1 00:07:07,759 --> 00:07:09,440 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting for 2 00:07:09,440 --> 00:07:13,680 December 18, 2025 is now in session. The 3 00:07:13,680 --> 00:07:15,360 first order of business is to approve 4 00:07:15,360 --> 00:07:17,919 the minutes from the September 25th, 5 00:07:17,919 --> 00:07:20,560 2025 meeting. Is there a motion to 6 00:07:20,560 --> 00:07:21,919 approve the minutes? 7 00:07:21,919 --> 00:07:22,880 >> Motion. 8 00:07:22,880 --> 00:07:24,400 >> Is there a second to the motion? 9 00:07:24,400 --> 00:07:26,080 >> I second. 10 00:07:26,080 --> 00:07:30,160 >> Any modifications or discussion? Hearing 11 00:07:30,160 --> 00:07:32,160 none. All in favor? 12 00:07:32,160 --> 00:07:37,360 >> I Any opposition? No. Abstensions? No. 13 00:07:37,360 --> 00:07:40,880 The minutes are officially adopted. 14 00:07:40,880 --> 00:07:42,479 The board will now conduct the public 15 00:07:42,479 --> 00:07:44,960 hearing on today's agenda. First, the 16 00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:46,319 applicant or the applicant's 17 00:07:46,319 --> 00:07:48,160 representative will state the reasons 18 00:07:48,160 --> 00:07:50,720 for the requested variance and present 19 00:07:50,720 --> 00:07:53,360 any material or documentation which is 20 00:07:53,360 --> 00:07:56,080 to be considered regarding the proposal. 21 00:07:56,080 --> 00:07:58,319 Next, persons wishing to speak in favor 22 00:07:58,319 --> 00:08:00,000 of the proposal will be given the 23 00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:02,639 opportunity to address the board. Then, 24 00:08:02,639 --> 00:08:04,639 persons who wish to speak in opposition 25 00:08:04,639 --> 00:08:06,400 will will be allowed to address the 26 00:08:06,400 --> 00:08:08,960 board. Finally, the applicant or 27 00:08:08,960 --> 00:08:11,280 representative will be given the option 28 00:08:11,280 --> 00:08:13,440 to make any closing arguments or 29 00:08:13,440 --> 00:08:15,919 comments to the board. Following the 30 00:08:15,919 --> 00:08:18,080 public hearings this afternoon, the 31 00:08:18,080 --> 00:08:19,840 board may make a decision on each 32 00:08:19,840 --> 00:08:22,240 application heard. The board may also 33 00:08:22,240 --> 00:08:24,240 decide to hold its decision until the 34 00:08:24,240 --> 00:08:26,720 next public hearing. If the hearing is 35 00:08:26,720 --> 00:08:28,720 closed, no additional information will 36 00:08:28,720 --> 00:08:30,960 be allowed into the record except for 37 00:08:30,960 --> 00:08:32,399 information that the board has 38 00:08:32,399 --> 00:08:34,399 requested. 39 00:08:34,399 --> 00:08:36,399 That information will be available for 40 00:08:36,399 --> 00:08:38,560 public viewing at the zoning office in 41 00:08:38,560 --> 00:08:42,000 one park place, 300 South State Street. 42 00:08:42,000 --> 00:08:44,159 Staff will now introduce the first 43 00:08:44,159 --> 00:08:56,230 application. 44 00:08:56,240 --> 00:08:58,000 Uh, first up, we have one new business 45 00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:02,800 item. Uh, it's a use variance V-25-10. 46 00:09:02,800 --> 00:09:05,120 The applicant is seeking relief to estab 47 00:09:05,120 --> 00:09:08,080 establish an additional dwelling unit at 48 00:09:08,080 --> 00:09:11,279 a pre-existing apartment complex 49 00:09:11,279 --> 00:09:14,240 uh, located at 99 McDougall Place. Owner 50 00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:16,320 applicant is Catamount Properties LLC. 51 00:09:16,320 --> 00:09:20,160 This is an R1 zone district. 52 00:09:20,160 --> 00:09:23,200 >> Okay. Is the applicant here? And anyone 53 00:09:23,200 --> 00:09:24,800 that comes up to the microphone, please 54 00:09:24,800 --> 00:09:27,040 state your name and your address. 55 00:09:27,040 --> 00:09:29,040 >> Hello, my name is Lauren Montport. I'm 56 00:09:29,040 --> 00:09:32,000 an attorney for the applicant. My uh 57 00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:34,480 business address is 120 East Washington 58 00:09:34,480 --> 00:09:38,160 Street, Sweet 312, Syracuse, New York 59 00:09:38,160 --> 00:09:40,480 13202. 60 00:09:40,480 --> 00:09:43,120 Um, with regards to our application, um, 61 00:09:43,120 --> 00:09:46,320 we did submit our application materials, 62 00:09:46,320 --> 00:09:48,480 uh, which I hope that you have in front 63 00:09:48,480 --> 00:09:52,000 of you. Um, as part of our application 64 00:09:52,000 --> 00:09:55,519 to add an additional basement apartment 65 00:09:55,519 --> 00:09:59,040 to one of three buildings on the site, 66 00:09:59,040 --> 00:10:01,839 uh, we have provided um, color 67 00:10:01,839 --> 00:10:06,080 photographs of the uh, apartment site, 68 00:10:06,080 --> 00:10:09,680 the streetscape as well as the completed 69 00:10:09,680 --> 00:10:12,720 apartment. Um, we've also provided um, 70 00:10:12,720 --> 00:10:16,399 site plans and floor plans as well as 71 00:10:16,399 --> 00:10:18,959 exterior building elevations. I think 72 00:10:18,959 --> 00:10:21,360 that the unique part of this application 73 00:10:21,360 --> 00:10:23,680 was that it was my understanding is that 74 00:10:23,680 --> 00:10:26,000 it had already been presented and 75 00:10:26,000 --> 00:10:29,519 approved um and my client completed 76 00:10:29,519 --> 00:10:31,920 construction of the apartment. However, 77 00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:35,760 the permits had since expired um and she 78 00:10:35,760 --> 00:10:38,079 was then informed that the apartment was 79 00:10:38,079 --> 00:10:42,000 not in compliance. So we are seeking um 80 00:10:42,000 --> 00:10:44,640 final approval now and essentially uh 81 00:10:44,640 --> 00:10:46,720 sanctioning of this apartment that had 82 00:10:46,720 --> 00:10:49,600 been completed in reliance on the prior 83 00:10:49,600 --> 00:10:53,110 approvals. 84 00:10:53,120 --> 00:10:55,760 Any questions from the 85 00:10:55,760 --> 00:10:58,480 >> uh do you know why the obviously you got 86 00:10:58,480 --> 00:11:01,920 the approval back in 20 2010 what took 87 00:11:01,920 --> 00:11:04,000 so long for renovations and 88 00:11:04,000 --> 00:11:06,480 >> Yes. Um and I my client is here too. 89 00:11:06,480 --> 00:11:09,360 They can probably speak um with more 90 00:11:09,360 --> 00:11:11,440 knowledge on the delays. I believe that 91 00:11:11,440 --> 00:11:14,720 it was just construction delays um COVID 92 00:11:14,720 --> 00:11:18,480 obviously. Uh and then um my client owns 93 00:11:18,480 --> 00:11:20,880 a number of properties in the uh 94 00:11:20,880 --> 00:11:24,160 Syracuse area and those had took kind of 95 00:11:24,160 --> 00:11:29,509 more uh precedence over this project. 96 00:11:29,519 --> 00:11:31,839 » Okay. 97 00:11:31,839 --> 00:11:33,760 >> Uh the question to staff is the intent 98 00:11:33,760 --> 00:11:35,440 here was previously approved for 15 99 00:11:35,440 --> 00:11:38,079 units. This is just for the additional 100 00:11:38,079 --> 00:11:40,800 14th unit that's been constructed. They 101 00:11:40,800 --> 00:11:42,480 would have to come back if they were 102 00:11:42,480 --> 00:11:45,920 looking for the 15th apartment. 103 00:11:45,920 --> 00:11:48,480 Um 104 00:11:48,480 --> 00:11:52,079 yes. So and just to back up like can you 105 00:11:52,079 --> 00:11:54,000 clarify because u based on our records 106 00:11:54,000 --> 00:11:55,920 it seems permit was applied for but 107 00:11:55,920 --> 00:11:57,120 never picked up but you mentioned 108 00:11:57,120 --> 00:12:00,160 construction was completed without a 109 00:12:00,160 --> 00:12:02,160 permit without a building permit. 110 00:12:02,160 --> 00:12:05,360 >> I believe a building permit was granted. 111 00:12:05,360 --> 00:12:06,800 I um 112 00:12:06,800 --> 00:12:08,800 >> well our records show it was never 113 00:12:08,800 --> 00:12:14,949 picked up therefore never obtained. 114 00:12:14,959 --> 00:12:16,399 if you'd give me a minute. I actually 115 00:12:16,399 --> 00:12:18,560 think I have a building permit in my 116 00:12:18,560 --> 00:12:23,670 file. 117 00:12:23,680 --> 00:12:25,839 And I will say the original application 118 00:12:25,839 --> 00:12:29,519 was for one unit at 99 and one unit at 119 00:12:29,519 --> 00:12:34,000 98 and only one unit was completed, 120 00:12:34,000 --> 00:12:36,560 which is why we're coming to you today 121 00:12:36,560 --> 00:12:38,720 asking for just that one completed unit 122 00:12:38,720 --> 00:12:52,310 to be approved. 123 00:12:52,320 --> 00:12:54,880 You'll note also on page 31 of the staff 124 00:12:54,880 --> 00:13:01,519 report that there was a a 12 month uh 125 00:13:01,519 --> 00:13:03,120 requirement that construction be 126 00:13:03,120 --> 00:13:04,880 completed within 12 months and I believe 127 00:13:04,880 --> 00:13:10,079 the applicant got an extension in 200. 128 00:13:10,079 --> 00:13:15,110 What year was it, Nate? 129 00:13:15,120 --> 00:13:16,800 » They were granted their last extension 130 00:13:16,800 --> 00:13:19,120 in 2013, but nothing's been sought since 131 00:13:19,120 --> 00:13:19,839 that time. 132 00:13:19,839 --> 00:13:24,399 >> Um, and I I do have this 20 133 00:13:24,399 --> 00:13:28,079 2013 building permit that's for 98 134 00:13:28,079 --> 00:13:29,680 McDougall. That was the one that was 135 00:13:29,680 --> 00:13:37,030 completed. 136 00:13:37,040 --> 00:13:39,440 So th I mean this is just a placard, 137 00:13:39,440 --> 00:13:41,440 right? It doesn't 138 00:13:41,440 --> 00:13:45,829 Nate was this 139 00:13:45,839 --> 00:13:47,760 is just the issuance of a placard. So 140 00:13:47,760 --> 00:13:49,839 like it looks like you got it for 98, 141 00:13:49,839 --> 00:13:52,720 but this is this is for uh a different 142 00:13:52,720 --> 00:13:54,399 building. 143 00:13:54,399 --> 00:13:56,480 >> 98 McDougall, 144 00:13:56,480 --> 00:13:57,920 >> correct? 145 00:13:57,920 --> 00:14:00,079 Um, so 146 00:14:00,079 --> 00:14:03,040 my understanding is that there's three 147 00:14:03,040 --> 00:14:05,360 buildings that make up the apartment 148 00:14:05,360 --> 00:14:08,470 complex 149 00:14:08,480 --> 00:14:13,199 and 98 McDougall is the building that we 150 00:14:13,199 --> 00:14:17,519 are seeking approval for the completed 151 00:14:17,519 --> 00:14:20,000 basement apartment. 152 00:14:20,000 --> 00:14:22,240 The application was originally submitted 153 00:14:22,240 --> 00:14:24,560 under 9998 154 00:14:24,560 --> 00:14:27,199 McDougall because we were going to do 155 00:14:27,199 --> 00:14:31,199 one apartment in 99 and one apartment in 156 00:14:31,199 --> 00:14:33,360 98. 157 00:14:33,360 --> 00:14:35,440 >> Well, you're according to my record 158 00:14:35,440 --> 00:14:38,880 here, it says we are talking today about 159 00:14:38,880 --> 00:14:42,399 number 99 and you're saying 99 was done. 160 00:14:42,399 --> 00:14:44,800 >> The lot is 99. 161 00:14:44,800 --> 00:14:47,519 >> There's three buildings like 789. 162 00:14:47,519 --> 00:14:47,839 >> Yes. 163 00:14:47,839 --> 00:14:51,760 >> Yeah. Right. So, so the address 164 00:14:51,760 --> 00:14:53,600 >> is 99 McDougall 165 00:14:53,600 --> 00:14:56,160 >> for today, the one you're asking for the 166 00:14:56,160 --> 00:14:58,079 approval of, correct? 167 00:14:58,079 --> 00:15:02,240 >> Um, so maybe the it's easier to say the 168 00:15:02,240 --> 00:15:05,920 mailing address, but the building on 169 00:15:05,920 --> 00:15:10,629 that address is 98. 170 00:15:10,639 --> 00:15:13,040 So, the lot itself 171 00:15:13,040 --> 00:15:15,440 is known, as I understand it, as 99 172 00:15:15,440 --> 00:15:18,639 McDougall. 99 McDougall has three 173 00:15:18,639 --> 00:15:22,480 buildings on it. 97, 98, and 99. 174 00:15:22,480 --> 00:15:23,519 >> Okay. 175 00:15:23,519 --> 00:15:27,440 >> And so today, this request is for 176 00:15:27,440 --> 00:15:30,240 building 98 177 00:15:30,240 --> 00:15:35,040 at 99 McDougall Street. 178 00:15:35,040 --> 00:15:36,079 Does that make sense? 179 00:15:36,079 --> 00:15:37,600 >> I know what you're saying, but according 180 00:15:37,600 --> 00:15:40,399 to our the the documents that we 181 00:15:40,399 --> 00:15:43,440 received from the uh headquarters, it's 182 00:15:43,440 --> 00:15:46,720 99 is the is the building in question. 183 00:15:46,720 --> 00:15:50,320 Okay. Um, so that might have been um a 184 00:15:50,320 --> 00:15:52,959 >> their request is for 98 in what they've 185 00:15:52,959 --> 00:15:56,240 submitted uh to staff, but obviously as 186 00:15:56,240 --> 00:15:58,639 she's mentioned, the property address is 187 00:15:58,639 --> 00:16:02,399 99. So, it's it's clear in what they've 188 00:16:02,399 --> 00:16:03,519 submitted. 189 00:16:03,519 --> 00:16:05,360 >> I see where the the issue needs to be 190 00:16:05,360 --> 00:16:09,590 confirmed by staff. 191 00:16:09,600 --> 00:16:11,519 because when I drove down there looking 192 00:16:11,519 --> 00:16:15,040 I putting it in the GPS 99 you know 193 00:16:15,040 --> 00:16:17,839 >> I guess it didn't come up even it was 194 00:16:17,839 --> 00:16:19,120 >> you've arrived and there's three 195 00:16:19,120 --> 00:16:21,279 buildings you know so I figured one was 196 00:16:21,279 --> 00:16:24,959 97 89 but 99 I didn't even see a 99 197 00:16:24,959 --> 00:16:25,920 number you know 198 00:16:25,920 --> 00:16:30,880 >> yeah no I um and we so we acknowledge 199 00:16:30,880 --> 00:16:34,560 that the apartment at 99 the building 99 200 00:16:34,560 --> 00:16:37,920 McDougall was never started never 201 00:16:37,920 --> 00:16:39,839 commenced we're Not here to talk about 202 00:16:39,839 --> 00:16:42,240 any apartment in the building of 99 203 00:16:42,240 --> 00:16:44,000 McDougall. 204 00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,120 >> Just the building of 98 McDougall. 205 00:16:47,120 --> 00:16:48,560 >> 98. All right. 206 00:16:48,560 --> 00:17:00,230 >> Yeah. 207 00:17:00,240 --> 00:17:02,160 I would hope that when if if there would 208 00:17:02,160 --> 00:17:04,240 be an emergency and you'd call 911, they 209 00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:05,600 could actually find a building. if 210 00:17:05,600 --> 00:17:08,480 they're not clearly labeled, you know, 211 00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:10,400 98.99 and 212 00:17:10,400 --> 00:17:12,400 >> because that one building wasn't labeled 213 00:17:12,400 --> 00:17:16,720 at all on from driving in the street. I didn't see any address on it. 214 00:17:16,720 --> 00:17:18,880 >> I I understand your concern if that's 215 00:17:18,880 --> 00:17:20,480 something you'd like addressed as part 216 00:17:20,480 --> 00:17:22,240 of this application. I'm sure we'd be 217 00:17:22,240 --> 00:17:24,400 happy to do that. 218 00:17:24,400 --> 00:17:25,760 >> Um, are you aware of the other 219 00:17:25,760 --> 00:17:28,079 conditions if we were to seek approval 220 00:17:28,079 --> 00:17:30,960 today on the application in terms of the 221 00:17:30,960 --> 00:17:32,960 screening and the striping for the 222 00:17:32,960 --> 00:17:33,760 parking lot? 223 00:17:33,760 --> 00:17:36,000 >> Yes. So, I had an opportunity to talk to 224 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:37,919 my client about that. Um, the weather 225 00:17:37,919 --> 00:17:40,320 this December has been unusually 226 00:17:40,320 --> 00:17:42,240 Syracuseian. 227 00:17:42,240 --> 00:17:44,480 Um, but yes, they are aware of the 228 00:17:44,480 --> 00:17:46,400 screening requirement and we'll comply 229 00:17:46,400 --> 00:17:48,160 with that. Absolutely. 230 00:17:48,160 --> 00:17:49,840 >> Was the intent upon the initial 231 00:17:49,840 --> 00:17:51,919 application back in 2010 to do that as 232 00:17:51,919 --> 00:17:54,400 well and that was part of it just took 233 00:17:54,400 --> 00:17:57,520 time and things happened, COVID, etc. 234 00:17:57,520 --> 00:17:58,799 that you didn't get to those additional 235 00:17:58,799 --> 00:18:01,200 conditions. That's right. Um, so I'm 236 00:18:01,200 --> 00:18:02,400 being told that they did stripe the 237 00:18:02,400 --> 00:18:04,320 parking lot, but yes, as to the 238 00:18:04,320 --> 00:18:07,679 screening of the dumpster itself. Yes. 239 00:18:07,679 --> 00:18:10,880 >> And as of right now, trash is adequately 240 00:18:10,880 --> 00:18:12,960 controlled and everything else and there 241 00:18:12,960 --> 00:18:14,720 hasn't been issues, but you understand 242 00:18:14,720 --> 00:18:16,960 the request to install screening and 243 00:18:16,960 --> 00:18:20,160 everything that about being compliance 244 00:18:20,160 --> 00:18:28,230 >> in our understanding of it. Yes. 245 00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:30,000 I'm a little perplexed as to why this 246 00:18:30,000 --> 00:18:32,880 was approved in 2010. Um because I don't 247 00:18:32,880 --> 00:18:34,640 see any evidence that without this unit 248 00:18:34,640 --> 00:18:36,559 they can't realize a reasonable return 249 00:18:36,559 --> 00:18:39,600 on investment. 250 00:18:39,600 --> 00:18:41,360 >> Technically, they should have a proforma 251 00:18:41,360 --> 00:18:43,679 attached showing the $90,000 and 252 00:18:43,679 --> 00:18:48,000 expenses and a full detail of how 253 00:18:48,000 --> 00:18:50,960 they're not making a reasonable return. 254 00:18:50,960 --> 00:18:53,600 Was that provided in 2010? 255 00:18:53,600 --> 00:18:56,000 >> Well, it doesn't it not provided here. 256 00:18:56,000 --> 00:18:56,640 Got 257 00:18:56,640 --> 00:18:58,400 >> um I don't believe it was provided in 258 00:18:58,400 --> 00:19:00,559 2010 because the apartment hadn't been 259 00:19:00,559 --> 00:19:04,240 completed at that time. So, what were um 260 00:19:04,240 --> 00:19:06,080 the basis of our argument is essentially 261 00:19:06,080 --> 00:19:09,919 that the money has been expended um to 262 00:19:09,919 --> 00:19:13,120 complete the apartment and uh in 2010 263 00:19:13,120 --> 00:19:14,480 when the application was made, I don't 264 00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:16,080 think that those you know the money 265 00:19:16,080 --> 00:19:18,240 hadn't been expended at that time. So, 266 00:19:18,240 --> 00:19:19,360 are you saying that without the rent 267 00:19:19,360 --> 00:19:21,520 from this unit, this apartment complex 268 00:19:21,520 --> 00:19:24,480 will operate in the negative? 269 00:19:24,480 --> 00:19:26,240 >> I am saying that without the rent from 270 00:19:26,240 --> 00:19:29,200 this unit, it would be unduly burdensome 271 00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:32,640 on my client um to 272 00:19:32,640 --> 00:19:37,440 operate the the unit. I I think in my um 273 00:19:37,440 --> 00:19:40,400 papers I set out the time frame that it 274 00:19:40,400 --> 00:19:43,039 would take to recover to recoup on the 275 00:19:43,039 --> 00:19:45,440 investment. Obviously, we would recoup 276 00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:48,400 on the investment um at a better rate if 277 00:19:48,400 --> 00:19:50,880 we could actually rent the apartment 278 00:19:50,880 --> 00:19:55,919 that was built out. Um 279 00:19:55,919 --> 00:19:59,280 even even as it is with the amount spent 280 00:19:59,280 --> 00:20:02,960 on the apartment, this is the 14th unit. 281 00:20:02,960 --> 00:20:06,080 Um it will still take eight years to 282 00:20:06,080 --> 00:20:09,840 recoup on that investment. Obviously, if 283 00:20:09,840 --> 00:20:12,160 the apartment is never rented out, it 284 00:20:12,160 --> 00:20:14,480 will take more than eight years to 285 00:20:14,480 --> 00:20:19,750 recover that cost. 286 00:20:19,760 --> 00:20:25,590 » Any more questions? 287 00:20:25,600 --> 00:20:26,799 » I would just like to state for the 288 00:20:26,799 --> 00:20:28,080 record that generally when we're looking 289 00:20:28,080 --> 00:20:30,159 at this question of reasonable return, 290 00:20:30,159 --> 00:20:34,080 it's not are you getting a return on 291 00:20:34,080 --> 00:20:38,720 some investment that you made without 292 00:20:38,720 --> 00:20:41,600 prior authorization. It's 293 00:20:41,600 --> 00:20:44,240 does this change to the property uh is 294 00:20:44,240 --> 00:20:45,679 it necessary in order for the property 295 00:20:45,679 --> 00:20:47,919 to sustain itself? 296 00:20:47,919 --> 00:20:49,600 >> Absolutely. And we understand that. I 297 00:20:49,600 --> 00:20:51,919 mean, I'm standing here hat in hand. 298 00:20:51,919 --> 00:20:52,400 Yeah. 299 00:20:52,400 --> 00:20:55,120 >> Um there had been a prior prior approval 300 00:20:55,120 --> 00:20:57,120 obviously took very long time to get the 301 00:20:57,120 --> 00:20:59,120 apartment done and we're not trying to 302 00:20:59,120 --> 00:21:00,480 sugarcoat that. 303 00:21:00,480 --> 00:21:01,200 >> Understood. 304 00:21:01,200 --> 00:21:03,280 >> Yeah. 305 00:21:03,280 --> 00:21:03,840 Okay. 306 00:21:03,840 --> 00:21:07,200 >> Any any more questions or comments? 307 00:21:07,200 --> 00:21:08,720 No 308 00:21:08,720 --> 00:21:11,440 hearing. None. We will uh close this 309 00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:14,320 portion of the Thank you. We will uh 310 00:21:14,320 --> 00:21:16,320 close this portion of the hearing and 311 00:21:16,320 --> 00:21:20,000 have a discussion to see how we want to 312 00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:24,950 proceed. 313 00:21:24,960 --> 00:21:26,880 » Can Can we back up because I I just want 314 00:21:26,880 --> 00:21:29,440 to clear something up with the uh owner 315 00:21:29,440 --> 00:21:46,950 and 316 00:21:46,960 --> 00:21:49,840 Can can you just verify? So 317 00:21:49,840 --> 00:21:51,840 >> the 13th unit you got there was a 318 00:21:51,840 --> 00:21:54,720 variance in ' 86. So the 13th unit was 319 00:21:54,720 --> 00:21:57,520 approved at that point. Uh and it was 320 00:21:57,520 --> 00:21:58,880 determined it was constructed without 321 00:21:58,880 --> 00:22:02,000 permits in ' 61. Then in 2010, second 322 00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:03,760 use variance was approved for two 323 00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:06,080 additional units, which would bring it 324 00:22:06,080 --> 00:22:09,200 to 15. Are there a 14th and 15th unit 325 00:22:09,200 --> 00:22:12,720 physically in these buildings today? 326 00:22:12,720 --> 00:22:14,559 >> 14 is right. I don't think 327 00:22:14,559 --> 00:22:18,799 >> yes, the the 14th unit is completed. 328 00:22:18,799 --> 00:22:19,280 >> Uhhuh. 329 00:22:19,280 --> 00:22:20,880 >> And that is what this application is 330 00:22:20,880 --> 00:22:21,679 for. 331 00:22:21,679 --> 00:22:22,880 >> What about the 15th? 332 00:22:22,880 --> 00:22:24,640 >> That is not completed. We're not 333 00:22:24,640 --> 00:22:27,360 applying for it. It was never begun. 334 00:22:27,360 --> 00:22:28,960 >> Okay. 335 00:22:28,960 --> 00:22:30,640 >> Yeah. Yeah. So the so the building 336 00:22:30,640 --> 00:22:32,320 permit you got and the variance was for 337 00:22:32,320 --> 00:22:34,080 two, but you're saying you only went 338 00:22:34,080 --> 00:22:36,320 forward with one. Is that do I have that 339 00:22:36,320 --> 00:22:37,840 unders understood correctly? 340 00:22:37,840 --> 00:22:38,400 >> Correct. 341 00:22:38,400 --> 00:22:40,080 >> Okay, everybody's got that. 342 00:22:40,080 --> 00:22:42,960 >> Yeah, that's my understanding. Uh are 343 00:22:42,960 --> 00:22:46,559 you going to seek the 15th unit to be 344 00:22:46,559 --> 00:22:49,760 completed at any given point in time? 345 00:22:49,760 --> 00:22:51,600 >> We're trying to take the path of least 346 00:22:51,600 --> 00:22:54,880 resistance. So, uh I guess it depends on 347 00:22:54,880 --> 00:22:58,000 how today goes, but um our meetings with 348 00:22:58,000 --> 00:22:59,919 the city have indicated that was going 349 00:22:59,919 --> 00:23:01,919 to be a very uphill battle. 350 00:23:01,919 --> 00:23:03,120 >> Oh, gotcha. 351 00:23:03,120 --> 00:23:04,880 >> That's why we're here just on the one 352 00:23:04,880 --> 00:23:05,760 completed. 353 00:23:05,760 --> 00:23:13,590 >> Gotcha. 354 00:23:13,600 --> 00:23:17,120 » Should we I think um it would be prudent 355 00:23:17,120 --> 00:23:19,679 to uh adjourn momentarily to have a 356 00:23:19,679 --> 00:23:21,760 discussion with legal counsel. That's 357 00:23:21,760 --> 00:23:23,520 wise. 358 00:23:23,520 --> 00:23:25,520 >> I do call motion. Michael, 359 00:23:25,520 --> 00:23:27,760 >> may I have a motion to adjourn for a few 360 00:23:27,760 --> 00:23:30,320 moments so we may discuss 361 00:23:30,320 --> 00:23:33,200 >> with our legal person? Motion. 362 00:23:33,200 --> 00:23:34,480 >> Second. 363 00:23:34,480 --> 00:23:38,200 >> Okay. So moved.