the sort of tire
of nothing but tires
no no mr chair this is hillary i think the consumer goods refers to the tires and okay
there's a personal vehicle repair and maintenance as well because i think they must be putting the
tires on okay thank you thank you no vehicle repair on the tire okay thank you your questions
from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
there are no hands mr chair planning commission
thank you chair bergman sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s-a-r-a-h-b-a-n-h
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
However, given the circumstances of the building, the appellant has shown a hardship,
and therefore the City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022-004258-3959 North Fairhill Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, sir.
You have your votes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number seven.
MI 2022-006-843-706 North 5th Street.
Vern Astasio is the attorney.
letter of support from Northern Liberties Neighbors Association for five units with one
being owner occupied. Mr. Anastasio is returning as a panelist. Okay.
Mr. Anastasio, just state your name. You've already been sworn.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair. Vern Anastasio for the Somoza family.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Our vice chair has a few questions.
i think this case has already been presented yeah i know i do remember this case yeah i've
already put the my case in chief is on the record is closed uh recommendation by the planning
commission was to approve it we were just tell hillary i do remember this case where
how did this get here let me just give me okay just yeah it didn't come up as a resumption hearing
um on my list so just give me one second let me let me just look at this hold on
it's my recollection uh pretty clearly remember the case now yeah you were just waiting for an
rco uh letter we met with them a few days ago hammered out what we needed to hammer out and
they're sending their letter uh so that you can vote
yes my apologies this is a
it just says for feedback from the RCO and the public
with a response from counsel for the applicant.
Back from May 3rd.
Oh, I don't know if anyone, yeah,
so we did get a letter from the RCO.
I don't know if anyone is here from the RCO to testify
or if there was any public testimony on this matter.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
so there are no hands so so uh mr anasasio i guess the question would be
your response to the community groups rco saying they won five units and one of the five should
be owner occupied you're asking for six was asking for six we would settle for five
as as my test i believe our testimony showed uh before i don't necessarily know i mean it's all
as a testimony was much of the property is going to be uh and already is owner occupied
i don't think i i think it's i think it's a i think we've i've talked to hillary about that
we're okay i think it's a little yeah other than that other than that one little uh caveat i think
we're in agreement did the planning commission already take a position on this hillary
Yes, I just have to, I just have to pull that up. Give me one second.
So the Planning Commission did recommend granting for five dwelling units.
Thank you.
Thank you. So MI 2022-006-843-706 North 5th Street, I vote yes with proviso, maximum five units.
So MI 2022 00.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
And Vern, stay on.
So MI 2022-007-385-2100 Shelton Avenue.
And I think you already have, but just for the record, could you identify your client one more time?
Sure. It's the foundation of Muqadim Atu Kidma, and the representative is Mohamed Baldi.
And our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, Counselor.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its adequacy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thanks.
My screen is shared.
2100 Shelton Avenue.
The application is for House of Worship.
and a community center in the existing structure. The house of worship is a matter of right by right
use. It's the community center that kicks the the refusal and of course the community center
will be used as an extension of the house of worship. So here is I'll zoom out a little bit.
Here's the lower level that'll be
used here. There's bathrooms in the center. There's a reception area. These classrooms will
be used for community activity. And then on the second level, we have more rooms, offices,
and these classrooms in the back will be used for worship, the activity room in the classroom.
This has been a long-standing institutional use as a daycare.
Here's the interior. It's on what is primarily a commercial corridor.
By the way, under separate cover, I did submit into evidence proof of posting.
is the interior layout, as you can see. So it's been institutionally used for quite some time.
So went a little too fast. Here we are. Here's us. Across the street is another house of worship.
Down the street here, Resurrection Power is yet another house of worship, and across here is yet another house of worship.
All three houses of worship also have community activities associated with their space.
This is our block.
As you can see, it is primarily commercial in use, very oddly shaped buildings, certainly not residential in nature.
Here's additional photos. We did meet with the community, not once, but twice.
Two flyers, two proof of postings. At each time, 137 individual households were in fact mailed.
And as the RCO, Faith CDC, I believe indicated earlier in their letter, no one showed up at the
first meeting, except for the RCO leadership, and no immediate neighbors showed up at the
second. The property was posted with both RCO notices as well. The RCO leadership did hear
our presentation, but it's their particular policy that they can't come to a position without having
near neighbor input. And as you saw with the photos, it's not like there's a whole lot of
immediate neighbors that are residential, that are impacted. So for those reasons,
because we've met the requirements twice, and we did present, there's a history of
institutional use on the property, because other houses of worship with community activity
are on the block. And because we are in a primarily commercial corridor, I am going to ask
this board to respectfully grant the variance in this case thank you would you have your client
adopt your testimony yep mr baldy if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand
do we see anything
Mohammed Balde
B-A-L-D-E
I'm sorry I don't see anyone
answering to the
Anastasia you're an officer of the court
we will accept your testimony
questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman
no Chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
Once again, sir, no hands at this time. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair. Sarah Bond, Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial mixed use zoning.
However, the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
MI 2022-007-385-2100, Cheltenham Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, I didn't hear Mr. Shaheed's vote.
Mr. Shaheed, can you just indicate your vote?
Sure. Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2022-007-533-119 Reed Street.
Danielle DeFazio is the owner applicant.
This application is for the partial demolition of an existing attached structure and the erection of an addition at the rear, including a roof deck,
For use as a single-family household living, size and location is shown on application plan.
A rear yard depth of seven feet is required in the RSA residential district, but this is only four foot, three-quarters of an inch.
Four feet, four and three-quarters inches is proposed.
There is a letter of non-opposition from Penn Sports Civic and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
Danielle DeFazio.
She will be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Good morning.
How are you?
I'm great.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Danielle DeFazio, D-A-N-I-E-L-L-E, last name DeFazio, D-E-F as in Frank, A-S as in Sam, S as in Sam, I-O as in Oscar.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its
accuracy? That one's for me? Yes. I'm sorry, I apologize. Have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing. Yes. Please proceed to see your screen. I'm going to apologize for that as well.
I'm going to apologize for that issue.
All right. Are you able to see my screen? We can. Excellent. So this is an existing three-story
row home. And at some point, a two-story kitchen bathroom addition was constructed at the rear of
house. I'll zoom in a bit. As you can see in the picture, the second floor of the addition
only covers about half of the footprint of the first floor. What we have found is the addition
has some structural issues and has settled significantly over the years. And because of
this, we'd like to demolish the addition and rebuild something similar that is structurally
sound. Moving to this page. Here is a diagram. Also, my architect is here as well. So if you
have like architectural questions, they can help answer as well. The proposed addition
The proposed addition would occupy the same exact footprint as the existing structure, so because of this it does not meet the zoning codes rear yard setback requirements.
would occupy the same exact footprint as the existing
The only difference between the new and the existing structure is that the second floor of the new structure would be built over the entire footprint of the addition.
We'd also like to build a small roof deck over the second floor of the addition, which would be accessed from the third floor of the house.
And finally, this is our letter.
We met with the RCO in April and we received a letter of non-opposition.
I'm not sure if I should read it or not, but it is here.
We're fine. We're fine.
So you're only going out as far as the existing structure, and that existing structure never
met the code.
Correct.
Right.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands, Mr. Chair.
planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission
the proposed variance is consistent with prior dimensions at this property thus allowing the
appellant to support their hardship claim the city planning commission recommends that the
zoning board grant the variance thank you mi2022-007-533-119 reed street i vote yes
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
You have your votes.
Thank you very much, everyone.
Have a great day.
Right, yeah.
So, number 11, MI 2022-007-535-8843 Bradford Street.