rco is in favor he she said that they they're there for it yes allegheny west all right thank
you other questions or comments from the virtual audience i see no further answer mr chair planning
commission amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change in
zoning at this location from the existing RSA 5 residential single family the appellant has
demonstrated the requested variance is the least minimum the planning commission recommends that
the board grant their requested variance for multifamily thank you MI 2025 000453 3440
north 18th street I vote yes proviso revised plans one page stamped 51425 Michael Johns my vote is
yes with proviso. Cheryl Gaston, my
vote is yes with proviso. Taneta Graham, my
vote is yes with proviso. Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Mishmel Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
We have
11 and 13 together. Thank you, boy.
Pardon me? Oh, thank you, sir. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm sorry. Oh, sure. Thank you very much for
participating. So number 11 is 2025, zero, zero.
participating. So number 11 is 2025-000-483-2611 Catherine Street and number 13 is MI-2025-000-533-2613
Catherine Street. There's a letter of non-opposition from South of South Neighborhood Association,
a letter of support from north washington avenue coalition um also a petition signed by 24
signatures but we do have a letter of opposition from a gentleman who i believe lives nearby yes
i don't have that letter so if if you can send me that letter i would appreciate just for our
records it's a pretty lengthy okay so some of the so we have a letter and we have a couple people
that submitted things via the comment section in the upload tool so i will copy and paste that into
an email for you thank you i appreciate it mr knockamson could you identify your client
and the relationship to the properties yes my clients are vincent and yardice jones the owners
of the property or and our vice chair has a few questions good afternoon council do you agree to
way to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
i have thank you counsel please proceed all right thank you um in my opinion this is the most benign
of the projects i presented today um if you you know you'll see you want to go back and look at
the other ones or i think those are the heavier lifts these are two single family homes okay in
graduate hospital the only variant and by the way this uh package has 12 exhibits uh we mailed uh
283 uh notices for 26 11 for the community meeting and for we mailed 280 283 notices uh for the
community meeting for 26 11 286 notices for the community meeting for 26 13 they were heard
together like they're being heard together today for purposes of efficiency here i'm making one
combined presentation I do have these are separate zoning matters and I do have separate
presentation matters that were submitted to the board again we have 12 exhibits here so the notice
of refusal these are small lots you know each lot is 560 square feet these are RSA 5 lots
all we're trying to do is put a single family house on both and we're getting a refusal due
due to the rear yard setback 2613 is we're actually going closer in conformance to the code
right now there's a building structure there that has almost no rear yard setback 2611 is
a vacant lot 2615 basically has no rear yard setback and 2609 we're matching the rear yard
setback of 2609 for 2611 2613 so we're mimicking you know what 2609 has um we like the board
chairman stated we have a letter of non-opposition from sasna we have a letter of support uh from the
other coordinating rco north of washington avenue coalition there is also another letter like that
they sent i just want to recognize it they have a letter seeking to dismiss our our appeal because
they uh noah was not part of the community input process with sasna so i think there's some
infighting between them and they said we we weren't we weren't like given the invitation
to participate with you internally so this this appeal should be dismissed that's either neither
here nor there but again well attended meeting um we do have revised plans so this is at the request
of sasana we are mirroring the um the steps the front steps and also we're mirroring the the um
the pilot houses so it's actually a better project in this way the pilot houses are now
combined in the middle like for 26 and 11 and 13. they're further away from 26 15 and 2609 so it's
less likely we would affect anyone's light in there in that respect and that was at the request
of sasna petition that was there um ariel mr knockamson just to clarify there's only revised
plans for um 26 11 right not for 26 13 right yeah let me take a look at that you you're it's only
for one so let me just clarify that i think it's only the one that was getting uh that's right
because 2613 the pilot house was a certain way the steps were a certain way they wanted us to
they wanted us to mirror it so we changed it for 26 11. that's correct thank you for the clarification
mirror it so we changed it for 2611 that's correct
um aerial views and this these pictures aren't the best but like i just wanted to highlight this
this is 2609 based on our calculation theory yard setbacks five feet which is similar to what we're
requesting 26 11 that's our property it's a vacant lot we're mimicking their their but
their back of their building structure 2613 you really can't see it this well but like our building
structure kind of goes out to here so by demolishing 20 the building structure for 2613
and building this three-story single-family home we're we're going closer in conformance with the
code from the rear yard setback situation and then 2615 again you really can't see it but their
building structure goes much further you know back here too um so again i think this is a project
that's the minimus in nature um and this is from a street uh perspective these were the issues at
the community meeting for the people who did have issues um first there was concern that we're going
to add a fourth story and then convert it into a duplex and as i stated during the hearing i mean
community meeting if we were going to do that we have to come back we have to get a height variance
and we have to get multi you know multi-family variance second thing is and i think this had to
deal with one of the neighbors was like okay now you're building a three-story structure which is
next to my three-story structure wants to stop you or your or the person who's living on on the
at that property from jumping from one roof deck to the next we all live in row at least i live in
the row home in philadelphia like you know what's stopping it is it would be illegal to trespass
and you know it just didn't make sense to me but that was their concern like someone's going to be
able to go on to his deck and vice versa so that was the other issue and then the third issue was
during construction you know what's to stop you from coming on to our properties there's a there's
a little bit of a wild west back here um in you know the city owns this land but it's really open
back there there's not a lot of fencing back there and you know there was concern that we're going to
leverage this additional land like you know in a way that was going to affect their property
rights and we're not going to do that there was also concern even the letter how are you going
these are smaller lots like how are you going to deal with construction well you would deal with
construction like you would deal with any construction what you know and this these
are single family homes and obviously we'd be respectful and we indicated to the owners of
2609 and 2615 that you know there are rights that they have under the philadelphia code in terms of
notice in terms of additional insurance requirements and things like that this is
this is for zoning and you know based on you know what we're requesting these are de minimis
variances so i'll just quickly go through um the plans um again if you see here this is the site
plan but what we did at the request of sasna is to now mimic the pilot house as i believe the
pilot house for 2611 that's here was originally here which to the person at 2609 they may have
appreciated that the pilot house was here to kind of give them privacy you know from what was here
you know with their house you know and maybe that was their concern that we can jump from place to
place but from a light and air perspective and from a design perspective sasna wanted this pilot
house to be there and we accommodated them if the board doesn't feel inclined you know to grant
with the proviso well at very least they should grant it uh period with no proviso
and then in terms of the height our height is in line with you know properties on that block
where 33 feet 8 inches again there's a mix between two stories and three story structures
and then again this is a single family uh situation here you walk into a common uh well
you walk into your front door you have a living room dining room kitchen not the biggest backyard
but no one has a really big backyard lower level you have like some additional living
second floor you have two bedrooms and a bathroom and a washer and dryer and in in the primary and
the third floor you have a primary suite with a roof deck the other accommodations we made besides
you know transitioning to the pilot house on 2611 and marrying the steps as well is we
we accommodated sasna in terms of the color of materials as well as having metal cladding for
the pilot house also what was asked of us again because it's a smaller block in a smaller neighborhood
was to make the parapet see-through and clear um you know again we're allowed to have a pair
see-through and clear um you know again we're allowed to have a parrot we're required to have
we're required to have a parapet of three and a half
a parapet of three and a half feet instead of having brick now it's see-through so it meets you
know the um safety requirements but also now it's lighter to the look of the property so it doesn't
look as high but again we're only 33 feet eight inches from the roof line anyway and then you can
see here how we kind of blend in this is a rendering of our properties and how we blend
into the community um so there are three story structures on that block and um i think that's
the extent of my presentation obviously we have the other documents the deed proof of mailing of
the community notice and the tax clearance certificate why don't you bring your client
yeah um so i would ask that either your niece or or vincent uh to uh appear um and be sworn in i
will say this my clients are were lived on the property at 26 13 for some time they moved down
to florida their their intentions to move back to philadelphia live in one of the single family
structures and sell the others sell the other one sure okay
do we see a hand
I'm here. I'm here. I don't know why you please video. All right. Could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer? Yes. My name is Yardis Jones. That's Y-A-R-D-I-S-E Jones,
J-O-N-E-S. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, yes.
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matters.
And what I stated, is that true and correct?
That is correct.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, I have a hand up from a Tom Gibbons.
I promoted them.
They should be back in shortly.
Tom Gibbons, please accept the invitation for panelists.
Hi, Mr. Gibbons.
Hi, everybody.
Hi, Mr. Gibbons.
uh do i have to say my name uh tom yeah please could you please turn on your video if you have
a video there yeah yeah of course uh hi mr gibbons could you please stay your name and spell for the
stenographer uh no problem tom gibbons g-i-b-b-o-n-s right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yeah mr gibbons you live uh right next to one of
these properties am I correct yes okay please start your presentation yeah no problem I don't
have much of a presentation it's more of just like a comment that I wanted to like circle back
and highlight briefly on like what one of the issues on the previous community meeting was
and similarly what to what Alan kind of talked about but just to add more clarity to the statement
like there are fences that separate all the houses between you know 26 21 26 19 26 17 26 15 myself
and 2609 um so that's like my only point from the project planning perspective is that you know the
execution the project would like to keep in mind or you know i personally and selfishly would like
to keep in mind that if there were plans to go through people's backyards i understand that we
would probably get some kind of notification but that would be my only like point is that you know
a lot of these families do have kids a lot of these families have pets we like utilize our backyard
You know, I bought my house in 2020. They've been there since then. So I'm not really sure what that point's talking about. A lot of us work remotely. Some of us work remotely that like project plan would highly disrupt my day to day life. That's really about it. I know I submitted a written testimony with pictures to kind of.
I saw I have your letter. Yeah, no, that's but that's about it. I don't have any opposition as to like execution of, you know, updating houses. That's everyone's prerogative. But my only, you know, quarrel would be if people were to go through people's backyards without kind of consideration. But, you know, that's it. I appreciate the time. And thank you for taking the time, Nicole. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Plenty, Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission. This testimony will be both for 2611 and 2613 Catherine Street. The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location within the current RSA 5.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location within the current RSA-5 residential single family.
The plan has demonstrated that the requested setback would not injure the use of adjoining properties and is in character with the surrounding properties.
The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the requested variance for rear yard setback.
Thank you.
Hillary, so number 2611 is revised plans?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
So I'm going to vote them separately.
Yes, we do.
We vote them separately.
Thank you.
11 MI 2025 000 483 2611 Catherine Street. I vote yes. Revised plans stamp 51425.
Michael Charles, my vote is yes with proviso.
Gerald Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
And number 13, MI2025-000533-2613,
Castle Street, I vote yes.
John, my vote is yes.
Gerald Gaston, my vote is yes.
Taneta Graham, my vote is yes.
Tywin, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a great day.
All right.
We're going to take a five-minute break,
and we'll be right back.
And then we only have, pardon me?
oh is there anyone i don't think is there anyone in the audience that the case is not
going to call for the two o'clock list chair i do not see any hands raised
good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this zoning board hearing
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.