lack of a better term, that's an insensitive term, forgive me, but you get the point. You'll
have to have people on site because you don't know when you're going to have people that need
your help. Is that right? Yes. All right. And you're going to have, well, let's segue right
away to, I'm going to get back to the parking, but as far as your security, explain to the board
your security plan. We will have security cameras on each corner of the building. And we also have
a security office the third floor will be used as our private security office we will have two
security guards there at all times okay and and the cameras you'll have uh you'll be will be
monitored constantly yes all right so let's get to the parking i'm going to put that so um what do
you have in mind as far as mr mr demarco can i say something how much longer do you think you're
going to be going on uh this is my last witness okay thank you i only have a few more questions
mr chairman okay yes sure all right go ahead go ahead erica tell the tell the board what you
envision as far as parking for yourself my vision is to line up the cars up and down vine street and
across 53rd street with the police assistance and are you familiar with uh funeral parlors as far as
uh using community using police explain to the board whether that's feasible or not
that's normally what is done now these so yes and you'll establish those relationships once you're
once you're operating with the local police district is that right yes okay um so the
mortician is wendy palmer so mr chairman i understand that there's a time issue um i don't
need mr palmer to testify but let me have erica just mention who she is and what what her experience
Her resume is in the exhibits. Let me go ahead and put that up on the screen. I don't think we need to have her formally testify unless you want to hear from her.
No, no. OK, we're fine. We're fine. All right. Very well. Who's Wendy Palmer? Erica, explain to the board who she is and what her involvement is with this business.
She's the director of the business and also the mortician.
She has over 30 years experience in this type of business.
All right.
And you provided her resume to me to include in the board's exhibits today, correct?
So, Mr. Chairman, I don't need to call Ms. Palmer, but you can see.
Please take another one.
So, Paul, explain to the board that you met with some of the RCO folks before this hearing today, correct?
You met with some of the RCO folks before today?
So explain to the board what you're willing to do as far as community outreach and talk about local hiring and cleanups and meeting space.
Go ahead.
Yes, so we're working on some type of partnership with the community, whereas we can have monthly meetings at the property, the location for the community, also cleanups for the community, and some type of project to help the homeowners in the community upgrade their homes.
And you'll provide meeting space to the RCO as reasonably required?
And you'll take qualified applicants and try to hire locally as much as you can. Is that fair to say?
All right, Mr. Chairman, that's all I have of Ms. Hall. I'll reserve the right to rebut any unknown standards opposition today. I would just close by saying this is clearly a preexisting nonconforming use. If not that, it's clearly an entitlement to a variance in light of the extreme hardship posed by the condition of this property, the longstanding decades long use as a funeral parlor.
All right, Mr. Chairman, that's all I have of Ms. Hall. I'll reserve the right to rebutting.
yep all right so um and again we are not increasing the volume of the services it is
consistent with what's been there in the past obviously we're left with a property that has been
used for decades for this use so um okay that's that's all i have thank you for your time questions
from the board questions from the board no no chair
jim tom no chair okay thanks um questions i i see hillary has a few questions here hillary
sure yes so um so a couple of things sorry let me just pull back some minutes well first thank you
for um addressing the accessory living use i'm that that was a question because that use is
actually not a use in the code um so my my first my first question would be to clarify what what
was being referred to as accessory living but if if if the community doesn't want residential living
and you're willing to do that um we can certainly do that via proviso just note there's no residential
use proposed for the property um we agree with that proviso okay great yes we can that can be
done via proviso um because this is an rsa3 property there should have been a review of
the parking um and there wasn't now i i see that there's clearly parking there but there's no
mention of it on the refusal and i couldn't find records of it historically um so that's something
we may actually need to have a corrected refusal done to um address that um i have to see because
this is a change of use application so there were no plans so if there's any changes to the existing
parking that might actually require a new application so we'll have we can deal with
that separately but i just wanted to note that for the record um and i noticed lastly um in the
packet there was a site plan um is there any additional is there a roof deck now being proposed
for this okay okay i was a little bit confused by the site plan so okay because of the change
of use and no plans were reviewed so um i just wanted to verify that um hillary if i may the
site plan um i believe it was submitted i don't uh molly uh doesn't fully remember uh but um
i i just looked in the system for it yeah no you're absolutely right that there is parking i
mean we we certainly don't want to have to file a new application uh we're willing to i mean there's
room for parking for some um but we wouldn't want to file an application but if if you want um
we don't need to actually formally provide it it i agree that it was shown um and for whatever
reason the examiner didn't pick it up um we certainly don't want to file a new application
though at this stage you know there's a way right now i i understand we may be able to work that out
So we can discuss that further, yeah, further offline, but it should have been reviewed as part of the application.
Lastly, because you did argue that this was a nonconforming use, Leonard Reuter was able to hop on.
So he just wanted to make a couple of comments regarding that argument.
Leonard, there he is. Thank you.
him. Leonard, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
He's slowly coming in as a panelist chair. Okay.
I'm here. All right, Leonard, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court
stenographer? Sure. May it please the board, Leonard F. Reuter, R-E-U-T-E-R, for the City
of philadelphia do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed sir sure uh just very quickly um i was only notified about 20 minutes ago that
uh mr demarco or his client rather was uh apparently making an argument that this is
a non-conforming use normally um that would have been indicated as a challenge against the refusal
and I would have been able to do a little bit more research to see what it is.
But I can just say that with respect to the non-conforming issues generally,
We typically leave that up to the board to make a determination.
we typically leave that up to the board to make a determination.
I did see...
I did see some of the materials that were presented by Mr. DeMarco.
I had the ability to do a quick review of some of the zoning archives,
which I should indicate for the record are under 5300 Vine Street,
not under the North 53rd Street address because this has two alternate addresses.
yeah um again it does appear that there has been some uh that it had been used as a funeral home
and actually had uh first one and then two families above uh going back probably at least
to 1953 if not to the 40s and before um the question of whether or not it had been abandoned
is up to the board i think to decide based upon the materials that mr demarco presented
As far as the parking issue goes, again, we're happy to defer to what your counsel, Ms. Emerson, and what you all decide to do about the parking question, because I do agree that it should have been reviewed.
I'm not sure whether it was missed or if Ellen and I made a determination that, but the fact that it wasn't reviewed at all, I think, you know, that's, again, what you do with that is up to you.
So I just wanted to indicate that. And I would just ask next time, Rich, if you could, like, let me know.
Sure. I'm sorry. That's all right.
So it was late. If I may, Mr. Chairman, explain.
Leonard, Leonard, you had 20 minutes. I mean, I don't know.
I could just explain. I knew of a discontinuant.
So I actually wasn't initially planning to argue.
And when I realized that it was probably not a legal abandonment, I chose to argue.
So sorry about that. No, it's up to the board.
But so that's it. If you have any questions, I'll be here for a little bit. But if you don't have questions for me, I actually am at the Historical Commission at the same time. So I have to run to that if any if nobody needs anything else from me.
Thank you, sir.
Yeah, I agree with with Len.
OK. All right. What questions or comments from the virtual audience?
There are no hands here.
Planning Commission.
uh excuse me mr chair um uh willie jordan has had his hand up the entire time i believe
he's from the rco and we do not have a letter yeah mr jordan
willie jordan's allowed to speak hi mr jordan could you state your name please and spell for
the courts. Willie Jordan, W-I-L-L-I-E, Jordan, J-O-R-D-A-N. Did I swear you earlier today,
sir? Yes. Okay. Please proceed. Yes. Thank you, Chairman. We're asking for a continuance. So
we had two meetings on this, and there's still some concerns. One, Mr. DeMarco argued really
clear that it was a vacancy by just showing there was no activity going on in that property
for a long period of time. So that's vacant. Vacant is vacant. You can't argue that. There
wasn't doing any. And to expand the seating, one of the concerns that the neighbors had,
yes, there was a funeral home and they only had around a 50 seat capacity. He's asking to go up
to about 149 seats. So that's a change in parking, service, and everything. So we're willing to sit
down and talk with the owner, which we have in the previous time, to find out where we can come
up with a more suitable agreement with this. Okay. Yeah, I can respond, Mr. Chairman. Happy
to work with Mr. Jordan on this. I just want to make sure that we don't have to come back. We've
waited quite a while for today's hearing. No, no, I'm not, I'm not familiar with all the finagling
on being approved and then don't have to come back. I'm saying continuous, Your Honor. Yeah,
my response would be happy to keep the record open. We will continue to work with Mr. Jordan
and hopefully maybe have a CBA on this, but we obviously don't want to have to have another
evidentiary hearing, we could have the record open to allow us to meet again with Mr. Jordan.
I just want to make sure we complete the testimony today. And I guess Hillary will defer to you on
this. We would be glad to meet again with Mr. Jordan, try to hammer out, or just, you know,
have a discussion, try to hammer out an agreement. Happy to do that.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
yes chair i have brian wilson with a hand up and will be allowed to speak
Yes, Chair, I have Brian Wilson.
i could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
brian k wilson b-r-i-a-n w-i-l-s-o-n right do you swear or burn to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor sir yes i am please proceed
So to tag on to what the RCO just stated about the capacity, the request to have 140, a space used for 140 people, our block doesn't allow for that.
Also for parking, part of Vine Street is a bus stop. So there's no parking that's going to be allowed in front of the bus stop. Across the street, there is a park, but that only holds very few cars that allow to park there.
Plus, there's also, we're already inundated with parking from the medical center that's on 52nd.
The employees from the medical center park on our block.
They park on the, there's a walking pad directly across the street.
They park there. They park along Vine Street and along 53rd Street.
and they're there during regular office hours.
Jordan, thank you very much for your con,
I mean, sir, thank you very much for your comments.
We appreciate what you have to say.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
That's chair, Michael Johns will be allowed to speak.
And Mr. Johns, you've already been sworn once today,
just mention uh state your name uh michael johns all right please proceed sir okay good morning
chairman bergen and commissioners thank you for this opportunity to voice my opposition
to the proposed use for 238 north 53rd street i am usually on the other side of the table
listening to community concerns but this time i'm on the other side i'll try to keep it simple
and to the point. I'm a long-time resident and business owner on this block.
Notwithstanding some of the comments Mr. DeMarco mentioned, we do not believe that the
project proposes a hardship as the proposed plan calls for major reconfiguration of the first floor
if you could pull up the existing floor plan. What Mr. DeMarco showed was only the proposed
plan but not the existing plan. So if you could pull up the existing plan for the record,
The plan calls for major reconfiguration of the first floor and some of the upper floors, including the removal of what appears to be bearing walls, interior stairs, and other walls to increase the seating capacity threefold from three to 40 to 140 plus seats.
This alone will cost thousands of dollars, so clearly there's no financial hardship and there's nothing about the particularly physical, surrounding, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific structure or land involved that will result in unnecessary hardship.
In addition, the increase in capacity will negatively impact parking and congestion and inflame hostilities, not to mention the gun violence that has been plaguing our community at funerals and burials and other large gatherings.
Two, there's no need for another funeral home in the neighborhood as there are five or more funeral homes within walking distance of this location, including 56th and Girard, 42nd and Habitford, 52nd and Baltimore, 53rd and Market, 57th and Race, 58th and Vine, 53rd and Locust, just to name a few.
The neighbors also met and want to see other uses that are more consistent with the neighborhood, such as multifamily residential.
Now, I will hope that Mr. Willie Jordan will get back on the call and clarify the issue around residential and this property.
So just for the record, because I think there's some misinterpretation of what was what was intended in his letter.
Since, as you can see from the existing plans, it was already laid out and previously listed as a two-family on the second and third floors.
So reconfiguring the first floor to add one or two more units would not be difficult.
And there is adequate off-street parking on the site, so neighborhood parking would not be impacted by a multifamily development.
Other suggestions include some uses that complements the federally qualified health clinic across the street from the site, or some use that addresses one of the many disparities.
from the site, or some use that addresses one of the many disparities this community faces.
The bottom line is the community does not want it and does not need it. And we will entertain
uses that support or uplift our community, not a use that simply profits off the proliferation
of gun violence in our community by having a bigger funeral home. Thank you.
i have a couple questions mr chairman did i just hear that because it's a funeral parlor it's going
to result in more gun violence no no that's not that's not what you heard that's not what you i
hope not oh no no but that's not what you heard i hope so what i said specifically that's why i
wrote it down so i could read it what i said specifically this neighborhood and this community
is being plagued by gun violence at large gatherings funerals and at burials just look
at the news. This is nothing new. This is nothing that I'm making up. And so increasing the amount
of capacity at this site from what was 40 or 50 maximum, right? Now, you stated early when I look
at this plan, and I want to be clear, let's look at this plan. You never really showed this plan,
Mr. DeMarco. The only plan that you really- I'm objecting. That's-
Hold it. Mr. Chatt, Mr. Chatt, Michael, Michael, first and foremost, we want to move this along.
This has been going on for a while, and if there's many more people in the audience, we're going to have to continue this.
So, Mr. DeMarco, do you have a question for Mr. Johns?
No, just brief response, Mr. Chairman.
I don't need to cross more.
Well, before you respond, let's see if there's anyone else in the audience.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
There are no hands.
All right, thank you.
Mr. DeMarco.
The multifamily use is a use variance.
So while that's a fine suggestion, it would require additional, starting over from square one, it's a use variance that would be prohibited by the code. It's simply not a fair or legitimate option for this developer.
Mr. Chairman, we don't want to get hung up on increasing capacity.
It's true that they created a large room, but it's the same footprint.
We're working within the same footprint.
Happy to accept the proviso by this board if you want to limit seating.