home of the residents um um there is there there is no access to this street and one of the bigger
issues is there's no parking across the street that's that side street that does not allow parking
and um the emergency vehicles if built as proposed would not be able to access residents at this
location because it's a one-way street. And the only way to enter Armstrong Street that you see
in front of you, Armstrong and Worcester, is to go all the way around Bellfield and come up a very
narrow street. Can you show the next picture, please? Stop. This is the entrance from Bellfield
Avenue into Armstrong Street. And when they get all the way to the end, they have to try to turn,
which as you see, trash vehicles, can you go up a little bit further, please?
Trash vehicles that service the existing apartments, there is one to the left that you see, must back into the street.
The proposed condo is all the way around the other side of Armstrong Street, and that is not possible.
the trash plan that is proposed is non-existent what did he say jumping the trash off from other
locations does not define how or what matter the trash would be handled in this process
and there there is absolutely no more room for any more for another multi-family dwelling that
is proposed in this area, let alone on the corner of Worcester and Armstrong Street.
The area is hazardously saturated. And can you go down a little bit further?
a little bit further. This is one of the stop. This is what it looks like on Armstrong Strait
next door to where this project is proposed. And as you can see, there are developments
everywhere. The existing residential homes, which were referred to as the holdout homes
and Mr. Whelan's June testimony.
I'm not sure what he's referring to
that they're holding out from,
but these homes have been engulfed in development.
Clarkson Street, which is the street
that you will see in the rear
where there is the gray building
is totally saturated with cars parked everywhere.
And as you know, when there's cars parked everywhere,
there's conflict.
There is absolutely no more room in this street. It is oversaturated. In the application, the developer said that his hardship was that his project doesn't fit in the space. And yes, indeed, that is a hardship. It doesn't fit in the space. It doesn't belong there.
There is nowhere to put it. And the idea that abutting it to a residential home and displacing or inconveniencing residents of 30 years is unconscionable as far as we see it.
um go down a little bit further i'm not sure um what i have left but therein lies the community
concern um um there's no there's no room for this complex the streets are too small
um it is going to impose um very severe hardship on the residents in the surrounding community
the residents in the surrounding community because they are going to lose access they're
because they are going to lose access.
going to it's going to enhance the uh traffic burden that the community is facing la salle
and the community have reached a peaceful and harmonious place because we recognize
that we would like to see these concerns addressed we would not like to see any more development in
this area until there is a traffic study that is conducted by the streets department of traffic
impact study to determine exactly and to what extent the community will be burdened by such
a development but as you can see this is a very very very dangerous situation that is being
presented here i'm sorry chair this is tanya sunkett again i again i apologize for interruptions
but it's now 1 p.m., and we're closely getting to the time when our IT Zoom personnel will be
unavailable to support an ongoing discussion. Can I ask that Stephanie Pritkin from LaSalle
University be allowed to speak? I will yield the floor. Something new and different? If it's
something new and different, yes. Can I just testify that I haven't been involved in that
Alice and Weiss.
I have been involved in that traffic, and it is terrible.
I go to the shops at LaSalle.
Ms. Weiss, pardon the interruption.
I think that's been, Ms. Brodus has testified to the traffic congestion numerous times during her testimony.
So, is anyone else who would like to speak on this case and something new and different?
Chair, I have Onita. Onita, I'm sorry if that's not the right pronunciation. You're going to unmute yourself.
Hi, good afternoon. This is Onita DeBrady, the resident at 543 East West Street.
Yeah, but just please spell your name and I'll swear you in.
O-N-E-I-T-A-D-E-V-R-A-D-Y.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, ma'am. Please proceed.
Okay, I just wanted to go on record as I stated in the questions and answers that my family is not opposing or for the project, we are remaining neutral. And that was what my attorney was supposed to state. But I do also want to go on record and do state that personally, at this time, I also have a problem just getting out of my residence.
I literally am bombarded by traffic every single morning.
It's very dangerous for me to pull out of my driveway.
Sometimes people don't even allow me personally to come out of my driveway so I can get to work in the morning.
It takes me sometimes from 10 to 30 minutes just to get to out of out of traffic.
and the, excuse me, the traffic does go all the way from Belfield, all the way back up to Chu and
Aune, and sometimes beyond that, all the way up to Wincote and Worcester. Again, I just want to
make it clear, we are neutral, our family is remaining neutral on this project. That was a
stipulation of our agreement with the opposing council for the agreement that we're now seeking
with them, but I do want to make sure that it's clear that we're not opposing, nor are we for the
project. And Mr. Whelan, you can state that that was a part of our agreement as well,
based on the papers that were sent to us. Is that correct, sir? Mr. Whelan?
Mr. Brady, I'm happy to get into a final 30-second summation, but I want to make sure that we get
everything heard, because if we're not done in the next five minutes, I'm terrified.
You only have to answer yes or no, Mr. Whelan.
Ma'am, ma'am, I'm sorry. This is the administrator. Questions will not be asked of an attorney by just someone who's testifying. So if you finish with your testimony, we're going to move on. Thank you very kindly.
Anyone else?
We have Stephanie Pricken. I'm allowing to speak. Please unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Hello, I'm Stephanie Pricken, S-T-E-P-H-A-N-I-E. Pricken, P as in Paul, R-I-C-K-E-N. My address, I represent LaSalle University, 1900 West Balney Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19141.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
So I'm going to make this brief because I think the sentiment has been heard from the community about the extreme danger of Worcester Street and the congestion and the traffic volume.
I will just I want to corroborate that.
But I also want to bring up the concerns for emergency vehicles, ambulances, police, fire trucks, the route on.
ambulances, police, fire trucks. The route on the one-way street of Armstrong poses a
particular problem. There's a hairpin turn there. The street itself is extraordinarily narrow. There
is illegal parking in that area that remains unticketed, unsupervised. Residents from the
Armstrong Lough Apartments, which is not even fully occupied, park on the curbs, our curbs.
We have, because the street is so dense as far as traffic, we have had multiple accidents where
cars have jumped the curb and destroyed run-through fencing on LaSalle's property, which is a good
feet from the center of the Worcester Street. Of course, we have many students that walk up and
down the Worcester Street corridor because we own the property on either side of this project and
adjacent diagonally across the street. So we are opposed to the project based on the traffic flow.
There is no trash plan that I am aware of that is feasible, again, because as you saw in some of the pictures, a trash truck actually has to back up on a one-way street, which then blocks traffic for everybody else.
So again, it's mostly due to safety of students
and other pedestrian residents
that are walking up and down Wester Street.
The fact that as someone testified,
Elkins is a blind entry onto Wester Street,
which causes problems.
And the location of the one-way street on Armstrong,
which people have to pull out onto traffic
to actually make the turn.
onto worcester street either way and folks are parking and you can see in some of those pictures
right up to the stop sign on curbs residents block off parking spaces with cones because
there is not enough parking for the existing residents let alone adding on new folks into
this neighborhood thank you thank you anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
We have Sherry Cohen. Sherry, you will be sworn in at this time.
Ms. Cohen, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Thank you. My first name is Sherry, S-H-E-R-R-I-E. My last name is Cohen, C-O-H-E-N.
You swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Chairman.
Please proceed.
All right. Thank you. I want to say good afternoon to members of the zoning board.
My name is Sherry Cohen, and I'd first like to extend my personal greetings to Chairman
Frank DiCicco and Attorney Sharon Suleta.
I live a few blocks from 541 East Worcester Street and drive down that street at least
once a week on my way into Germantown, and I always experience the heavy and dangerous
congestion that currently exists on the street.
I'm here today as a community resident, as an attorney, and to provide historic context to today's zoning matter.
Chairman DeChico, from his time on City Council, might recall the historic issue in this neighborhood, which was alluded to earlier, and came to be known as the Battle of 20th Street.
LaSalle University, who we are so pleased to be working with on today's zoning case,
had wanted to completely close 20th Street between Bellfield and Olney Avenues to any through traffic
in order to protect their students from traffic and build a more cohesive campus.
20th Street had historically been a two-way street.
This neighborhood has long had a highly congested traffic pattern,
as a few of our streets are major traffic arteries germantown residents travel on chew avenue to
access i-76 and broad street central high and girls high school parents and students travel
on chew avenue to get to these schools and septa bus routes also travel on chew avenue
also upper west oak lane residents travel on nearby ogons avenue access i-76 and broad street
The Battle of 20th Street took place over a 40-year period, 4-0, 40-year period.
My late father, Councilman David Cohen, was a champion for the community over all these years, as were scores of community residents and our community organizations at that time.
The Ogons Area Neighbors Association, for which my mother served as vice president, Bill Field Area Neighbors Association.
for which my mother served as vice president, Belfield Area Neighbors Association, and Penn
Area Neighbors Association. Community meetings about this very issue place often monthly.
Many hundreds of people signed petitions in protest of the proposed closure of 20th Street.
Daily Street protests began in the early 2000s. Every weekday morning, neighborhood residents
came out to protest with many car drivers honking their support as they passed by.
So many of the residents were our community elders in their 70s, 80s, and 90s. They came out
every morning with signs demanding keep 20th Street open and explaining why they opposed the
closure of 20th Street. Then and now, we wanted and still want to be able to enter and exit our
neighborhoods in safety without danger and without encountering huge traffic bottlenecks.
The Battle of 20th Street came to a head in 2004 when legislation was introduced by our former
district council member to change 20th Street to a one-way street. The neighbors were outraged and
a hearing was held in city council. A number of hearings had been scheduled for that day and we
all arrived in the early afternoon at the scheduled time of the hearing. Yet our hearing did not start
until after 1 a.m. in the morning. Our neighbors, led by our elders in their 70s, 80s, and 90s,
had to wait until after 1 a.m. to testify. The hearing did not conclude until after 4 a.m.
The city government that day showed massive disrespect to the people of our neighborhood.
Unfortunately, this legislation passed City Council and 20th Street became a one-way corridor.
This was an act of tremendous disrespect to the people of our neighborhood, especially after a 40-year struggle.
This change to 20th Street led, as our neighbors had stated for 40 years, to increase congestion and danger on our neighborhood streets, especially on the 500 block of Worcester.
Worcester Street, as another traffic artery in the neighborhood, was frequently discussed during these years as a traffic alternative to 20th Street.
In fact, a traffic study was conducted by Orth, Rogers, Thompson, and Associates in 1987 to 1988,
which made clear that Worcester Street was the closest and most convenient traffic alternative to 20th Street.
Since 20th Street became a one-way street in 2004, traffic congestion and danger has only increased on the 500 block of Worcester Street and the surrounding streets.
Today, our community is more united than ever. As you just heard, LaSalle University is also opposed to this project.
We joined together to urge the Zoning Board of Adjustment to deny this request for a variance
as it would lead to more traffic congestion, more danger, more parking problems, and so much more
as expressed eloquently by other speakers. As an attorney, I also asked the Zoning Board of
Adjustment to follow long-standing legal precedent. The burden on an applicant seeking a zoning
variance is a heavy one. Variances should be granted sparingly and only under exceptional
circumstances. The reasons for granting the variance must be substantial, serious, and
compelling. Not one such reason has been shown by the applicant in this case. Thank you for
this opportunity to speak with you today. Thank you, Ms. Cohen, for your presentation.
you're reminding me of many sleepless nights in city council uh anyway uh is anyone else to
testify in this case no that's all chair chairman if if i may just have 45 seconds i'll i'll blow
through this as fast as i can um certainly what you've heard about today is that this is a
commercial you know commercial corridor more than half a mile away um significant traffic all
throughout an extended neighborhood, and frankly, one all through the LaSalle neighborhood, which
is not part of our project. It's not relevant to our specific site. We are offering 12 parking
spaces off street. So we are taking parking issues off the table and trying to do what we can there.
There's also extensive public transit in this area. And what you have heard is both through
the land planner, her expert opinion in her letter, and essentially from all the people
testifying today, there's been a significant change in the neighborhood and this densification
And this densification and change of the neighborhood and the multiple variances granted all around our project are actually completely in line with the 2035 plan for this neighborhood.
and change of the neighborhood and the multiple variances.
In fact, you know, LaSalle objects to development.
However, it's been the largest developer in the neighborhood for some number of years.
And, you know, we are with regard to trash, I'm not sure what people were referring to.
and obviously I didn't want to do it to slow down the process, but I object to any and all of the
mischaracterizations of my prior testimony. We have, with regard to trash, finally,
we have private trash collection, which will be required, as this board knows, because we have
more than 10 units. The city therefore requires it. With regard to our parking and plan and usage,
all of our parking will be off of Armstrong, all of our vehicular access will be, and purposely not
off of Worcester. And as the board is also aware, this all has to be approved by the streets
department. So any issues and, you know, suggestions that the emergency vehicles may or
may not be able to make certain turns, etc. That's, you know, obviously an issue that's
highly concerning, but it's not one for this board. That's a decision for the streets department
to make whether or not our project warrants that. And lastly, aside from the significant
change in the neighborhood, you have not heard today, but the property you saw is very large
and triangular in nature, and currently only zoned for a twin house, which you heard again
from the land planner is highly inappropriate for that use. So with that, I'll end as quickly as I
can. We've met all of our burdens for a variance, and I don't believe that this board has heard
anything today that would warrant it overturning its decision of granting the variance from
uh last june 16th thank you very much thank you any questions from the board
no mr chairman no no okay i think there's no one else on this to testify correct
akisha we do have one additional hand deanna cartwell as you wish chair