17-75 Special Exception 806 Howard Street

Home Browse Search

Area Board of Zoning Appeals—December 6, 2017 will be no undergraduate residents. And maybe I'm making this up but I thought he referenced using that residential space for business associates. So I would inquire is that really a residential space or is it a crash pad for business for associates of Ceres? So I think we really need to dig in to what is the purpose of that third floor because it is my understanding the entire variance hinges on whether that truly residential. If it's going to be business associates crashing for football games,I don't know that that's residential. I think that's more of a business purpose. So I would just ask that we would dig into that a little bit more with the exact purpose of the third floor is and I echo all the comments made about the parking. If this is even possible my colleagues and neighbors are under estimating the impact of the parking on the safety of that. So really appreciate your consideration and again digging into the exact purpose of that third floor. Thanks. MR. CRUMLISH: Is there anyone else wishing to speak in opposition of this petition. Seeing no further,the public session is now closed. Would the petitioner care to address some of the comments? You get five minutes. REBUTTAL: MR. MURPHY: We heard a number of things and let me try to address them in order if I can. The possibility of moving to an expanded Eddy Street Commons that was an option that was explored by Ceres,the issue was that the Eddy Street Phase would contain no new office space, it's all residential. So that was an issue that was an issue that was already determined. The safety concern with respect to the parking. Without any Special Exception,without any variances, without anything,we can go two floors of offices in that existing shell. So the parking is sort of a moot point in that it is sort of the office,or the Special Exception parking dealt with the difference between that and the office parking is really the only thing that you're deciding upon here. In terms of property values, I am not an appraiser, I'm an architect, however, I have bought and sold a few houses in my time. Generally speaking and in my experience is blighted in the (could not understand what he said) properties,surpass property values, not heavy investment like we're showing here. In terms of the single family nature of the neighborhood,yes we applaud that and we want to support that everyone be a part of it but I think it's important to point out this zoning predates any of these houses being built. So the builders of those houses either did know or should have known that this is a possibility on that site and there's not a whole lot else I can say about that. With respect to the future,the student housing,we agreed that we would commit to writing that it would not be student housing, but I think more importantly baked into the ordinance under the upper level dwelling unit is the definition of,it's a single family that's baked into the ordinance which means no more than two unrelated adults. So any attempt to intensify the residential use would require another trip before this body and Council as well. In summary I would say this,we don't need a variance for building height. "0" Office District allows what we're showing here. We don't need a Special Exception for the office use. The office use is granted as a right. The Northeast Neighborhood Overlay zoning District is not applicable because it's an existing building,so therefore any requirements related to the exterior design and material are not applicable. The benefits though are it's an adapted reuse of the existing structure. We are providing an upper level dwelling unit which is encouraged. We are providing porch which is encouraged. The modest parking increase from what is currently permitted seems to be reasonable in our judgement. And we've got a good strategy for(could not understand what he said) actually accommodated in reality with the stripped parking on Howard. And finally the intent would be to rebuild those existing walls in their current location but this time make it a lot better looking. Thank you. MR. CRUMLILSH: Staff do you have comments that you'd like to address? MRS.SMITH: I do. I first want to say I probably misspoke when I used the word "mixed use". I see that that set off some concern of the neighborhood. When we use mixed use what we're talking about is adding a residential dwelling unit to something that's already non-residential. That is encouraged in this area because of the resurgence of making this residential again.Adding a residential unit to a non-residential use is something that is thought of as strengthening the 20