After winning a new pair of nice Italian leather business casuals in an office coin toss, the Intern Architect finds himself back at the gates of Zoning, a renewed sense of purpose. The project is a small addition to a legal brick 2-flat that is voluntarily converting to a single family home. All parties agree (the architects and expeditors have teamed up), they cross their fingers and say, this one looks pretty clear cut, we should not have a problem.
The owner currently lives in both units with an old cat, an older dog, a couple turtles and a snake(?). The addition would take the place of a back porch and stair for the two units and would include a stair from the first floor to grade, but not from the 1st to the 2nd floor. He would like to forgo the back stair to 2nd floor, which is not required in a single family home.
An email from the expediters had warned that Zoning supervisor Mr. G had gotten his hands on this one and was asking for the walls of the front foyer and enclosed stair to be removed to insure its single family use, citing a general zoning “policy”, but not a specific ordinance which the proposed work would violate. Everyone involved believes this is because there is no such violation, just a general paranoia on Mr. G’s part, an unfounded suspicion of ill-intent.
Meeting in the lobby, the expeditor seems out of breath, at his wits end. He arrived at 5am, got the 3rd spot in line, and then a meeting at 9am with plan examiner E. and Mr. G, where he struggled to bring reason to the vague assertion of tear down these walls, just because… Based on this meeting, the Intern Architect (representing the architect, with proper papers in tow) is able to meet with the man to seek clarification. Mr. G could not be more inarticulate with his clarification. He asks why the work couldn’t be done, scoffs at added expense, grumbles responses, averts eyes, avoids specifics, questions credentials, says I don’t want to talk to you, and is about to walk away when the Intern uses the only venue of accountability available to him. He asks for an official rejection letter, which states the specific ordinances on which the project was rejected. Mr. G. grabs the plans and heads to back to follow pesky protocol.
An hour later, the plans re-emerge with a rejection letter that states: “the Zoning Dept. interprets this as a separate dwelling unit…”, listing a number of erroneous reasons why this is to be considered a two-flat (citing a glossary as one of the violated ordinances). There seem to be other agendas at work here, besides those listed among the city ordinances, the only official zoning “policy”. The intern can only think, I wore my new shoes for this.