since that time, we have a new tenant, PNC Bank, which wants to go in there. We're not changing
anything at all about the parking. We have made one of the non-conformities more conforming,
if you will. We had a stacking lane setback with the checkers that was only 5.5 feet where 20 feet
was required. And now we will have a variance request of only 1.1 feet for the stacking lane
distance from the property line. I think I said the parking in front of the bank will not change.
There will still be those 16, two of which will be ADA compliant. Nothing else changes within the entire shopping center, which comes to you with a use, excuse me, not with a use variance, wrong, with a parking variance.
We have 144 parking spaces. There's a variance that permits that. We are not asking for any additional parking. We don't think we need any additional parking. We have, at all times, plenty of parking for the rest of the shopping center.
We think this will be more of a destination-oriented use, much less impulse stops, so we will have much more coordinated traffic, much more coordinated parking, and a lot of it will, and not a lot, but more will be, some will be drive-through.
So we think the current configuration works well. We expect to have streets approval. Streets has made no comments about ingress, egress, or internal circulation.
Um, we did talk to the RCO, uh, and talked about their concerns, which were, uh, safety and
security. We, uh, indicated to the board in a letter, uh, the next day that we had, uh, private
security from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday through Sunday, every day of the week. We have the
Philadelphia police, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., three days a week. We have lot cleaning daily. Obviously,
we have trash collection on a regular basis. We have lot cleaning daily. We have bulk trash
service on call. We have provided a contact for within my client, both a phone number and an email,
which is something the RCO had requested, and they talked a little bit about the traffic around
the former checkers. We think we've made that a lot better by creating a better setback with
the stacking lane, by creating, frankly, by creating a use that is more destination-oriented
by repeat customers and less of an impulse use.
And I think that's all I have to say at this moment.
As I said, I have my engineer on the line
and I also have my client.
I would ask...
Your client can want to adopt your testimony.
Thank you very much.
Greg has been allowed to speak.
Hello, this is Greg Peel.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good afternoon, Greg Peel, G-R-E-G.
Last name is Peel, P-E-I-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Greg, were you able to hear everything that I said about the project and the dimensional variances?
Yes, I was.
As well as the safety concern, the trash collection, and the other issues raised by the RCO?
Yes, I did.
And would you adopt what I stated as your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, the only other thing I would ask is since since it is slightly unusual that we have some revised plans at this point, would you like me to go through all of them? They're already in your packet.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, the only other thing I would ask is since since it is.
No, I just I'm going to I'm going to bring up one issue. Mr. McCherry, have you noticed Hillary's note on here? Applicant may need to submit revised landscape plan to planning for a stamp.
yes i i do see that let me just
so we got seven pages of revised plans
let me just review the amount
i do believe ultimately it would it would need to go to go to planning then for for a stamp in that
case okay so um what i'm going to do is i'm i'm going to uh go through the whole thing and i'm
going to hold the vote until we take care of that this week and we'll vote next week at 2 p.m okay
it's got to go to planning commission first for stamp i i believe so the planning commission on
we are we are chairman yes typically um when the cba approves an item um if l and i believes that
but the change is administrative in nature, and it appears this one probably would be,
they would send it back for our review in a stamp anyway.
Okay. So you think that's been done already?
I don't think it's been done already. It would typically be done after the ZBA is approved.
Okay. So we can vote on this today.
As far as I know, I'm not Hillary, so I don't want to advise you on that.
Okay. We have advised everyone via email and we provided it to everyone.
So I think, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I think we can vote.
Okay, sure.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Mr. McShurry, any follow-up?
Yes, after the statement from Planning Commission, I believe we are okay to proceed today and have them stamp it after the approval, provided there is approval.
All right, questions or comments from the virtual audience?
There are no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial area zoning at this location.
The proposed variance for stacking land setback and fewer required hiking spaces that are required will not injure the use of the adjacent property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variances.
Thank you.
MI 2024-000681-5716, Baltimore Avenue, I vote yes, with proviso.
Revised plans, seven pages, stamped by ZBA on April 17th, 2024.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James, now my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Provide Zone.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 2 p.m. case has not been heard?
There are no hands, Chair.
Okay, we're going to take a five.
Excuse me.
Robert Stevenson just put his hand up, and I will allow him to speak.
Two hands came up now.
All right.
Hi, Mr. Stevenson.
Could you state your name, please?
Hi, yes, this is Robert Stevenson, S-T-E-P-H-E-N-S-O-N, and I am the owner of 608 South Front Street.
And the case about 610 Front Street was holding on since 2.
Hold on. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
610 Front.
but that's not on the next list
it was announced up at the top of the session at two okay
might have been number seven if i remember correctly but it's been a while
OK, I'm sorry. So that that case was continued, sir. I now set in the beginning. 610 South Front Street has been continued.
Can you I wasn't sure what that meant, to be honest, I'm a little. I'm sorry. I've learned I've learned a lot, I will say.
Sure. Okay. The RCO and the lawyer both requested a continuance.
So the RCO and the lawyer both requested continuance so they could have more time to review and discuss the proposal.
Uh-huh.
And I'm sorry you got stuck.
You didn't hear that.
Yeah, I just didn't understand.
So it's going to be continued to another date.
You'll be notified.
And the issue was the RCO and the lawyer both need to discuss it further.
I got you.
Great.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it. Yep, no worries. Are there any other hands? Yes, Kendra Gudgeon will be allowed
to speak. Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes, Kendra Gudgeon, K-E-N-D-R-A-G-U-D for George, G-E-O-N. Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. What case are you interested
in? 29 East Mount Airy Avenue. See here, I think that I'm sure. You're right with you.
So the attorney for the applicant had requested a continuance for that. And I announced that in
the beginning of the day. Okay. Okay. So that case will be continued. There is a letter of
opposition from the RCO at this point. Okay. So a new date will be announced. A new date will be
announced. I'm really sorry that you didn't get that information. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate
it. Thank you. Is there anyone else? No hands, Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the 330 list this afternoon here.
With me is our vice chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also is our attorney, Mr. McShurry, and also our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format. Be advised if proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sumter.
Let's look at our schedule.
Number three, MI 2023-006-842-11500 East Roosevelt Boulevard. That case has been continued.
number four
no I'm sorry number five
MI 2023-006-846-6922 East Roosevelt Boulevard
uh is Mr. Anastasio here
I don't see his hand up okay thank you this case has been continued
and number six
MI 2023-00-6850-834-North 63rd Street, this case has been continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Yes, there's a hand up by the name of Robert Rudnitsky, and I will allow to speak.
Yes, my apologies.
I just, my name is Robert Rudnitsky.
Say your name and spell for the course.
My apologies, Chair.
My apologies, Chair. Again, my name is Robert Rudnitsky, R-U-D-N-I-T-S-K-Y, and I'm just confirmed. My apologies.
Again, my name is Robert Rudnitsky, R-U-Z-N-I-C-S-K.
The case 11500 East Roosevelt Boulevard has been continued.
No, no, I was referring to 6922, and I'm just verifying that, sir.
Okay, hold on a minute here.
I think you just said it. I just want to make sure.
I said, I just said 834 North 63rd.
that's 6922 east roosevelt
oh yeah yes that case has been continued sir i'm sorry yes
my apologies and i thank you so much no no no not not at all not at all thank you any other
requests for any other requests for continuance
no hands chair okay thank you i have a number one mi2022 001 934 769 south 17th street
uh no exhibits third listing
there are no hands here okay so this is the third listing mi2022
001-934-769
South 17th Street. I move to
dismiss. Thomas
Holloman, my vote is to
dismiss.
James Snell,
my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to
dismiss. Thank you. And number
four, MI2023
845-2128
Shelton Avenue.
No exhibits first listing.
Ariel Hannon is the listed applicant. House of Prayer for All People is the listed owner.
Ariel O'Hannon. I don't see a hand by Ariel O'Hannon, but I do see one from Charles Richardson.
Okay. Why don't we bring him on? He's been allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Could you just state your name, please, and spell for the court
stenographer. Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass. Richardson is spelled
R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, room 508 City Hall. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do. Do you want to talk about 2128 Shelton? Yes, sir. That was assigned
back in December, and the RCO has heard, and none of the RCOs have heard anything from these folks,
So neither has our office. Wondering if you can just have that listed to be continued, but must be must be.
Oh, yeah, absolutely. Absolutely, sir. Thank you, sir.