to screen off street parking and be um comprised of designed to include 80% native and 20% non-native plant materials. designs shall be one of a multi-lever nature multilevel nature approved by the city forester and then 59515C1 proposed an A7 multifamily dwelling uh required is a special exception the appellant is Christopher Zadjac at 2299 Broadhead Road Bethleam PA18020 um the owner is Fortivo Development LLC at 2299 Broadhead Road, A Betham, PA 18020. 21 adjacent property owners were notified and it was published in the press. In one second, Mike, I'll get you a resolution here from Eastn Planning's April 15th meeting. Now therefore, it be resolved that the Eastn Planning Commission recommends to the East Zoning Hearing Board that the request for a special exception be granted and grants conditional preliminary approval of the submitted plans titled 1141 Jackson Street. Subject, the receipt of the final plans which meet the following criteria. One, the plan shall comply with the PL planning staff's analysis memorandum dated April 7th, 2026. Two, the zoning hearing board grants the special exception and grants the variances required with this application and subject to any conditions the zoning hearing board may impose. Four, monuments and markers shall be shown on the plans for all corners of the property. Four, a note indicating that the site is not located in a federal emergency management agency defined

100-year flood plane shall be on the plans. Five, all additional comments and concerns of the city engineer, city forester, zoning administrator, fire department, and codes department shall be met. Six, all the plans shall not be recorded with the county of Northampton, Pennsylvania until all plan titles and certifi uh certificates are endorsed by authorized signatures. Thank you, gentlemen. I see the applicants present. Is there anybody else here for this hearing tonight? 1116 Jackson Street. If you want if you want to speak tonight I'm going to ask you to be sworn in now.

Ma'am in the back. Are you going to speak tonight? You're not going to speak though? You might as be sworn in just in case you want to. You can just stay right there and just put your hand. Yeah.

Yes. Okay. And the property was posted, Mike. Thank you, counselor, if you can have have your um client um give his name and address for the record, please. Sir, please state your name and address. Uh Christopher Zjac, 2299 Broadhead Road, Sweet A, Bethlehem, 1802. Thank you. And you are principal of Portivo Development. Correct. And I'm Victor Scilio here on behalf of the applicant office address of 1216 Lynden Street, Bethlehem.

Thank you. And if I can just by way of opening and to address some of the variants that were noted in the um the posting of the property, there are some that will be removed because there will be compliance with and it's actually noted in our narrative that we submitted with the application and I can go through those. Um section uh 59515F3, no street trees. My client has been in contact with the city forester and they are working with and will comply with the request of the forester for the city uh for the street trees 59533 K1 waller landscaping enhance enhancement that will be added and will be in compliance with planning commission's requirements 59533M1 parking lot illumination uh as was addressed with planning commission last week that will be complied with uh and uh and coordinated with planning so that it meets a residential standard and nothing that is too substantial or like in a commercial setting that would emit glare into the neighboring property. So, that's been addressed and we'll work out with planning. And then uh 59533M2, no uh planting buffers that will be added and will be in compliance with planning requirements. So that will leave the following uh variances that will be requested. Uh 59515D the 5- foot variance for the lot width. The lot width is 40 ft. The requirement is 45. 59515 F6 driveways no more than 10 ft wide. We are proposing 27 ft. And when you hear the parking uh arrangement, it will make sense as to why that dimension is being requested.

59515 F8 the new uh the building size 39% larger when you see the surrounding areas and the the size of this lot in comparison to the others. You'll see why that uh variance is being requested. And again, 59533 J2, the vehicles backing into Juniper Street. You'll see the configuration of this property and that this is the last street on Juniper Street and that will assuage of the concerns regarding the backing requirement. With those logistics, I can give you a little bit of an overview through my client here about what is being proposed. I'm sorry, councel. And then a special exception,

the use. Yes. Okay. Just want to make sure you covered everything. As soon as you raise your hand, Mr. solicitor. I knew exactly what I had uh need to address. All right. So, um that's a formal modification of your appeal on the record. It is. And like I said, it is what is included in our narrative that was submitted prior as well. Thank you. So, uh and and I'm going to stand up. I'm going to be an attorney and easel at the same time to help show this plan if that's okay. And I'll maneuver the microphone so you guys can hear me as well. Okay. Sir, uh please tell me what you're what is currently on this site and how you're proposing to develop it.

Uh currently it's a vacant lot. From my understanding, there was a twin home on the lot that burned down. I couldn't really determine how long ago. Uh and there's currently uh two garages that back up to the alley, which is known as Juniper Street. So those those are still existing. So there uh there was a twin home holding two families, correct? And you're looking to develop this into a three unit. A three unit. Okay. And there are two garages that would require backing up into uh Juniper Street.

If if the garages were left, they would require backing up into Juniper Street. Our plan proposes to demolish those uh to allow six parking spaces uh in the back of the property. And so there would be three lanes, two spaces for each unit. Correct.

Correct. We're we're proposing uh headtotail parking. Uh so each say two slot space would be assigned per apartment. So, it would be no different uh than if we had had a residential townhouse or something of that nature that would have a car parked in the garage and then a car parked behind it. So, they would be they would be assigned so that the occupants would be able to work out amongst themselves uh you know how they would position their cars in order to get get in and out of the parking. Okay. So, I have on the phone board here the site plan. You submitted this in the portal to the uh zoning. Correct. I did. Yes. And this is the same site plan that's in the portal.

It should be. Yeah. And this shows the construction of a three unit uh building that is how how many feet wide? Do you know? Um 23 feet wide by 48t long. Right. Correct. Okay. And just so I'm clear, there's no other dimensional relief you need. In other words, Even with the 40ft lot, you don't need any uh setback relief to any of these. No, we're we're meeting all the current setbacks. The only relief we're looking for is the lot. Uh the lot is 40 ft and I believe for a three-unit, you need 45 ft.

Okay. Now, if I look here and to the west of your property, there is a threetory uh dwelling there already. Correct. And then to the east there are threestory twins twin homes to the east. And how many stories is the property or the building you're looking to construct? Uh it's it's going to be two and a half stories as as the lot slopes back the the uh lower level unit will be at grade but then as you get to the back it'll be two stories.

Okay. And before I forget, you heard the variances that we addressed with the board that we are removing and your willingness to comply with planning commission and planning details for that. That is accurate, sir. Yeah, we're we're looking for absolute minimum variances that we need. So, as far as what the planning commission asked regarding the lighting, uh the landscaping, the forest or wanted the trees, were willing to do all that. Okay. Now I'm going to show you the second page and these are the elevations for the construction. Correct. They are. This was also submitted in the portal with the city. It is. Yes. And this is consistent with how you would develop the property.

That's correct. Okay. And this would have a first floor unit, second floor, and third floor unit. Is that how it will be divided? Looking at the front of the building, it would be first floor, second floor, third floor. looking at the back of the building. It's it's basically two stories. Okay. Now, I'm going to go to the last page on the exhibit here. These are the layouts for the units, correct? These are also the layouts you submitted in with the with the portal as well. Yes. And can you give us the square footage of each of the units if possible?

Um I believe they're 11 a little over,00 square feet per unit. per unit. Okay. And um and you would commit to the board to develop the property and build the the uh the unit in the what's shown in the elevations and with the layout you've provided to the city. Other than the staircase and and if you want to show them the other we can show them the other ones. The staircase in the front has to be set up slightly differently uh in order not to encroach into the sidewalk. And these are the renderings. Yes. That you have?

Yeah. So that this this staircase in the front would actually run across the side of the building instead of going straight up. And then this is a more uh illustrative exhib.

Correct. Yes. Now let's talk about the surrounding. Here we have an aial of the property. Your lot is 40 feet wide. Correct. That's correct. Yeah. Next to you to the west there is a to the far left there's another threetory dwelling that has a 40ft lot. Correct. Right next to you there's a threetory dwelling on a 26 foot lot. Correct. And I'm talking about lots. I'm talking about lot width. Right.

You're 40t. And then to your east, you have the the the immediately the two twin homes. Correct. Correct. And they have 15 foot lot widths. Correct. And then if we continue down again, another set of twins each with 15 foot lot widths. I believe all of them are 15 feet all the way up to the corner as we go down Jackson Street. Yes. So your lot is larger than the one immediately adjacent to you and 40 ft being the same size building as or a similar size building as what is one more removed from you to the west.

Yeah. Our our building would actually be a little bit smaller the two buildings to the west. Okay. And if you look at the if you encapsulate the entire twin home to the east, what is your building size in comparison to that? It would actually be a little bit smaller than uh if you counted both twins, it would be a little bit smaller. Okay. Now, um and this is for residential use in the residential neighborhood, correct? Yes. All right. And um do you know if any of these properties to your west have more than one dwelling units in them?

Uh that I'm not sure of. I don't know. Okay. Now, let's talk about the parking in the back. There are some variants that are needed for the parking. Um and the way you have it constructed, you have three lanes, two cars per lane. As you talked about, the headtotail parking, correct? There is the zoning ordinance uh concern regarding backing out into Juniper Street. What is to the west of your property on Juniper Street? Uh I believe it's Jun Juniper Street ends to the to the west of our property. So there's there wouldn't be traffic going west to east on on Juniper. Correct.

There would not be. So, because it stubs off there, their concern about backing out into the street with the two-way traffic would be alleviated. Correct. Yes, it would be. All right. Uh and nothing prevents people if they wanted to from backing into the parking pad. Correct. And then going head out,

driving forward. Yes, they could do that also. Um and if we look here at the um the concern about the uh we have the vehicles parking out. We have the the the building size is comparable to the ones adjacent uh to your property if you look at them as a whole. And then the lot width 40T is required. Have you done anything to change the dimensions of those lot of this lot? No, the lot's 40 ft. It is there's nothing I can do to change that.

Okay. And when you purchased this property, that was the residential building on it was already removed and and the lot was vacant except for the two parking garages in the rear. Correct. Yes. Okay. Um and you shown the the board here tonight the rendering of the building facade. Are you committed to developing this building in conformity with the rendering you provided to the city? Yeah. Other other than the staircase has to be changed as per the planning commission. Yes.

Okay. And I'm showing the audience the the rendering of of what you're proposing. Yes. And the same with the layout of the the individual units. And each unit will be a twobedroom.

Yeah, they'll all be two bedroom and then uh one bathroom. Is there anything else you want to tell this board about your intended development and the special exception and variances you are requesting?

No, I think you covered everything that we we needed to do. I think we asked for the minimum amount of variances uh required. It's a lot that's been vacant for I don't know how long and I think what we proposed to do is an improvement. Um, I believe we could do a two-unit there without having any variances. However, you're still going to have issues with uh old garages and and things of that nature that are there. So, we're I don't think we're causing any harm. Um, and in fact, I think we're improving it by adding additional parking. If we left the garages there, you'd only have two off- streetet parking. We're proposing six off streetet parking, which I think is better. And I know there there are people from the public that have questions. So I'll reserve comment or closing until after.

Just a quick qu followup question on what you just mentioned. If you could do a two-unit without having to come here, why not do a two-unit? Because a two-unit would obviously be more in line with the character of the neighborhood than three.

Well, I'm not number one, there is a housing shortage in Easton. You can see the letter from uh the joint plan or the Lehave Valley Planning Commission uh that they they feel this is a good project to do. Um you know, one of the things if I do a two unit, I still then I would leave the two garages there, I'd only be providing two parking spaces. Um so I think adding six parking spaces is better. Uh there's some things that we need to do that are going to be fairly expensive. The planning commission wants new curb there. They want new sidewalk there. Uh so economically it makes more sense to do uh to have that advertised over three units versus two units. Uh the other thing is that lot's been vacant for I don't know how long. So obviously if it was if it was a simple matter of doing a two-unit and it made sense to do a two-unit, someone would have done that already. So I don't I don't see any harm in doing a three-unit. U it's not going to overpower the neighborhood. Um, and I think it's going to it's going to be better and it's going to and it's going to solve a need for housing in East.

It will be. Yes. Correct. It's not a true It's not a true Correct. It's not a true threetory building because the back of it will be two stories. No. No. I wouldn't I wouldn't want to do that. It wouldn't make sense to do that. But the amount of families that are going to be in this space is going to be more than what it would be if it was the other houses.

Well, the number of families would be more, but not necessarily the total number of people would be more. Um, you know, if if I needed to do twins there, I might do four or fivebedroom twin homes, which would be more people. These are limited to twobedroom units each. So, um we're limited to the number of people that will be in the building. Any other question? The board? I do have two. Um when you say it's been vacant for I don't know how long. Are we talking months, years, decades?

That might be something that's I I mean I searched on the internet. I don't I'm not sure when the building burned down, but it burned down more than a couple months ago. I would think it was a couple years ago at least. You know, the sewer the sewer line is still there, but it's been capped off. The water line's still there, but it's been capped off. So, I would assume probably at least five or six years. Okay. More.

And the other thing, and I'll direct this to both you and your council. I'm assuming there will be no problem with but had one like this in another municipality last night where they were going to do stacked parking as you're proposing and my recommendation to the board was to set a condition that the and it's not so much concerned about you but the next property owner um requirement for written leases that assign each stack to a unit so that there's no cross stack. packing. Correct. We we would number the spots. So if it's considered apartment one, that would be one. Apartment two would be number two. Apartment three would three.

And that was already discussed with planning and that is not a problem. Landlord doesn't want to have to encounter tenants saying unit two is in unit one spot. Y makes absolute sense. But I just wanted to mention it because you know this gentleman may be sensible but the next person may not be. So, I think we need, you know, I would have them attach it as a condition. Sure. Yeah. We And we we have other buildings that have the same setup. Yeah. All right. We'll take questions now from the people that were sworn in. Want to come up, please?

Oh, well, they can sit there. It's fine. Uh, my name is Thomas Smith. I live in You can sit if you want. Oh, okay. My name is Thomas Smith and I've owned the property adjacent to this vacant lot for almost 30 years. Mr. Smith, I'm sorry. What is the address of your property, please, sir? Uh, 11 1159 Jackson.

1159. Thank you. And when I bought the property, the lot had been vacant for multiple years already. And I looked into it and found it couldn't be built on because of the variances required. So it came up for sale several times throughout the years and I I tried to purchase it from different people, but they all kept denying, you know, the sale for one reason or another. And uh I just feel that uh it's kind of unfair. I think that if he if he does construct this this building there, it's going to adversely affect the property values in the neighborhood because there's already a big restriction on parking. And I mean, no, there nobody has off- streetet parking on I mean, he's probably got one of the only houses that have off- streetet parking except on to Juniper, but on Jackson Street, there's no parking. We're constantly having to park around the corner. Even if he was going to put a single home there, you couldn't guarantee that people would park behind the house in a garage or a parking pad.

And if you have three families that not only the families going to be using it, but they're going to have friends and visitors and and there's going to be deliveries and you know, I mean there another unit was uh directly west of our property and they put in a three unit and since they put that threeunit in it, it's been brutal to park there. It's just one of my big concerns. And my my grandson who is currently living at that location. He's uh he had a stroke about three years ago and he's very sensitive to noise. So I'm I'm a little concerned about the construction aspect. I think the building that he's proposing is a beautiful building. It's just that for the residents that are in the neighborhood, there's a lot of people that are up. They don't want it.

Thank you. I I have a question. If you were to purchase that property, what was your intent with it? Um, my thought was, uh, I was going to put in a small swimming pool for the kids and possibly like a parking pad because there's, you know, if I could get a parking pad because we did have access from the juniper if you knock down those garages like he was proposing, you could put like a a gravel parking pad back there because it basically just trails off. Juniper just trails off into the woods into our property and just goes straight down the hill. Sir, do you have anything?

Good evening. Uh, my name is David Wagner and I'm his son. I live directly next to the proposed development at 1141 Jackson Street. Um, my first thing I was going to say is it requires uh multiple significant deviations from zoning code, including the lot size, the driveway width, building scale, parking design. Although his building is smaller in stature than the neighboring buildings, it is going to occupy 39% more space as well as the parking pad. There are serious concerns in that area directly behind my house. Um there's already noticeable erosion. The ground is washing out down Juniper be where Juniper Alley ends off is completely running down into the neighbor's yard. I couldn't get his signature, but he has told me numerous times his property is flooding out. Um, a larger amount of payment increasing increasing the building footprint will worsen that drainage and the runoff. I'm already in the process of trying to rebuild my retaining wall to keep my property behind my property. Um, in addition, uh, there's no buffer fencing, nothing to stop, uh, barrier the noise that's going to come. like he said, I can hear a full conversation right outside my wall of my house. If they're going to do construction there, both neighboring houses are going to hear that clear as day. Um, the neighborhood is made up of families and this uh project is just simply it's too dense for that area as we we are already having parking problems. Um, and each each house has, you know, two to three cars per uh per unit. Um I have went around and I gathered signatures from at least 25 of the ne the members of the community who share also share these concerns. Um and they

ask respectfully uh that the board take them in to consideration and I ask to deny the requested variances please. Right. Thank you for your time. Oh yeah. very little. I do hear that. Oh, I do hear that. That's why I'm That's directly next door.

Oh, yeah. No, I know. because I don't think someone else

I'm more concerned concerned of the property running away and I my house floods already. How is it going to do?

Okay, thanks gentlemen. young lady over here.

Can we give your name and address for the record, please? My name is Imani Pangle. Um, I live at 1137 Jackson Street. So, that's uh attached to the half a double that is on the other side of the building that's supposed to be built. Can I ask two favors, dear? Yes. Number one, can you speak up a little bit? Oh, I'm sorry. So, we old people can't hear all that well. No worries. And number two, can you spell your name for us, please? S I M A N I P E N G E L. Thank you very much.

Um, so our main concerns, um, my mom has one of the garages that is on Juniper Street. Um, and if you allow me to show you pictures of how the street is actually set up, it is a very narrow street. Um, and the fact that the cars would back up into Juniper Street, I just don't see how six cars, say people are coming home at the same time, are going to be able to practically do that. Um, and on the other side of Juniper Street is a cemetery. So, there's not really room, any wiggle room to fix that street, make it wider. the street um as he said was eroding very badly on the actual street itself as well as at the end of the street where they're looking to build the parking lot. Um and if if they are going to make it better that that would be great but it does bring a lot of concerns to the neighbors especially the neighbors who already are parking their cars back there. um multiple families living along that street that already are taking the space there. Um I'm not saying that it's a terrible idea, but it is something that is be bringing a big concern to the community. Um we also wanted to talk about here um we had concerns with the construction as well and like you said uh we do hear you know motorcycles on 22 uh personally we have people in my family work from home I'm a student um and it is a big concern of ours as well but like you said yeah it will be done but we live there we have to hear it constantly so it's just something that is looking like a negative on our end that we just have to deal with.

Um we one of the also uh concerns that we had is the amount of people moving into the neighborhood. Um Jackson Street is a very familyoriented neighborhood. The community on Jackson Street is very lovely. Um living there for multiple years now uh has been a great place in East to live. So I think that the main concern would be the amount of people coming to live on a on that street um and just like he said the space that would be taken up doing so. Thank you.

Come forward ma'am. Hello. If you give your name, address for the record, please.

Uh, my name is Orlando Gambier. Um, the address is 11:37 Jackson Street. Um, my biggest concern is parking. The proposed parking spot as my daughter said is actually not working in the back. It's a pharaoh narrow street. Uh if on Jackson Street itself you have the houses that have three and four cars, the family houses that are on the street. If you work uh and come home, say uh you work a second shift, there is no parking. you be circling and circling and circling and finding a spot further down or so. So now with this uh my concern is the amount of residents that are coming one unit usually does has more than two cars realistically. So the parking is the main concern. I saw uh the proposal. The building looks nice, but I think it's too many units in it, too many people for the parking spots that we have. That is my my concern.

Okay. Ma'am, can I just ask though because I I just want to understand your your reasoning. You just said one unit usually has two vehicles. Uh more than two at the moment. Oh, that's not what you just said. Oh, well, let me correct myself then. Okay. one one unit usually in the houses have three four cars. So the parking when you say is two usually when the people living in it's not two two cars. Easton is not a place where you most people take the bus. It's

so you you think that a a an apartment with two bedrooms in it the people occupying the two bedrooms are going to have three or four cars? Three the most. I see it. that that's what's going on in in the community. It's not two cars. Do you realize if he built two twins here, each with four bedrooms, there would be even more bedrooms and more people living in the same size structure on the property? Not really. Pardon me? Not really. I don't I don't see what you're where where you come from.

If if he's saying that if they built two Um, twins, just like yours, just just like your house, there would there would be there were if there was four bedrooms per home there, there there could be three, four, or five cars for that house.

And typically in our community, it's people just starting family, there's lots of kids here. So, in a home like that, there would be maybe two, three cars. People have a project car. We've had it. We have neighbors that have cars and cars and cars and cars, and that's what they have. We deal with it now because we live there. They live there. they live in the same type of house as us. But if we are having another building built here and they're having two cars, one for each person that lives in a bedroom and uh this person has a project car or maybe there's a third person staying there, then there's more and more cars. I think that's what my mom's trying to get at.

Also, um as it is right now, uh you have people living on the street that have their work fans. So one fan takes maybe three four spaces. Um we I think I took some pictures where you have a fan taking three four spaces and then with this coming I add to it you don't have parking. That that's my basic thing. should.

Uh so Yeah, we we own one of the garages. We even use our garage for parking. Mhm.

It is an alley. It's very small.

That side has a cement wall. uh to the left, but the to the right does not have a cement wall. It's just grass. It's just Yeah, I I I think still it doesn't make sense the parking situation

and I think what what the board is trying to convey to both of you and and to all of you is, you know, specifically uh what you're mentioning now. You said your neighbors have cars and cars and cars. You said one of your neighbors has a work truck that takes up two or three spaces. That's your existing neighbors. These folks are putting in the parking that is required under the city ordinance. So, somebody's going to go and build something there. They're providing the necessary parking. They should not be punished or penalized because your existing neighbors have cars and cars and cars or work trucks that take up two or three spaces. But it's not that the board does not hear your concerns. It's just that we we're not in a position to penalize somebody who is complying with the law because of your existing neighbors.

And may may I just drive it back to my original point when I was sitting up here by myself? Um, the way the street is set up was my original point and my main point of the off- streetet parking. It doesn't seem as someone who lives it and sees it dayto-day, it does not seem feasible for that. As she stated, alleyway. That's all that's my main point and that's where I was trying to go. I think it may have gotten a little carried away with the uh parking situation as is now, but it does it does trickle over, but that's what the point that I was trying to make. I I live in your area as well. Um I'm right off of Jackson Street. I have three family members in Jackson and they actually all back up to the alleyway there. Um they have garages as do you. So, if we were to, you know, scrutinize the the folks in front of us about their development or if someone else was to build two twins with an twocar garage or a single oversized garage, you know, how do we treat that? You guys are pulling out under the drive the alleyway. Others may. So, what you know, I'm just trying to really understand

how this parking pad built wider. Um, they're looking for they're not looking for shorter, smaller, and tighter. They're looking for a very large place to be able to maneuver these cars out individually, one at a time. Of course, they can't all pull out. So, what would be the difference if you had two garages, two twin houses, two garages? These folks are leaving at 7:00 in the morning or individuals stacking out of this driveway. And again, I'm I I live in the area, too. I understand the parking. You know, could you help us, you know, how do you get in and out if it's tight? Is it do you have to buy a smaller car or

Oh, no, not at all. Um, our neighbors are very very they just we work together. We work as a community, like I said, very community oriented. Um, we know if one person parks their car this way and they have to come out the other way, you know, it it's able to happen. Granted, it doesn't always work. Uh, people are parked parked, someone has, like you said, someone has a family member over, someone's parked here, and you have to you have to squeeze your way. There's times where I've wiggled my way back and out of that alleyway, too. Um, so people utilize their garages when there is a garage for them to use. Um, but like I said, it sometimes things just get carried away. And I think the concern of it getting carried away and it not working the way it's proposed is the most daunting thing about this. May I may I just suggest u that um you're kind of lucky that you have every day you get to come home and park in your spot. Every day I go home, I don't know where I'm going to park.

I hear you. Just so you know, the board, we all live in the city. I probably live in the most dense neighborhood there is. And I know what she's talking about because there's multiple homes that have two drivers, four cars, two work trucks. You know, I you know, I'm parking a block away every day, so I feel your pain. U but you you are lucky in the fact that you get to go home and have park in the garage. Always was. Okay. Thank you guys, counselor. So just by way of of comment to address some of the concern

concerns raised by the uh by the neighbors as we all know uh if granted a developers agreement will control when and how construction is to be performed in normal hours and not you know beyond normal working hours for construction. So that will be addressed in the developers agreement. the board is aware of the parking requirements in the zoning ordinance and then how we meet and comply with that with this parking pad and it dovetales right into the two variances that we are requesting for the 27 foot wide driveway and the backing out into Juniper Street. Um, one of the neighbors gave some depth as to how long this property has been vacant. And you know, it sits there and it's telling you that in its current state with the current requirements, the land is sterilized. With these with these variances and the special exception, it will put productive use to this land. In the portal that was submitted to the zoning uh zoning department, you will see the Lehigh Valley Valley Planning Commission's um favorable review of this project. Um and let me address some of the concerns about, you know, the condition of Juniper Street, the runoff and what have you. Even after development, even after development of this parking pad, this project will be will be below uh impervious coverage requirements. We're not seeking a variance for that. So really what this boils down to is the lot width. We're at five. We need five feet in lot width. And then the special exception. This building when you look at the aerial view fits in conformity with the property to the west in its size and to the east if you were to look at the twin home as a whole unit which it really is look is viewed at from the public when you look at the roadway here. We're not

larger in height. uh than any of the surrounding properties. Uh we will not uh stick out like a sore thumb in that neighborhood with the size of the property or size of the building we are developing. This hits your special exception requirements. It's also been addressed and it's been understood by this board that the three units doesn't really change the dynamic of how many people could be there if there were two twins that were that would be developed. that addresses the other impacts of your special exception, the burden on water, sewer, school or public resources. Um, it just meets the requirements for the special exception with the city of East and we would respectfully request the granting of the special exception and the variances as requested.

Okay. Before I close the hearing, there wasn't anybody else that was sworn in, was there? Sure. quickly up here in front in the with the microphone and just state your name again please.

My name is Thomas Smith. My question is during the construction period will they need to be blocking off access to parking on Jackson Street at all? Will they be blocking it off like say during construction period so people can't park there? So, it's a again that will be an issue to address in the developers agreement if there would need to be the blocking of any public roads. Uh, it is the last usable property on Juniper Street. Uh, so if need be, there may be trucks in front of its property, but we do not envision them blocking off the access to Juniper Street.

I'm not concerned with Juniper. I'm talking about Jackson Street. No, Juniper is really an alleyway in the back of the lot. The only time I think we would need to block off Jackson Street at at all would be because we have to replace the curb and the sidewalk. So there there could be a short period of time. Yeah. Uh that in front of that lot when we're doing the curb and the sidewalk that you couldn't park there, but we would certainly want to keep that to an absolute minimum. And I'm sure the city would require it. So yeah, you know, when you open up for the curb, they're going to come out and inspect. We're going to pour the curb. They're going to come out and inspect again. We're going to back fill the curb and then you can park there again. Pretty sure you're probably going to have to redo the sewer lines, too. I I would think so because they're over a hundred years old.

Sure.

You know, the the other thing to keep in mind is because this is single ownership. Um, you know, if we if we turn this back into say a twin like it was and we sold those, one of one of your neighbors mentioned about project cars and things like that, uh, our leases will not allow someone to have a project car. Our leases specifically state you can park a car that's licensed, roadw worthy. There's no project cars. There's no people changing oil, you know, in the parking pad, things of that nature. We don't allow that. So, and so in some instances, common ownership with three units gives us more control than if we said, "Okay, we're going to do a fourbedroom twin and sell them and then you're on your own." you know, you you can't really control what people were doing where we can we can do that uh by allowing us to do a threeunit.

How how close to the property lines are your buildings going to be built? Yeah, we're we're meeting the set we're we're meeting the setbacks by quite a bit.

Yeah, the building's only 23 feet wide. So, the lot's uh 40t wide. So obvious.

Thank you. Yeah. The the other Someone mentioned about water runoff uh in the alley. Uh obviously the planning commission wouldn't allow that. Our water has to go out uh to Jackson Street as part of our uh grading plan that's there. So we're not going to be creating any uh a bigger issue in the back of the property.

Okay. There's no other questions or any comments. I'm going to close the hearing. This is structure. Can't store. Finally, my concern people coming in put in

and I understand all but no I get all that I think this will be lessive saying put more apartments. That's how I mean I can tell you she's right next to me and that's almost every house. I understand that's not control

again. And that's right. service off scales. No, I know. I would suggest you put that condition. Miss Panta,

Miss Volcano Hall, hi Mr. Civetella. Hi, Mr. Loack. Hi, Miss Thomas. Hi. It's been granted with those exceptions. And Bob, what's the if you just mention one I had mentioned about no cross stacking and and consistent with the testimony, all vehicles will be licensed, no project cars. Okay. No changing the oil in the parking lot. No working on the car. Thank you very much.

Yeah. This is

Oh, I'm sorry. Do you want some more? Okay. You want any more? You ready, Mike? All right. Open up the next hearing. Secretary with the purpose, please.

All right. Applications hereby made for public hearing before the zoning hearing board for a property known as 700 Davis Street Zoning District Southside block class B. Variance is as follows. 59514D proposed an existing lot of 1980 ft. Required minimum lot size of 2,000 square ft. 59514D proposed existing lot width of 18 ft. required a minimum lot width of 30 ft. 59514F3 proposed no street trees require street trees shall be planted along both sides of all streets in accordance with chapter 554 and as determined by the city forester 59533b proposed zero off- streetet parking spaces required two off- streetet parking spaces above actions request to proceed with changing the use of a current single family home to a two family home is Blake Atherton at 636 Davis Street, Eastn PA 18042. The owner is uh Jennifer and Blake Athetherton at 636 Davis Street. I don't know why that's twice. Uh East Pennsylvania 18042 uh 15 adjacent property owners are notified and it was published in the press.

Thank you. I see the applicant is present. Anybody else here for this hearing? You want to speak at this hearing? I'm going to have you sworn in. Ma'am, do you want to speak? Um yes, I do. Okay, I'll have you sworn in right now, please.

I do. Thank you, sir. If you give your name and address for the record, please. My name is Blake Athetherton, 636 Davis Street, Eastern, PA. And property posted? Yes, it was.

Thank you. All right. Tell us why you're here. I'm here seeking variances for uh what was mentioned um zoning section code 59514 these lot size requirements 700 Davis Street is a corner lot uh on the corner of Davis and Milton. So I do have sidewalk on the front of the lot and on the Milton Street side on the south side. This is a duplex. So the southside boundary is the adjoining wall of 702 Davis Street and then the uh backyard abutts up to another property. There is no way to increase the lot size or the lot width and so we're seeking a variance for uh the lot dimensions. Then uh 595-14 uh the street trees. Uh, as stated here, street trees shall be planted along both sides of all streets in accordance with chapter 5542 and as determined by the city forester. So, we've been in touch with the city forester. Mr. Rob Christopher had a phone conversation with him and he was willing to follow up that phone conversation with an email. I'll read that to you. Says, "Hello, Blake. As I mentioned in our phone conversation today, since there is an existing structure that you are just trying to convert into a multif family property and it is not new construction, there is no requirement to have street trees planted within the right of way. The current sidewalks are also too narrow to cut tree wells into since they would need a minimum of 36 in or more to bypass a tree well for ADA compliance. This would be on the West Milton side of the property. the Davis Street side. The frontage is too short and close to the intersection to plant plant a tree there. So, one would not be required out front either. Please review all the landscaping and tree requirements in the instance that you may need buffer plantings for additional parking you may have. Uh if it is going to be mainly on street parking along West Milton Street

and a current driveway, this may not apply, but you will find all the information you need at eode 360. So in harmony with uh what Mr. Christopher has stated here as the not being needed, we are seeking a variance on not having street trees as there is no room for them. Then we have 595-33B off streetet parking. That is the topic for tonight, isn't it? Um variance 59533K states that all parking spaces required herein shall be located on the same lot as they are intended to serve. However, in the opinion where in the opinion of the zoning administration, practical difficulties prevent such an arrangement. They may be established within 600 feet of the premises they are intended to serve. So two points here. Is it practical to have on premises parking? When you look at 700 Davis Street, it initially looks like you could park two cars in the backyard, but then when you're going through the ordinances between um impervious surface coverage, uh setbacks, the need for a driveway, um in Southside, you're allowed 10 foot wide, but because of the orientation of pulling two cars off of Milton Street into the backyard, you'd need a a 20 foot wide driveway and then five feet on either side of that for buffer zones for turning radius. you'd end up taking up like 30 feet of the curb, which would be two parking spaces that are on the street already, just to gain two parking spaces off the street. Uh it looked like you need four or five variances to get on premises parking versus just one variance to say you don't need it. So it didn't seem practical to have on premises parking. So could we find parking within 600 ft of 700 Davis? We did consult uh construct a list of 78 properties, residential properties within 600 feet of uh 700 Davis and um these were

properties that either have a parking pad or a driveway already residences. We sent out postcards on March 27th and then again on April 8th to all of these residences and it reads, "Dear neighbor, we are your neighbors at 700 Davis Street. We are inquiring about the possibility of renting two off- streetet parking spaces with limited off- streetet parking at our address. We are seeking a nearby arrangement that would be uh and we'd be would be glad to offer fair compensation. If this is something you would consider, please contact us at 908-268-3350. We understand if this is not feasible and appreciate your time. Sincerely, Blake and Jennifer Athetherton. To date, we've received only one response to these postcards. It was a gentleman who said he had some parking for us. Uh but when we contacted him, it turns out it's not his residence within the 600 ft. It is another piece of property that he owns outside that radius. Uh, another consideration was the commercial lot uh just across Old Philadelphia Avenue. There's a a commercial lot there where the Dollar Tree is uh Dunkin Donuts Subway. Is everybody familiar with that lot? That's within 600 ft. Uh the lot itself is listed on JW on um ncpub.org as being owned by um CVS still. Um, I think it's called PA, CVS LLC or something like that. They have a website listing all of their real estate property, everything that's available for rent, lease, or for sale. This property was not listed, but there is an inquiry tool on that website. And so we did reach out on these same dates, March 27th and April 8th, to this uh this real estate company that CVS owns asking if

there was an ability to lease property, lease parking spaces. We have not heard back from them. It is evident though that the parking lot is being used and so we suspect that it is currently leased even though it's not listed and um perhaps the offer of leasing two spaces just isn't getting their attention. So, we have put some forth some effort in finding parking spaces within the 600 feet, but we can't find it. That being said, um to consider if we if you would consider for a moment 702 Davis Street, this is our next door neighbor. It's the other half of the duplex. They have a multif family zoning u uh admission on their property. They don't have the lot width. They don't have the street trees. And um if they have secured off- streetet parking somewhere, uh it's very evident that the tenants are parking right on the street right there at the house. Who's going to walk 50 feet to their house when you can park right next door, right outside? Uh around our neighborhood. I live right there at 636. Uh right next to 700, there's always two or three spaces on Milton Street available. There's a space out front available all the time. Then across Davis Street, there's always two or three spaces. Right next to my house, there's a space available on Milton Street. There's two out front available. And there's five across the street available. So that's 12 or 13 spaces that are almost always available in this neighborhood for off- streetet or for on street parking. So the the neighborhood itself doesn't need off- streetet parking and um it wouldn't benefit the neighborhood to try to shoehorn parking in to this property at all. It would remove green space and I'm sure some of the neighbors wouldn't like it anyway. So we are looking for variances on all of these issues to try to move forward with uh developing this property. So, so

these variances arose be because of your wanting to change this property from current use to multif family. So, why is that? Why do I want to change the current use uh business creating um a two family house to uh be able to rent it out? Okay. So then you have to that's why these arose then is not because the city did anything or because you can't buy more land to make sure the square feet is because you want to have make money off of a single family home making the double. How am I going to buy land though to increase?

Well, I'm just saying but that arose from your wanting to do what you're wanting to do. Okay. So, I'm just trying to figure out how that's a hardship. It's a hardship to developing this property, but okay. Any questions? Okay, questions. How large is the footprint? Like the inside square feet? Does it have five bedrooms? It's a five bedroom house. Yes. Okay.

So, what are you proposing to put in? Uh, we currently are proposing two two-bedroom apartments. So currently it's it's vacant. It's unoccupied. Correct. How long has it been unoccupied? We bought it I think it was November October or November. Just six months, seven months.

Have you put it on the market to attempt to rent it as a single family house? No. Is there a reason why you don't want to try to rent it as a single family house? It's a five bedroomedroom house. Um that's a pretty big house to rent out u to as a single family, but also just, you know, developing it into two. So, I think the um uh just the long-term investment and profit margin is what we're looking for.

But when you bought the house, you bought it as a single family home, correct? Wasn't wasn't marketed as a two family. Correct. Okay. Sorry, interrupted. No. Any other questions? I'll get Ma'am, do you want to come on the forward, please?

Do you want to give your name and address for the record, please?

Um, yes. My name is Sandre Jones and I live at 262 West Milton Street. Um, the backyard of the um 700 um Davis Street is um where my my house is located. And I I came because I was concerned about the the statement on the notice that said two off streetet parking spaces. And I was assuming the only off streetet parking spaces was the um green grass. And I was like that would be invading my home and would um lower the worth of my home if there was a parking space there. and my yard is very narrow and it would be close to my yard. So, I came because I was concerned. I wrote down, you know, some reasons why. But since he's saying that that was no option, I'm happy to hear. And if he wants to turn it into a two family home, that that's, you know, whatever. Um, I've been inside the home and it looks like impossible, but he does that work for a living. So, I'm happy to hear that. That's why I came. I didn't want that to happen. and I wrote down why

it would just yeah lower my um worth of my property. So thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? No further questions. Anything else you want to add? No, I don't.

All right. Close the hearing. whatever. I mean, to me, that's that's Yeah. To me, you bought the house with the with the intention to turn it into a income house, which is fine, but you have to make sure you buy house for that. I can't for what I need to sustain. All right. Make a motion to a second. Mr. Civetella.

Hi Miss Volcano Hall. Hi Mr. Lopes. Hi Miss Panto. Miss Thomas. Hi. It's been denied. may ask um what would I need to do if to to get it to be approved?

We can't give you legal advice, but I can only tell you that there was no legal hardship established here that would enable the board to approve your request under these circumstances. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Take a take a couple minute break. See which ones are

for Well, and it's again just a no hardship at all. I'm going to buy a house and turn it into an apartment and I don't care what anybody says, right?

Not a reason. It's good. I don't know. She's the one that's going to take her place. It's just it's cold outside. It's just a little chilly. The air conditioning comes on at 8 o' So you have a half hour.

I don't know. I I forget. No. Well, no. No. But I woke up. I forget what night it was. About maybe 5 in the morning. And the All the power went off like the whole street complete power like maybe a half hour and it came back on

really

fiber optics. Yes,

sometimes I wish we could just go back to 1970s. I gave our exhibits out there just to save time. That's cuz the chair said the air conditioning is coming on at 8 and I gota be

Oh, really? I left you his card. No, he's he was teasing. He said I said, "Is it is it cold in here or is it me?" He said, "It's always cold in here." He goes, "But the air conditions coming on at 8, so can you be out by No, I'm serious. I mean, I can be fast. Don't Don't get me wrong. I can be fast. I'm kidding. That's what she said. We went through this already, Pam. It's cold in here. Yes, I just said that, too. Keep pace.

Yeah. All right, everybody's back. I'm think it's You ready, Dwayne? Yeah, I guess. How do you want to proceed with this one? You think we get on the record for it or no? Well, yeah, we can go off the record for a minute. What we decided to do is they want to present all as one consolidated package if you will. Um those are yours. Thank you.

Lot one there is, correct me if I'm wrong, one fewer variants required than lots two through seven, each of which requires one additional lot width variance. Correct. Correct. And it is my further understanding that within that 2 to7 span there is some difference in the grades. Correct. And you will address that. Yes. Yes. So, we're going to they they've agreed and and we'll go put this on the record then

that they're looking for just one consolidated decision, but within that decision, we will have to do a vote on lot one separately and then lots two through seven. Um making sure we address within that vote any difference in the slope. Okay. Okay. Okay. And that's because the testimony would be repetitive if we did them. We'd be here for way longer than we need to. So, we appreciate it. Yeah, we appreciate that. All right. Now that we've had that practice run after he reads the purpose, I'll put that onto the record and you can make any corrections that I screw up. I don't.

All right. I'm going to open up the hearing to the secretary with the purpose, please. These ones for these ones for two to Yes.

All right. Applications hereby made for public hearing before the East Zoning Hearing Board for property known as Zero Stewart Street zoning district southside block class A. Variances as follows for lot 1 59514 F4 proposed front-loaded parking required new off- streetet parking shall be located in the rear of buildings 59514 F12 proposed front-loaded attached garage required. No new attached garage shall be front-loaded. 59533 K3 proposed new driveway is is accessible at the front. Required new driveways shall be accessible from an alley. 59530E1 proposed build upon area of a natural slope of 12% to 25% required in areas with a natural slope of 12% to 25%. No more than 30% of such areas shall be regraded, cleared, built built upon, or otherwise altered. That was for lot one. Now, variances for lot 2 to lot 7. 595 uh 14D proposed a 24 ft wide lot. Minimum lot width of 33 feet. 59514 F4 proposed front-loaded parking. New off streetet parking shall be located in the rear buildings. 59514 F12 proposed front-loaded attached garage required. No new attached garage shall be frontloaded. 59533 K3 proposed new driveway is accessible at the front. Required new driveways shall be accessible from the alley. 59530E1 proposed build upon an area of natural slope of 12% to 25% required. Areas with a natural slope of 12% to 25%. No more than 30% of such area shall be regraded, cleared, built upon, or otherwise altered. 59530e2

proposed build upon area of natural slopes of 25% to 35% required areas with natural slope of 25 to 35% no more than 15% of such area shall be altered regraded cleared built upon or otherwise altered 59530E proposed build upon area of natural slope 35% or greater required if areas where the natural slope is 35% or greater no area shall be altered, regraded, cleared, built upon, or otherwise altered. Um the above action is to the project's proposed seven town houses within the southside. Um driveways to the townhouse units will be accessible from Pastor Fred Davis. The proposed units will be serviced by public water and sewer. Uh, the appellent is Manchi Patel at 1449 Jake Place, Helertown, PA1 1805. The owners of the The owner of the property is Scott Kindred, 93 East Somerset Street, Raritin, New Jersey 08869. Uh, nine adjacent property owners were notified and it was published in the press. Thank you to tell me I see the applicant is present. I'm going to swear in uh the applicant and anybody else that's here to speak tonight. No. Okay. Not at all.

Okay.

And Mr. Chairman, if I may, as a matter of housekeeping for the record, uh, as the board is aware, this has been submitted as seven different applications and appeals. Um, for lots, for lot one, only four variances are required. For lots 2 through seven, five variances are required. the same variances for each of those lots two through seven. The only difference is uh in some instances there is a difference in the grading of the slope to be disturbed. uh but prior to the commencement of hearing I spoke with uh uh the appellants council and they would prefer to present this as one consolidated appeal. So they are looking for one uh vote from the board that will cover the four variances requested on lot one and the five variances that are requested on lots two through seven. uh the latter taking into consideration uh within the vote the difference in the u degree of the slopes

and the board is very thankful and I confirm on the record Kate Derso here on behalf of the applicant. The only other difference between two through seven is the width varies. They still all require the same relief but the width amount varies between two through seven. I was a little confused because I saw I thought I saw in the narrative, but I thought I saw in each appeal that it was just 20 feet. So, but but it does vary. Yes. Okay. Not not substantially, right? Yeah. Okay. Can you go ahead correction? Not six does have 22 feet in the appeal. Sir, I'm sorry. If you could just give your name and address for the record. You'll get to it in the testimony. Just state your name for the record.

My name is Sher Sakar. I'm with RNI Engineering. I'm the principal. I've been a professional engineer for 20ome years. And did you file the zoning hearing board application? Yes, I did. And is the owner of the property as stated in the notice? That's correct. And in the exhibit package, we have a copy of the deed confirming the owner. That's correct. Okay. And then did the owner sign the zoning application? Yes. And is that the second exhibit in the package? That's correct. And is the applicant that's listed under agreement of sale to purchase the property? That is correct. And is exhibit three in the package the redacted copy of the agreement of sale? Yes.

And what is your relationship with the applicant? Um well applicant is my wife. Uh she's um she's the boss of the house and she's here in the audience in the back. And did she also provide you a in case she couldn't attend this evening, a letter of authorization for you to be able to provide the testimony which you have as exhibit 4 in the package? That's correct. Okay. And going to the uh property itself, how large is the tract of land? Uh it's approximately 0.8 acres. And is it currently vacant?

It is vacant. That's correct. And does the underlining zoning district permit single family attached dwelling units with 2900 square foot minimum lot area? That's correct. That's for block A. I'm sorry. Block A. Block A. Correct. And then as it relates to the subject property, did you prepare an aerial of the property to show the board what is uh in the immediate vicinity? Yes, I did. So, what's marked in the exhibit package is exhibit five is an aerial map and it has yellow uh drawings. What does the yellow represent?

So, the yellow represents the outside perimeter of the property. Um it's it's located along Pastor Fred Davis Street and it's a it's a polygon and and you can see there's a curvature in the Pastor Freight Davis Street. So, and and the yellow is this is a surveyed uh track. So there's meets and bounds on there. That's correct. Okay. And then does this uh exhibit also show that the property is vacant and that it does have some wooded areas along on it? Yes, the property is wooded uh and it's got brush underneath it. It's part there is actually a barian narrative report which has the photographs of the property as well. Okay. And we'll get to that because that's one of the other exhibits. That's correct.

Okay. And can you describe the topography of the site? Yes. So, I'd like to take the the board over to the next page. Okay. Which looks like this. This is a map for for purposes of the record. It's exhibit six in the package. It's the steep slope exhibit. Exhibit six. Correct. And this drawing was included in what was submitted online at the city portal. That's correct. Okay. Can you correct Can you then walk through the board uh this exhibit and the topography?

Sure. So, um, again, Pastor Fred Davyy Street is at the bottom of the page. Um, if you're looking at this, um, the north is to the top of the page. The yellow color slopes are 12 to 25% slopes, the yellow color. The red ones are 35 plus and and the green ones are 25% to 35% slope. So as you can see most of the steep slopes are concentrated onto the rear of the property further away from the street and the shallower slopes which are the 12 to 25% or gentler slopes rather are mostly concentrated towards the street towards the road. And we'll get back to this exhibit uh uh later in the testimony, but uh what surrounds the subject property?

Um actually, if we go back to the next exhibit, okay, the next exhibit is is the is the aerial map uh showing the surrounding properties and that's exhibit seven. Yep, that's correct. Can you orient the the board to what surrounds the tract?

Sure. Um so again the property in in subject property is highlighted with the yellow box. Um you can to the left of it is the canal street. Um on the top of the page is Madison and Joseph Street is a residential community. Again emphasis there's a great change. So it looks adjacent but vertically it is quite elevated. Uh across from Pastor Fred Davis Street is the church property and a large parking field. uh to the north of the property towards between Canal Street and the subject property is an is an commercial use building with a parking lot that's immediately adjacent to the subject property.

Okay. And then did you include in your submission materials a sketch plan uh to show the proposed townhouse development? Yes, I did. Okay. And is that what's shown in the next exhibit included as the submission to the portal? That's correct. So, can you walk the board through what is proposed on the property then?

Sure. So, uh what's proposed again, Pastor Fred Davis Street is at the bottom of the page. Um the subject properties highlighted with a dark black line on the perimeter, which is the same as the yellow color on the prior exhibit. and on that uh is laid out with the seven townhouse units uh with associated driveways, sidewalks and um you know street trees improvements. So the property in question is a non-traditional nonalley street configuration. It does not follow a typical street grid environment as you can see. Um there is a lot number eight which is just a vacant lot. No structure is proposed on it.

And is the property encumbered also by a 30- foot wide utility easement? That's correct. The 30 foot wide utility easements are actually towards the northern end of the property. It's right adjacent to that commercial parking lot, if you will, and runs through proposed lot one. That's correct. That's correct. And and just for the record, although you made uh seven separate submissions, these lots do not exist as as shown. That's correct. There's only one parent parcel right now. And the but the city directed you to do seven separate submissions. That's correct. Okay.

And going to the uh what you just stated that the property doesn't have a traditional street and alley block pattern. What are you proposing as far as access and parking for the uh proposed development?

Sure. So just given that it does not have a traditional uh street and alley uh configuration and given the topography change between Pastor Fred Davyy Street and Fel Street which is on the back side of the property. Um the only other option is to provide the units facing Pastor Fred Davyy Street with a driveway and a parking garage that faces the street. So that's what's being proposed. H the dotted line on this exhibit is actually the garage space. Just wanted to just point that out. So the the dark bold line is the indent of the garage. It would still be covered structure, but it's that's where the garage is.

And does the parking meet the city requirements? That's correct. So, and and because you're proposing the garages to be along the front of the property clearly, then the access you need front loading access as well along uh Pastor Dave, Pastor Fred Davis Street. That's correct. That's where the that's where the hardship associated with the land comes because there isn't any grid structure. There is no alley street grid configuration and there's a vertical topography issue. So, uh it isn't like you can approach this property from Fel Street. It's just physically not possible.

And will there be any issues or concerns from a traffic or safety standpoint with having these seven access drives along Pastor Fred Davis Street? No. And they'll just would just operate as a typical uh townhouse development where you have multiple access drives on one road. That's correct. That's correct. And as you stated immediately across Pastor Fred Davis is the church property. Is that correct? That is correct. So it's you're not conflicting with other access driveways already that would if somebody was backing out or going into the site.

That's correct. Yeah. So there is no residential across where two cars backing out would have a conflict. It's just it's just by it's it's a unique lot really just by itself. It's just there. So yes. Yeah. That's that's correct. And if you had to construct your own alley or have some rear access, would that require the alley to be within the more steeply sloped areas on the track?

That That's correct. So, it would be if you were to do that, it would then disturb much larger portions of steep slopes um and move the driveway or such an alley even closer to Fel Street, meaning closer to the residential properties in the back. So yes, that's correct. And as far as utility goes, is there existing sanitary sewer, water, and a storm drainage conveyance system located already within the Pastor Fred Davis Street? That is correct. Yes, that's that's true.

And in your opinion, with regard to the front loading um that's proposed and the relief uh associated with that, are the variances necessary to be able to enable this townhouse development to be constructed on the property? Yes. Um, now let's go to talk about the slopes. So, let's go back to first to the exhibit uh six. Did the city engineer request that you uh calculate the land disturbance on a per lot basis? Yes. So, can you just and and overall and overall

and overall so can you just for the record explain what the box is on the top of this exhibit shell and it's harder to read on the 11 by 17 so I apologize.

Yeah, I do have a large copy of the plan if somebody has um wanted to see it but anyways I'll walk you through the plan and the calculations. So, like I said the red color are the very steep slopes or severe steep slopes that's 35% and up. The green ones are um very steep slopes and they are 25 to 35% and the yellow ones are the most you know gentler of the controlled or regulated slopes in the city ordinance. So that's 12 to 25%. Um you can see that most of the slopes the the reds and the greens are further tucked away from from the fast pastor Fred Davis Street. On this plan, I have also shown the seven townhouse units. They are shown in a black color with a dotted line again representing the driveways and the garages. And then there's a preliminary grading plant done underneath it. You can see some topography that was done. So that emphasizes really the disturbance associated with this property. So um on the tables uh if you look at the top left corner it says existing slope table overall and then right next to it says slope disturbance table overall. Okay. So the first table is what exists and a table right next to it is what's proposed to be disturbed. Um and if you then follow down that same format that's for overall that's for the entirety of the site and then if you go down the same logic applies or the same tables apply that's for existing slope for lot number one proposed disturbances for lot number one and so on and so forth and it goes through all seven lots basically. So uh overall is the first the top left um table which is the overall calculation

and did the uh the city engineer uh basically uh approve not approve the relief obviously can't grant the relief but how you did the calculations and the information you provided to the city to show that you weren't estimating or guessing it was actual engineering design that was done.

That's correct. So the city engineer did issue a review comment upon which I had revised this plan and then I did resubmit back to the city engineer and he wrote back a letter saying he satisfied obviously it will be further reviewed during the land development process but so far as the zoning is concerned he's satisfied that there's sufficient data here for him to move me along. Just just so I understand them real quick. Um the existing slope and the slope disturbance, they're both the same, right? As far as as far as this 12 12%. Yeah. So for every category Yeah. And then the slope disturbance is also 12 and 25%. That's the category, correct? Okay.

So So let me walk you through that first table. I think it's slightly confusing. I'm sorry and apologize. So, you do I'm sorry to interrupt, but before we get off, you don't happen to have that communication from the city engineer. I do. I have it. It wasn't It wasn't in the upload because that was actually It is in the system. It is in the upload. That's It was We do. I It's not in the packet. It was done after the packet was sent out. Can we just make that part of the record? Council, I do have a copy of it though on You do have a cop on record. What's in the record? We'll mark this as 12. 12. Thank you. I'll hand it up to you. Now,

thank you very much.

For the record, what council has handed to me is on City of East letterhead, subject, City of East ordinance 59530D, property pastor Fred Davis Street, parenthesis Stewart Street. This is dated April 13, 2026. Authored by Mark J. Hammerstone, city engineer to whom it may concern. I have reviewed the applicant's revised submission materials dated April 12, 2026, including the response letter and revised plan sheets SK01 and SK01 SS in connection with the above referenced matter. Based on my review, the applicant has adequately addressed the prior city engineer review comments for purposes of the current zoning variance review stage. The revised submission now includes updated steep slope information, quantitative slope disturbance tables, additional cross-sections, and other plan clarifications sufficient for this stage of review. Please note that this acceptance is limited to the present zoning review context. Any future subdivision, land development, building permit, storm water retaining wall, erosion and sediment control or other engineering related submissions will remain subject to separate review and approval as applicable. And council, I did want to ask this will be going through land development. Then

it would require land development. We because uh obviously the variance relief is critical to be able to do the land development. Um yes, it would definitely need land development. The engineer will review this for Yeah. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Yes. But he wanted to make sure that we had an idea of the the slopes and the disturbance. And so they did, you know, he did do the engineering for that so that we were at least, you know, addressing what the city engineers concerns were. And councelor, I apologize. I I see it now. Do I see the on the uh slope disturbance table? I see the disturbance percentage at the end. At the end. Yes. I Okay. Now I I couldn't see it before, but I got it. Thank you. Yeah.

Yeah. And just why don't you just I know we don't have to read the numbers in for all the boxes, but why don't you just for the overall uh disturbance just for the record?

Yeah. So for the overall disturbance the first table is the existing steep slopes as is that they exist within the property. So for the yellow color which is the 12 to 25% range is 11,598 square ft worth of yellow color slopes uh 25 to 35% range is 3,390 ft and the 35% and above is 13,536 ft. That's what exists under this plan for all inclusive disturbances for all seven lots. It would be the yellow range to 12 to 25 9782 ft is proposed to be disturbed. uh 25 to 35% range 474 square feet almost 475 square feet is proposed to be disturbed and 35% and above uh range of steep slopes 2571 square ft is proposed to be disturbed. That's how the tables read and then you can follow the same configuration, same chronology for lots individually for each lots.

And does does your calculations accurately reflect the existing uh slope as well as what the proposed slope disturbance would be for each of the proposed townouses? That's correct. And as it relates to lot seven, is lot seven and I guess a little small portion of six the only lots that require disturbance of the what I'm going to call the red slope area.

That's correct. There is there is uh actually it's if you follow through so if you follow through lot number one under the slope disturbance table see it's 0 0 for the green and the red. Lot number two is 00 for green and the red. Lot number three again is 00% for uh red and blue colors. Then you go to

red and green. Sorry. Uh lot number four again 00. Lot number five has zero in green but a small percentage disturbance or 400 foot disturbance on the red. And then six and seven again six is 0% disturbance and for the green color and the red color has a 663 foot disturbance and lot number seven has both 40 4 green color is 474 square ft approximately and the red color is 1507.

So they vary in and out. Yeah. And because of the topography, how are you building the how would the townouses essentially be built from like a from the front standpoint? Yeah. So actually on the plan itself, there are cross-sections. Uh each cross-section is showing how the topography changes from the front to the back. And if you follow for instance cross-section AA, on the front side there is three stories exposed, but on the back side there are two stories exposed. So the building's going to step inside and then it'll just climb up the stair and then on the back side. So that's an effort to reduce soil disturbances and sleep slope disturbances in the rear.

And in your opinion, are town homes the most compact residential form of the uses that would otherwise be permitted in the underlying zoning district? That's correct. So town houses are the most compact permitted use in this uh zoning district. And so let's talk about the minimum lot with uh that's part of the requested variance. Can you walk the board through each of the lots? Obviously, as was noted at at the outset, lot one does not require a variance for the minimum lot width, but can you walk through lots 2, three, four, five, six, and seven?

Yes. So, actually the exhibit the sketch plan would probably be better, which is exhibit number eight. Okay. which just provides a little bit more clarity in terms of dimensions and and um and the lot widths. So if you look at SK01 drawing number SK01 that shows townhouse number one is 20 foot wide unit itself but the lot is much wider uh because it encompasses the 30 foot wide easement area as well and it's got a curvature on Pastor Fred Davis Street so it's got a little bit more arc to it. Uh lot number two, three, four, and five. They are each 20 ft wide. And lot number six is 22 feet wide. Lot number seven is also 22 feet wide. The lot I mean sorry the unit is 22t wide. Lot number seven itself is 24t wide. So it it is larger than the remainder of the lots. Uh, one thing I want to emphasize and bring to the board's attention is that even though the relief is related to the lot width, the lot areas are still compliant. So, this isn't trying to increase the density by making the unit smaller. This is just trying to work around the slope issues that we have. Uh, the wider the unit, the larger the impact. So, as we go down the testimony, I'll get into it. And are you aware does the city zoning ordinance have different uh lot with requirements for town homes depending on what zoning district zoning block they might be located?

That that is correct. So um um I can just read you some of the dimensions of this particular attached use which is um single family attached dwelling unit. So if you are in block A your lot width required is 28T lot area is 2900 ft². If you are in block B uh the lot width drops down to 23 feet and the area comes down to 2150 square ft. And if you are in block C lot width becomes 18 feet for the same product 18t wide and 1,200 square ft. So it does vary substantially as you can see from C to A it is about more than half. It's it's maybe 60% less in terms of lot area. But

and are you familiar with the design of town homes? Yes.

Yeah. And in this area of the city is is the product that you're proposing something that would be conducive for sale or can you kind of Yeah, from a Yeah, from a planning point of view, actually, if you look at the block map, I think the property right north of this is actually block B. This just happens to be block C. I'm not sure why, but it's across an enormous parking lot. It's on one side, it's got a commercial use, on the other side, it's got a fairly steep slope, so the neighborhoods are detached vertically, substantially detached, I would I would say. So this just happens to be one of the pieces that was just it's an island floater type of a lot in here. Um so to me from a planning point of view and I've been doing this for a long time when you have a commercial properties adjacent to a residential use you generally tend to go more denser product and as you move away it becomes more wider product bigger lots which is in the deep ends of the residential community. So this happens to be on the on on the on the transition line. Across is a institutional use with a fairly large parking lot. I mean fairly pronounced parking lot. To one side on the north side is again a parking lot. Uh not as large as the church but still nevertheless a commercial use and then no connectivity to the residential use in the back. Although there is a community there but is vertically extremely separated. So um to me from a planning point of view there is no downside or I think it's more appropriate to have a more denser product skinnier product which then also works from a price point which also works from layout point of view and in this particular case we have a unique situation with the steep slopes. So yes,

and how as it relates to construction of of these town homes and the impact on the slopes and the surrounding area, um would the construction of the town homes in portions of the steep slopes have any adverse impact on the surrounding area? No, actually the slopes are coming down. So they're western slopes coming down towards the east, meaning the the reds and the greens that you saw are higher slopes and they're falling down towards Pastor Fred Davies. So actually this development is going to be well lower than everything else around it.

And I note on the uh plan, the SKO1 plan, there's a retaining wall proposed. What's the purpose of the retaining wall? Um so the purpose of the retaining wall is it's an attempt and it's actually in the 10th and zoning ordinance is one of the mechanisms and we use it on an engineering site all the time. It's a mechanism to really control disturbances of slopes. Uh when you have steep slopes it is ideal to use a wall. Of course the wall will be designed by a professional engineer and it would be going through a permitting process with the city. So structurally is not an issue and walls are built everywhere. We design hundreds of them a year actually. So the in the intent of the wall is to limit the encroachment of the development into the slopes and therefore when you look at the the steep slope plan you will see yes there is an impact to the reds and the green colors of the slopes but the areas are very small and that is controlled by this wall. So that wallve helps to keep that area substantially lower than what it would be if you had no wall. And did you also include what you uploaded uh in the city uh filing a exhibit that would show what the lots would look like if they were at the 28t width?

That is correct. I did. So that would be an exhibit number nine. Exhibit number nine.

So it again looks like the same colors. I held the same scheme. It's called SK02 at the lower right hand corner. Um I kept the color same so there is easy comparison between the two and you can see that this plan actually underlying it shows the lots that are 28 ft wide. Uh the middle ones are 28t wide units because the town houses need to be as wide as the lot requirement at least the middle ones and the corner ones can be smaller. So lot number one again is only 20 ft. Lot number seven is again 20 ft. Everything else is compliant with the code. And if we were to do that, this is an emphasize. This exhibit was prepared to emphasize the hardship. If we were to do that, you could see how far the reds and the greens are getting disturbed with the same number of lots. And the retaining wall, you can see it now wraps around much longer and much higher. The wall will be substantially higher because it's now encroaching into it. So um the other thing that is actually in the narrative when we when we get to it, I'll just touch upon one of those things because it's relevant is not only there is an greater impact to the slopes for the same amounts of units which is again there's a zoning table on the plan. This plan meets the bulk standards. So there's no variance as if required. again the the the front yard and loading from the front and the parking in the front and access driver from the front those would be required because there just no way around it but the bulk standards are met Imper is met uh setbacks are met lot wids are met but it comes at a very steep price so compliance with one requirement of the ordinance now aggravates other requirement of the ordinance which is really the steep slope disturbances in

fact There is an actually section of the ordinances that say 59530 B1, 59530 E6 and 59530 E8 actually says we should not do this meaning you minimize cutfield, you minimize slope disturbances, you minimize runoff etc. So this plan sort of tends to violate those sections if you will compared to the SK01 which is the 20 foot wide ones. And you you noted at the outset that nothing is intended on lot 8. What's going to happen to lot 8 if this were to be approved and then you were to get your land development approval? Well, the lot eight would just be there would be no structure on it. Just be a lot by itself to just be like vacant open space.

Yes. Okay. Open space that could nothing is planned on that lot in either scenarios of the plan. Okay. Would since you would be required to get land development approval, would that require looking at your erosion and sedimentation controls um you know the various other design and construction standards? Yes, that's correct. We will have to go through a full engineering review. We will have to go get the uh erosion and sediment control certification from the county conservation district. I'm sure the engineering department will review that as well. So yes, there's going to be multiple layers of review on engineering.

And as far as the construction of the uh town houses, what uh what is the construction material that's proposed? It would be traditional woodframe, concrete construction, meaning the the the footings and the basement level would be all concrete and then everything above would be woodframed.

And uh how how are you proposing any of the storm water to be controlled? Um actually the storm water is and and that's also part of my narrative is that the storm water does flow from like I said from west to east. So what we have proposed is uh swailes drainage swailes at the back of the property at the back of the proposed units and uh in fact that was one of the comments of the township engineers review before he issued the clear letter which was one of the things that he did want me to address and I did. So there is there is there are drainage inlets on the property and there are drainage inlets right in front of the subject property in Pastor Fed Street. So that's where the drainage would would drain to.

So it would be collected and then correct. Yeah. And not flood the street. Yeah. It would be it would be conveyed and and I did in my written response back to the engineer I did commit to doing and providing all the engineering calculations during the land development review process. In your opinion as a professional engineer, would if the relief were to be granted and the town homes would be constructed, would there be any adverse impact on public health, safety or welfare?

No. In fact, there is this like I said, so this property sits lower. So, it receives runoff from other properties, not discharging the runoff to other properties. So, it's it's really on the receiving end of the runoff, not giving end of the runoff. Would it cause any adverse impact on the surrounding area if if the requested variance relief were to be granted?

No, this just happens to be a very unique project where um granted some of the technical variances that are required, but this just this is perfect recycle of an infill development. In our planning world, this is really a small lot that can come back on tax roll u contribute towards the city's population growth and really really with no downsides utilities and all there as well. Yeah, it is on the tax ro you mean it would increase the tax base with a a viable use as opposed to vacant land. That's correct. That's correct. And would granting the requested variances alter the essential character of the neighborhood?

No, it won't. Would granting the request of relief have an adverse impact on traffic in the area? No. In your opinion, does the uh slopes of the property create a hardship for the development of the town home that are proposed?

Yes, it does. And I just wanted to really one more time emphasize to the board that the percentage numbers are sort of, you know, they they sound to be too aggressive, but if you look at the square footage because the percentage is off of the base lot area. So if you look at 08 acres, you you're talking about 2/10 of an acre of disturbance. So yes, percentage wide, it sounds like 60 70%, but actual square footage wise is a smaller number. So because the lot's very small and we are preserving really almost half of the lot. We're not even touching the back portion. So on a percentage basis the number seems to be a little bit higher. But on a square footage basis this is really really small disturbance on a on a scheme of things.

And you would keep the area in the rear that abuts the residential in its vegetated state. That's correct. We won't touch anything that's beyond uh the limit of our development. So it would just stay as is and that's why we are putting that swale in the back so that all that runoff that comes down it just can safely conveyed and there's no erosion and you know everything works like it should that is all the questions I have of shock any questions from the board

I just have Sir, just one question. Um, are the vehicles going to leave the property backing out on Pastor Fred Davis Street? Yes. Okay. And and my only observation slashquest is when I mean I'm looking at uh exhibit seven and I never realized how many parking spaces there were surrounding that church,

right? They must have quite the congregation. Um it looks like well over a hundred. And I'm wondering uh what first of all what the speed limit is on Pastor Fred Davis Street because I see there is or appears to be a driveway exiting the church property

up the street a little bit from your proposed development on Pastor Fred Davis Street. And I'm wondering how many of those vehicles will use that thoroughfare to get down to West Canal Street. And if there happen to be 50 or 60 cars going that way at any given time after the end of a church function, I'm wondering how that's going to affect uh because this is situated at least it appears to be situated on a curve of Pastor Fred Davis Street. Can you give any thought on that?

I I could I could. So that is correct. There is a slight curvature to the street and this exhibit you picked is the best exhibit to look at because then you get the overall view of the property, right? But you could see that the curvature is fairly subtle and and um it's actually got a radius of 292 feet on on our side of the property. So, it's a fairly large radi on a road. Um, the other thing is that the driveway coming out of the property is stop controlled. I'm sorry. Is what controlled? Stopped controlled. There's a stop sign. There's a at the church. At the church. Yes. Oh, yeah. Okay.

So, if you're coming out of the church, there is you can actually it's it's it's not an uncontrolled movement because it's a secondary driveway. Pastor Fred Davy Street is a primary street. In other words, that will be free flowing no matter what, right? Everything else is is is a controlled movement in my world is like a stop control, meaning you just have to stop and find a gap and and leave. So, um so that that's an advantage because it is a stopped control movement, meaning it's an it's not a primary movement, it's a secondary movement coming out of the church. The other thing is that the church has multiple driveways that lead out to multiple locations. So I didn't see.

So there's one more actually on the street. Yeah, there's one more actually on Pastor Fred Davis uh very close to Cooper Street. Like if you follow that four-way intersection, it's there's another there and actually there's one on the east side and I don't have the street name, but right behind the church structure, there's also a driveway that goes out that way that also connects to the canal street. So actually looks like there's two that go down to that canal.

That's correct. So there are multiple exit points out. Um just me being a driver, I've always realized that when there are multiple exit point outs, traffic is self-controlling. you know, if there are seven cars backed up on that particular driveway, I'm going to just go back to the other one where it's easier for me to go out. So, if there's a huge congregation happening and everybody's leaving at the same time, they happen to disperse through multiple locations and not just one location. So, that's also an advantage. All right, two remaining questions, which includes my first one. Do we know what the speed limit is on the on Pastor Fred Davis in that area?

I don't. Um, but I believe that that's a a city street. It's not Pendar Street. Um, I want to say I've seen the sign for 30 or 25 miles, but I don't want to guarantee that. I'm not 100% sure. And and and I mean, as long as it's not 45, I'm sorry, it's not 45. No, no, no, no, no.

All right. And the other question is um the the curvature appears to be somewhat gentle. What is the topography of the road or the street itself? Is it is it flat there all the way around or are you coming up a hill and you're going to hit a blind spot when you run into your driveways there?

No, it's it's actually subtle. Fortunately, it's not as steep. So if you look at SK01 drawing uh which was exhibit um 8 actually that shows the excuse me the topography of the road the within Pastor Fred Davis Street. So the the topography is there. There is funny you kind explain the contours.

Yeah. So there is there are contours. Um if you look at um unit number five right in front of unit number five in the road you see 290 elevation. That's contour elevation 290. Then you go in front of unit number seven is 294. So it's only 4T there.

So it's climbing but it's not nowhere close to what's on site. Yes. Yes. It's Yeah. The the streets usually follow the topography of the terrain prior to their construction. So steeper areas get steeper slopes. And this is slightly steeper. In fact, if you go down further south of town home number one, you like if you're going north on towards Canal Street, the topography really flattens out because that's when it's reached the plateau, you know, and and it is a 50ft rightway. It's a 50ft rightway. it correct.

So there's nowhere like at any point in time car traveling I guess north on on Fred Davis um street there that they couldn't see the any driveway that's no yeah coming up or people point out would be able to see oncoming traffic at all right yeah yeah they would be able to see it Yes. Yes.

Oh, yeah. Thank you. Yeah, I suspected that I wasn't 100%.

Mr. Lopes brings up a good point. are putting trees I guess there are those going to um inhibit any kind of um vision um they are actually ordinance required street trees so um but they are no different than any traditional subdivision that we live in you know in suburbia you know that's a tree the will block he's saying what about visibility for the driveways with trees

well no well no you know and then I'll explain why is it Answer is no because the planting height or the or the diameter is 2 and 12 in caliper tree. So it's a fairly small tree. As it grows, the city has an ordinance that you got to keep the bottom clear. You have to prune your trees. You can't just have a tree that then starts to block. So the textbook answer is no. Um of course it will be enforced. If there is an overgrown tree, then the zoning department will site that. So, but you could also work with the the city forester to make sure that a tree is selected that is not going to potentially have that extra

That's correct. That is correct. That's correct. It would be part of the review. Yes. This is just day one. We have a long road to go before the plan gets approved. So, any other questions from the board? lot lot six and seven. Um especially lot seven. Um it seems like from SKO2 that there there houses especially lot seven is more in the red than of course any other one. Um any any thought about scaling it back to five lots or six lots? SK you were talking about SKO2.

Yes. Yeah. SKO2 was the plan that was emphasizing the hardships. So that's not the plan that we want to build. That's the that was the plan to show that if you were to comply with the lot widths, that's where we would end up with more stoopes disturbances. So SKO2 SKO1 is okay. SK1 SS actually. I got you. Yeah. SK1 SS is the is the cor the correct man to look at. Exhibit six. Exhibit six. Well, then strike that question. Okay.

Uh, I I have a question and we'll go off the record for a minute. Council, do you deem it necessary to put your client's fee agreement with his client on the record? Oh, back on the record. With your wife. Oh, yeah. She might. All right, the board is any other questions? No other questions from the board.

Uh I I'm not going to belabor the point. I think it's a very unique uh property to develop. I think that the product and the design that they're proposing is a good use of that property. Um it's not going to impact anybody in the area. Um I think it's complimentary as sort of a transition area up to the other residential when you're going from institutional and commercial up the road. I think with the uh requirements that the city will put on as far as the erosion and sediment and the uh construction that it can be uh developed and constructed in a way that's not going to adversely impact the surrounding area. Thank you.

I was going to ask the land Oh yeah. Yes. Not anymore. That does not present condition.

Mr. Loe. Hi, Miss Volcano Hall. Hi, Mr. Civotella. Hi, Miss Panto. Miss Thomas. Hi. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good luck on all your hard work. Yeah, thank you. It was a lot of hard work. to hear. It was easy to follow. Thank you very much.