I don't want people to rent on.
here we have about 23 attendees you can begin as you wish thank you
Good morning. My name is Bill Berggman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Ismael Shahid, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Thomas Holloman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chair.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our executive director, Tanya Sunkett, and our board attorney, Hillary Emerson.
So before we start, here's our virtual format.
Be advised these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand
and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email
and the address of the property in question. And finally, please note the question answer box on
the screen is not for testimony or comments. Any comments should be directed to Tanya Sunkett,
our executive director. So let's start by looking at continuance, continuances in this morning's
hearing. Number nine, MI 2021 -005 -319 -610 North 11th Street, there's a request for continuance.
number 11 mi 2021 004545 636 north 11th street and number 12 mi 2021 005318 649 north 11th street
is there anyone in the virtual audience has any comments relative to these three continuances
good morning mr chair this is jason hand um mr zen jin has his hand raised i will allow him to
speak at this time thank you good morning could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
yes zen jin z h e n last name j i n uh 1617 john f kennedy boulevard suite 1838 philadelphia pa
19103 here on behalf of the applicants do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the trees i do case number 11 12 uh yes 11 12 and the third case as well uh the
north 11 properties yes um i'm asking for continuance because i was just retained i know
one of the cases have been continued once before but uh because i was just retained i am asking
again one more continuance so we can meet with the community and present to the board that's fine
sir thank you thank you all three three of these cases are continued are there any other requests
for continuances sir i do not see any hands at this time okay i also want to list two withdrawals
Number five, MI 2021 -003 -087 -2244 North 26th Street, and MI number six, MI 2021 -003 -088 -2242 North 26th Street.
Both of these cases have been withdrawn.
We're now going to go to our add -on list.
First case and only case on our add -on list. MI -2022 -000 -643 -1836 South 28th Street. I vote no on this case.
First case and only case in our add -on list.
MI -20.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
We're going to go to our regular list and we want to start with number two.
M .I. 2022 -000 -398 -1504 -South 6th Street, Attorneys Matthew Monroe.
Letter of non -opposition from the Pachon Square Civic Association.
Mr. Monroe, thank you for joining as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Bergman, members of the board.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please, sir?
Yes, Mr. Bergman.
It's Matthew Monroe, 2030 Pemberton Street, 19146 with Monroe Law.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
uh yes mr bergman um my client is masonry tattoo and i'm here today with my client uh daniel mason
they're the commercial tenant and at 1504 south 6th street um they they have a five -year lease
and uh on this property okay uh mr hallman has a few questions for you good morning counselor do
you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax
clearance, copy of the refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property, five
days in advance of this hearing, and did you meet with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes to all.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Absolutely.
All right, Chairman Bergman, members of the board, as noted, I'm the attorney on 1504 South
6th Street. This is an application for variance for a tattoo shop at 1504. My clients are two
long -time tattooers. Dan Mason is here with us today, and his business partner, Wrong Ma 'am,
is from the block. He's been tattooing since, I believe, 1992, and Dan has been tattooing since
2011. They're both highly sought -after professionals who effectively book out
their schedules months, sometimes years in advance. This is not going to be the type of
high -volume shop, understanding that this is in a neighborhood. It's very low volume.
They take clients by appointment only, but they will have posted hours of operation of 1pm to 9pm.
Activity in the stores could be very limited, but I'll just go through my exhibits for the record.
The property is currently zoned CMX1.
It was on a traditionally mixed -use block, and I have some context photos that I can show you.
here i'll show you at exhibit one we have the lease and as noted by ms emerson the the lease
we have currently was signed in 2020 but went month to month we will have my client has signed
a five -year lease in in march and we'll be able to follow up and provide a full copy of that
and should the board vote in favor of this project i believe we're going to be requesting that the
vote be held open so we can produce a copy of the signed five -year lease at the conclusion of this
hearing. Exhibit two, we have the refusal. Exhibit three, we have the application for appeal, which
was timely filed along with the public information sheet. At tab four, we have our notice letters to
the RCO and all of the near neighbors, which were all sent out. And as you can see by the
certificate of service, bulk mailing as required by the code. It was properly posted 21 days in
advance of the hearing. And here we have the letter from the East Pass Young Civic Association,
I'm sorry, the Pass Young Square Civic Association, which accurately reflects what
happened at the meeting and is a non -opposition position. And here, just to provide a little bit
of context for the property. We are down here in the highlighted blue area. And as you can see, these
um uh we are down here in the highlighted blue area and as you can see these are both um currently
cmx1 uh properties on the corner it's been rezoned as rsa5 um but and as you can see here this is the
commercial storefront where and this is a mock -up not a sign that's currently there but um there was
no sign on this application um that passing square civic association requested that they put a sign
on there as reflected in the letter. So this was just a mock -up to show what a potential sign could
look like. And on the storefront, the property itself was previously used as a market. It was
with 1502. It was a single building and it was later subdivided. So into two separate properties.
So the commercial area that they're currently proposing to use as a shop was used in the past
as a commercial lot here you can see um looking down sixth street and i believe it's from dickinson
uh at the corner there's two active businesses the laundromat and a uh in a market uh food store
uh down here is a former commercial storefront that used to be the market that was split with
what is now currently proposed to be mason reed tattoos and down here is the building itself
So it's pretty close to the corner. There have been and are currently active businesses on the block, so it's not out of context.
These are just some interior shots of the proposed space. They're just cleaning it up and getting it ready.
um the uh the the hardship here is uh the fact that we have a um uh the zoning code treats tattoo
shops like regulated businesses and it's been our position for uh some time that the businesses that
they're regulating are that it's outdated in how it deals with tattoo shops in fact the city council
recognized that and included this in it's an amendment of the code last year um so uh so
So tattoo shops can open in CMX, in certain zoning districts, they opened it, but there
were simply none available.
And as this property is on a block that wrong man grew up on in his, in his neighborhood,
this is a, it's a family friends property.
And this is something that he had access to and a lot of relationships and they had full
support at the RCO meeting from near neighbors, from people who wanted to see them come operate
and open shop in the neighborhood.
We have the tax clearance as noted at tab 8.
And here's just a sample of some of their work.
Because this is a non -controversial project,
I'm obviously open to questions from the board.
But before we do, or you can tell me
with the order you want to handle it in Chairman Bergman,
but my client can adopt.
Why don't you adopt your testimony first?
Mr. Mason, can you raise your virtual hand
so Ms. Sunkit can let you into the hearing.
Daniel Shurnoff has his hand raised by Debbie Himm?
Yes, it could be.
I'll allow him to talk right now, sir.
Please.
Could you state your name and spell for our court sonographer?
Daniel Shurnoff, D -A -N -I -E -L,
last name shernoff s -h -e -r -n -o -f -f do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do proceed okay uh uh dan did you hear uh the factual statements i made in
to the board i did to the best of your knowledge uh were they accurate they are do you adopt them
as your testimony i do thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no
Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Good morning, Chair Bergman. Ian
Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. That's last name spelled H -E -G -A -R -T -Y.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Proceed. Thank you. Good morning, members of the board. The comprehensive plan
recommends a zoning map change from RSA 5 to RM1 at this location. This existing structure as we've
seen includes a commercial tenant space on the ground floor and this proposed personal services
use is consistent with the historical use of that ground floor. So the City Planning Commission
recommends that the board grant this variance. Thank you. We're going to hold the vote on this
until we receive the updated lease. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And Mr. Chair,
This is Hillary. If you could just note that the record is closed, except for the release record is closed.
All right. Except for the lease. Yes. Thank you.
MI 2022, 000049, 1326 West Somerset Street.
MI 2022 0000.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
Letter of support from the coordinating RCO 37th Ward, RCO.
Okay, Mr. Whalen has been promoted to panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Whalen, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
You'd think after two years of this, I'd remember to unmute myself and turn on my video.
Good morning, Chairman.
Sean Whalen, W -H -A -L -E -N.
You're from Vintage Law.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
can you identify your client please in the relationship to the property certainly i'm
here on behalf of the owner of 1326 west somerset that is avali a v a l i llc right and mr hallman
has a few questions sure good morning good morning counselor do you agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes I do did you email all of the
exhibits and documents as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance
copy and refusal or referral pictures or drawings of the property five days in
advance of this hearing did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter
yes to all thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you
all right so you should be seeing just to put it this is a letter from the rco we had a well
attended meeting with them and they voted in support 14 to 0 in favor of this development
they were actually quite excited to see development here and i'll walk through the reasons
for that so again i'm here for 13 26
Let me zoom in on this for you. 1326 West Somerset, right here at the corner of Somerset
and North Park. We're just one block off of North Broad Street here. This has been a very long
vacant corner, essentially. There's vacancies at three of the corners. So again, here's a better
are showing an aerial of large vacancy over here, vacant here and here. And this kind of outlines
the basis for it. So in this neighborhood, you have our property is zoned CMX2. This property
is also vacant CMX2, and the RM1 properties are vacant. Essentially, CMX2 is not viable at this
location because, again, we're only one block off of North Broad Street. And given the size of this
property, we are 1 ,056 square feet. We actually have 16 feet on West Somerset and 66 feet on North
Park. Essentially, the only viable possible commercial use of this property being only a
block off of north broad with all of the commercial that we know is there is a corner store and
somewhat ironically the only corner at this property at this intersection with
a commercial use or with any use rather is already has a corner store at the bottom
and if we were to include a commercial use at our property it would be limited to about 450 square
feet which is really not viable for any real commercial use so again here you can see the
vacant lots around each each side of this corner again that one corner with the
ground floor commercial use is the only one that has any building or development on it
and we received two simple refusals. We are proposing a four -unit building right at the
corner. We are only allowed by right two units and we are proposing not to use the first floor
as commercial. So we would have one residential unit and a commercial unit. That commercial unit
will be converted to a residential unit if this board approves. And we would then have a fourth
we would then have a fourth residential unit, which helps make the project viable and gets
residential unit.
financing and moving this forward. And I certainly understand that a financial hardship is not in and
of itself, cannot substantiate the granting of a variance. However, under the Marshall standard
from the Supreme Court, it is a viable factor that this board can consider in granting a variance.
So, again, we just have those two variant, those two issues for refusals. We have a 14 to nothing in favor vote by the RCO. And I know somebody will ask me, so we have four units. They range, three of the units are approximately 600 square feet, and one is 750 square feet.
There is a roof deck for one of the units, and there are two two -bedroom units and one bedroom unit, or one one -bedroom unit with a den and one regular bedroom unit.
And here are the zoning plans, and I don't want to belabor the point with anyone.
Dimensionally, we are in compliance with the code and have no other issues, so I'm happy
to answer any questions that the board has, or I'll call my client to adopt my testimony.
Mr. Whalen, call your client, please.
Certainly.
Ramton Saniketam should be on the line.
If I'm allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Ramton Saniketan. It is R -A -M -T -I -N -S -A -N -E -E -K -H -A -T -A -M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Great. Thank you very much. Mr. Sneeketam, you are here on behalf of the owner of Ali LLC?
And did you hear all of the testimony that was already presented in this case?
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge and information?
And would you adopt that testimony as your own?
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
do you know further hands Mr. Chair Mr. Haggerty thank you Chair Bergman Ian Haggerty for the
Philadelphia City Planning Commission members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends a
zoning map change from CMX2 to RSA5 on this property and the entire block actually given
the lot size the existing CMX2 zoning district however would allow two residential units and
one commercial unit. We agree in accord with the comprehensive plan that the lot's location away
from the main commercial corridor presents a hardship for complying with the ground floor
commercial use requirement. However, we believe the proposed dwelling unit count of four is not
connected to the hardship and represents more than the minimum variance necessary, especially
since this is a vacant cleared lot. So our recommendation would be for the board to grant
the variance with a maximum dwelling unit count of three. MI 2022 -00049 -1326 West Summer Street,
I vote yes with proviso three units. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell,
my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you. Board,
I just have a quick question for you.
We obviously the RCO was in favor of four units, and therefore we did not provide any proviso plan or revised plans.
We don't have any revised plans to be approved by the board today.
So with this just being a use change, I would just like confirmation from Ms. Emerson, if I could, that nothing would be, no further documentation or plans would be necessary as part of this proviso.
Or in the alternative, I would offer that, you know, the fourth unit be provided, be allowed and provided at a workforce housing rate.
This is Hillary Emerson. The proviso is sufficient because we're not stamping.
We don't need we don't need additional plans or anything to stamp. You can work with L &I.
We don't need additional plans or anything to stamp.
You can work with L &I with the proviso that's been provided to submit a new set of plans at the building permit stage.
Thank you very much, Ms. Emerson.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2021 -005 -300 -1615 West Lehigh Avenue.
Brandon Savron is the attorney, letter of support from coordinating RCO Allegheny West Civic Association.
Also a letter of support from Swamp Poodle Neighborhood Association.
This is Savron Aspen from both of two panelists, sir.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Brandon Saverin, B -R -A -N -D -O -N, S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R -A -N.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Thank you.
May I share my screen?
Oh, hold on a minute.
Could you identify your client and the relationship with this property?
My client's name is Crowdcopia, LLC.
It is the owner of the property.
All right. And Mr. Howellman has a few more questions.
Good morning, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of the refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO and did you have a letter?
um yes to all those questions mr holliman i just have to revise my prior answer i do waive the
reading of the refusal but i i don't step to its accuracy um i don't think that'll be an issue in
this case but i can explain why in a moment thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you
very much okay uh hopefully uh the board is able to see the refusal um as i mentioned i represent
crowd copia llc who is a uh lender and um as i will uh show you with documentation in a moment
And Crowdcopia came to own this property because its prior owner, who was a borrower from Crowdcopia, was in the midst of a renovation of the property and fell into default on its mortgage loan.
So Crowdcopia took over through a D in lieu of foreclosure and basically embarked on a mission to stabilize the property, both physically and legally.
Um, we don't know whether the prior owner realized this or not, but the property, um, which has had, um, use as three dwelling units since we believe at least 1960 did not have a, um, valid zoning permit.
It had had them in the few, in the past, which I'll show you, but L and I deemed, um, that those zoning permits, uh, to have expired.
We're not quite sure why.
And for that reason, I'm not going to stick to the accuracy of the refusal.
We're really, we have not received a demonstration from L &I as to why the property is considered
to have the need to seek new zoning.
But in any event, we decided to go through that process, went through the RCO process,
basically took a legalization program to the coordinating RCO and obtained their support,
as I'll detail in a moment. So in any event, this is the refusal that's the subject of this case.
This was issued to my client when it went to apply for rental licenses. And as I mentioned,
was surprised that those rental licenses were refused. My client was told that it needed to
obtain a new zoning and use permit, it then went to apply for that. And that was also refused
with a basis that really wasn't detailed. But here we are. So just to give you some background,
this is an exterior shot of the property from a few years ago during prior ownership.
This is where the property is located. It's on West Lehigh Avenue between 16th and 17th.
These are pretty large properties. It's 16 feet wide, as are most of its neighbors,
but 111 feet deep. So even with a building depth that probably exceeds 60 feet, there's a very
large rear yard here, which all of the units have access to through a common door in the ground
floor. Sorry, common door from the basement. This is the front of the property after my clients
Um, this is, this is the front of the property after my clients, uh, uh, painted it, um, and, uh, have a for sale sign because they, they are lenders. I don't know if that's currently up, but their mission is really to get this in legal form and then sell it. Um, they're not in the business of developing or owning properties long -term.
This is the deed in lieu of foreclosure that I mentioned. You can see that this was recorded in December of 2020. Basically, instead of going through the formal foreclosure process through court, the prior owner agreed to execute this deed and transfer the property to Crowdcopia when it fell into default on its mortgage.
This is the most recent zoning and use permit, which is from 2013. There's plenty of others in the zoning archive. Here's one other one from the 60s. You'll see it says present use three family.
but this is the most recent one, 2013, basically reaffirming the three family use as legal
non -conforming. There have also been commercial uses in the ground floor at times, but at least
over the past 60 years, we're not aware of any point in time where the property had more or less
than three residential dwelling units. So that's what it's constructed as. And basically the prior
owner had largely renovated it but was not at the point of having renters in there to occupy the unit.
This is our letter of support from the coordinating RCO, Allegheny West Civic Association.
I attended this meeting myself with two representatives from the lender, my client.
In -person meeting, there were 38 votes of support and no opposition.
This is a letter of support with provisos from another affected RCO, Swampoodle Parcels Association.
Swampoodle also took a stance of support but proposed a few provisos here that my client has no issue with.
If the board is inclined to place one or multiple of these provisos on the zoning permit, that we're agreeable to that.
And just to give the board some context, while there are a few other single family houses on our side of Lehigh Avenue on this block, and that's what the zoning code would require in this location, it's, I believe, an RSA 5 property.
Most of the other properties that are not vacant lots have more than one dwelling unit.
And as I mentioned, that probably is due to the size of these properties.
They're large. So I won't run through this line by line, but I've attempted to list out here all of the properties from end to end on our side of the block,
how many dwelling units are within them according to the zoning archive and the manner in which
those properties were permitted you'll see that many of these properties were permitted through
the zba variance process our property was as well we believe and we are really here to have you
reaffirm that triplex use because the hardship if you were to decline to do so is that this house
would have to be gutted in favor of a single family home and that because quickly I have a
lot of photographs these were all presented to the coordinating RCO at our meeting but when my
clients took over, the property was largely complete in terms of its renovation. It's possible,
I'm speculating, but that the prior owner basically ran out of cash doing this, but it really would be
a shame to have to gut this. These are really generously sized units that could provide three
nice homes to folks in the community. So with that, I would like to bring the client's
representative on to adopt my testimony. And his name is Dan Mastropiri.
Dan, not to speak.
Could you state your name and spell it for our court reporter?
i can't hear anything dan can you hear us
sir you might need to just turn up oh your body i got it okay okay hi could you state
your name and spell for the court reporter uh it's daniel mastro pierre d -a -n -i -e -l
It's Daniel Mastropieri, D -A -N -I -E -L -M -A -S -T -R -O -P -I -E -R -I.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Proceed.
Dan, good morning.
Are you authorized to represent Crowdcopia at this hearing?
Were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony this morning?
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And would you therefore adopt it as your own testimony?
I would.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Mr. Charles Richardson with his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak at this time.
good morning mr richardson could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
good morning mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass
uh room 312 city hall richardson is spelled r -i -c -h -a -r -d -s -o -n do you swear or firm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed the councilwoman has no
objection to granting the variance for this multifamily thank you um any other questions
or comments from the virtual audience i see no other hands planning commission thank you chair
bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the
comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from rsa 5 to rm1 on this block face this proposed
use is consistent with both the prior approved use and with the comp plan recommended zoning
district so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
thank you mi 2021 -005 -300 -1615 west lehigh avenue i vote yes with provisos trash and recycling
stored indoors, no basement living, no rooftop access structures, rooftop access limited to
maintenance only. Thomas Hollum, my vote is yes with provisos. James Snell, my vote is yes with
provisos ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso thank you council thank you
m m i 2021 005067 2048 wilmot street
letter of non -opposition from councilwoman sanchez letter of approval from frankfurt neighborhood
advisory committee
yanessa santiago labrum is the owner pro se
i'll promote them to panelists at this time sir
i also have a miss eb reyes with her hand raised do i promote her as well
let's let the woman come first okay
good morning good morning hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
yes um good one of the english in spanish bueno dia mi nombre es um jinesca santiago
okay so so do you need an interpreter do you need an interpreter
okay okay hi this is tanya i know what time so we have to we have to have our own interpreter
right we have to i believe i believe she's available um try eb rea um jason i believe
that's the interpreter good thank you no i'm not the interpreter yes it's the funny good morning
i am the interpreter i'm here thank you very much could you state your name and spell for the court
reporter? Yes. My name is Estefania Rubio, E -S -T -E -F -A -N -I -R -U -B -I -O. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. Okay. Mr.
Holloman, you have a few questions? Good morning. Did you email all of the exhibits and documents
as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of the refusal or referral
pictures of the property five days in defense of this hearing did you meet with the rco and do you
have a letter buenos días han envió todos los documentos de anexos antes de la audiencia con 5
and envió todos los documentos anexos antes de la audiencia con cinco días estos documentos
incluyen prueba de propiedad impuestos copia de rechazo derivación en todos los documentos que
tienen que ver con la propiedad y yes thank you please proceed and share your screen
excuse me mr chairman yes did you want to read the uh refusal in the record
do you have it with you there thomas yes yes okay do you read it why do you no problem thank you
i'm sorry this is tanya may i intervene for a second uh the court report court report is
questioning whether she was born in
i'll double check could could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
thank you
could you have her state her name spell for the court report
jinesca podrías decir tu nombre y deletrearlo para la corte por favor mi nombre es jinesca
santiago lebron y es deletreado y y de punto n e s k a a mi apellido s a n
C -I -D .A -G -O -Lebron -L -E -B -R -O -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
¿Cura decir la verdad? ¿Nada más que la verdad y toda la verdad?
Interpreter, could you read her name and all for the record, please?
Ginesca Santiago Lebron, and the spelling is as follows.
i oh sorry y -i -n -e -s -k -a -s -a -n -t -i -a -g -o -l -e -b -r -o -n
Thomas proceed thank you mr chairman one zoning refusal the proposed addition eliminates the
required front setback must not be greater than the distance between the front line and the front
facade of the jason property with the greatest setback also must not be less than the distance
between the front line and the front facade of the jason property with the least setback
that's it mr chairman okay could you read that for her um um the uh
Señor de la Junta explicó los dos rechazos específicos.
We can continue.
Thomas, one other thing.
Could you verify that plans submitted in the exhibit packet
or the ones in a review by LNI?
Do you see that line?
Verify plans submitted.
can the applicant put the plan up on the uh um screen
she will
They seem to be correct, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
continue
okay uh my name is gynesca santiago lebron i'm the owner of the 2048 wilmore street
philadelphia pa 19124 um este es el bifuso que el departamento de licencia inspecciones envió
a mi expediter evi reyes el once um let's see el once dos no en noviembre 29
Hello, my name is Ginés Casantiago Lebron, and I'm the owner of the property for which
we receive a letter of refusal for the property located at 2048 Wilton Street, Philadelphia,
1924. That's the postal code. And this is the letter received by my expediter, Ivy Regis,
on November the 29th.
On November the 29th.
No, the 2nd of November the 29th.
Proceed.
Esta es la aplicación para la PIO, que fue enviado al zoning,
con el propósito de que se había cerrado el balcón.
Y este es el proyecto Information Form, que también fue enviado al zoning.
so here is the application for the appeal to the refusal letter that we sent to the zoning board
to inform about the closing of the balcony and this is the project information form that we also
sent to the zoning board este es el certificate of tax clearance y también está el título de la
casa con mi nombre es Gineca Santiago Lebron. And there you have the tax clearance document
certificate and also here you have the property certificate with my name on it.
Esta es la carta que nos envió el RCO
diciendo que votaron y aprobaron el request.
This is the letter that we received from the RCO
saying that they voted and approved our request.
Y esta es la carta del Zoom que se le envió a la comunidad.
And this is the letter that was sent to the community.
Estas son las fotos de la propiedad exterior.
These are pictures from the outside of the property.
Interior.
And this is the interior part of the property.
Este es del lado izquierdo.
This is the left side of the property.
Y este es el derecho.
And that's the right side of the property.
Del barco.
Ok, aquí.
Sorry, 14 minutes.
No, no necesito.
Este es el plano del balcón.
hay tres fotos
this is a plan
in the balcony
we have three pictures
y estas son
la prueba
de que se le envió
las cartas
a la comunidad
del correo
hay más de 100 cartas
que se le enviaron
this is proof
of the letters
that we were sent
by mail
there are over
100 letters
that were sent
and that would be all thank you
questions from the board uh yes mr chairman the the reason behind the refusal is that there's no
firewall between the properties on either side that's my comment mr chairman
did you mention did you tell her that there's no firewalls
Can you give me a second? She's requesting some time.
no sé qué decir
llámalos
pero a escuchar
Can you repeat the question?
can you repeat the question because she is not understanding well
the porch you made a living space out of it but you have a party wall between your neighbors
which has a fire rating you did not extend that into that porch
Ustedes construyeron un área de vivienda en la que viven dentro de ese porch que se muestra en las imágenes.
El problema es que ese porch comparte paredes con las propiedades vecinas o laterales.
El problema es que la pared entre las propiedades no tiene la calificación ignífuga de incendios que se necesita.
La tienen el resto de la división de la propiedad, pero no extendieron esa pared con esta calificación ignífuga
hasta el porch,
hasta esta nueva
área de vivienda.
Ese es el problema.
All right.
Other questions
from the board?
¿Alguna otra
pregunta de la junta?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
¿Hay alguna pregunta,
comentario de parte
de la audiencia virtual?
I do not see
any further hands
down, Mr. Chair.
No, no, nadie te ha levantado la mano.
the fact that this type of conversion has been done elsewhere on the block city planning commission
has no objection to the granting of the variance mi 2021 005067 2048 wilmot street i vote yes
thomas solomon my vote is no james snell my vote is yes
Thank you. Could you tell her, please?
in 2014.
Así que no hay objeciones
de parte de la Comisión
de Planificación
y por parte de la Junta
hay tres votos positivos
y un voto negativo.
Does she understand
she has the votes?
Entiende que tiene los votos,
o sea que fue aprobado
su proyecto.
¿Sí fue aprobado?
Entonces, sí fue aprobado.
So, it has been approved.
Thank you,
and thank you,
Interpreter, for your help.
Sí, fue aprobado.
Gracias y gracias a la intérprete por su ayuda.
Gracias, muchas gracias.
Thank you.
Interpreter, thank you.
You can log off now.
We appreciate your help.
Thank you.
Have a nice day.
Wendy.
Number seven, MI 2021 -005 -317 -2522, South 68th Street.
Letter of support from coordinating RCO, Ward 40, Republican RCO.
Joseph Consul.
mr consul has been promoted to panelists sir
hi mr consul could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
good morning
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
yes it's joseph consul that's c -o -n -s -o -l -e
do you swear firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do did you identify your client in relationship to the property
my client is stacy atkinson and she is the property owner
um mr holland has a few questions good morning council do you
Mr. Holloman has a few questions good morning counselor do you agree to waive the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy I do did you email all of the exhibits and documents
as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of the refusal referral pictures
or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing did you meet with the RCO and
did you and do you have a letter i do and i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
is my packet up yes it is okay good morning everyone joseph consul here for stacy atkinson
who is also on the call uh the property she owns is 2522 south 68th street my packet contains uh
the refusal rco and council letters rco letters photos and plans and other required documents
which i'll get to in a second first the refusal this is a referral the property is zoned rm1
and the proposed use of the property is a personal care home that's going to be independent living
for adults that need care in a minute i'll have miss atkinson explain to you her mission and who
she is and what her qualifications are but it's zoned rm1 this is a special exception use in the
rm1 district and the referral is on the screen next up the rco letters we have more of an email
it's an rco letter of support with provisos and all of the provisos are acceptable to my client
that's no sleeping in the basement, safe cam program, and a five -year referral to allow for
future neighbors to have a say if such a say should be necessary.
Approve of mailing.
Photos of the exterior of the property. The property is two stories, as noted in the letter
I just scrolled through. Some more pictures.
yard all up aerial shot elmwood 68th and we've got some photos showing
actually this is our the layout that's the basement
first floor second floor all included in the packet we've got the project information form
the deed showing miss atkinson is the owner of the property and finally uh there's a tax
clearance certificate and finally at the end um we've got uh miss atkinson's degrees um both
her college degree but also her personal hair personal care home administration um degree
from Temple University.
I would like to call Ms. Atkinson as a witness.
Ms. Atkinson, if you could raise your hand, please.
He's been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Stacey Atkinson.
That's S -T -A -C -Y -A -T -K -I -N -S -O -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Good morning, Ms. Actinson. First of all, did you hear my testimony so far?
Do you agree with what I said, and do you adopt it as your own?
Okay. Could you briefly tell the board a little bit about yourself and about your mission at the property?
Yes, a little bit about myself is I've worked in the community for many years now. I have my college degree in human services. I'm currently a LEED certified community health worker.
And my purpose and mission for the home is to pretty much ensure and combat homelessness and provide quality living for older individuals.
okay we'll rest questions from the board no mr chairman no mr council how many how many people
would be living there ms atkinson four four okay um questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman
Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Eggerty for the Philadelphia City Planning
ian hegerty for the philadelphia city planning commission
Commission. Members of the board, this is a special exception use. This proposed special
exception, we don't believe, will cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond
what would normally be expected for the use. So therefore, the City Planning Commission
recommends that the board grant the special exception. Thank you. MI 2021 -005 -317 -2522
south 68th street i vote yes with provisos no sleeping accommodations to the basement
five -year temporary special exception to expire june 1 2027.
thomas halliman my vote is yes with provisos james snell yes with provisos
yes we're providing them thank you counselor thank you board
MI 2022 -00050 -3601 North 11th Street letters of support from the second and third floor
For attendance, letter of support from coordinating RCO, Nicetown, Tioga.
Mr. David, Garcia has his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak.
We're promoting to panelists.
Is that as okay, sir?
Understood.
Understood.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Hello?
Jason, did we see a hand?
It's unmuted, but I don't think he's going to...
Hi. Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, sir. It's David Garcia, G -A -R -C -I -A, ID number 54351.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, sir. My client is a tenant, Firmini Vargas.
he owns uh will probably be located at 3601 north 11th street he operates a grocery store at the
bottom floor it is a three -story building the two upper levels are rental units that are presently
occupied and what he's seeking to do is to get a variance for purposes of selling hot and cold
take out food thank you uh mr holliman has a few questions good morning councillor do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes i do did you email all of the
exhibits and documents that required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of the refusal
referral pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing did you meet with
THE RCO AND DO YOU HAVE A LETTER? MR. HALLIMAN, I HAVE JUST BEEN RETAINED
AS COUNCIL. I REVIEWED ALL OF THE SUBMISSIONS THAT WERE MADE AND IN MY BELIEF I WOULD SAY
YES TO ALL OF THOSE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MEETING WITH THE RCO. I DID NOT MEET WITH THE RCO,
BUT I KNOW MR. VARGAS DID ALONG WITH THE APPLICANT IS ACCOUNTING OFFICE.
I THINK YOU PLEASE PROCEED AND SHARE YOUR SCREEN THERE WE GO I THINK I HAVE THIS DOWN RIGHT NOW
MR BURKE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
As I said before, this is basically a request for variances to allow for the sale of hot and cold food for takeout purposes.
My client has been at this location, I believe since 2017.
There is a, if I could just reduce the screen.
there is a lease in place which though it's a five -year lease it's coming up for renewal.
which, though it's a five -year lease, it's coming up for renewal.
If I could just get this in September of this year.
Mr. Garcia, we're still not seeing anything else.
I'm sorry.
You know, I got the wrong one.
I have two today.
My apologies.
Here it is.
There's an evidence of the refusal.
Excuse me, sir. You're going to need to unshare and then reshare once you have the correct one open.
Oh, it's not appearing?
I'm sorry.
It's not appearing. We see your email.
I apologize. Let me put my headphones on or earphones.
i'm sorry is my screen not it's not sharing we have the your email but we're not seeing
the documents we just see your email box well that's insane so i guess just go back
yes and then once it's on your screen just reshare
oh i see why okay
that's good now you see it good my apologies um well here's a notice of refusal
that was issued with request that again it's been operated as a grocery
uh there was the application for appeal what i wanted to show you was
if i could just bring this here was the lease oh here's the lease
attached as the lease. And of course, it expires in November. There is a 60 -day
notice of a continuation of the lease, which pending this hearing, it more than likely will
be extended. Tax clearance certificates have been shown. I think from my experience, usually what
you want to see is the location of the, let me get here, I'll show you the draw. It's the location of
where the vents and the oven hood is located. This is the side of the store facing Venango.
the areas that I'm circling is where the hood will be located and the let me see this is the
section here we go this again is facing Venango street this is the front of the store this would
be the the vent with the chimney as you can see here now there's photographs that show that a
little more clearly that i will show you right now uh this is probably the best the first one
is probably the best photograph the vent and the chimney will be in this area here excuse me
counselor yes sir the vent should be inside well i'm not i'm i'm sorry the exhaust uh board member
my i mischaracterize it yes the event when the hood will be inside at this location it's on the
wall facing the mango street this is probably one of the better photographs this is a close -up
but it would be more to your right where it's going to be located if you look again
at the if you could just place them based on the drawings
you'll see that here that it's on the second door there's the exhaust
and there's it appears to be outside correct it is outside facing venanga
but it's supposed to be inside no no the exhaust exit is here on the wall if i could just
there's the intake the kitchen will be right behind this wall and here you see the the exhaust
the photos if let me show you the photographs in color of the interior
Thank you.
that's exterior with the notification of the hearing but back here is where the this is the
area where the whole kitchen build -out is going to be this wall faces venango to give you some
perspective there's a picture of that uh of that sign to give you an idea behind this counter
is where the the kitchen area is going to be located this wall faces venango
the vent and the hood will all be installed in this area
and and the and the excuse me council and the and the exhaust will go where
well i'll go it'll be affixed to the wall so we could meet if i could show again in the drawing
will it go outside or outside i'll go outside again let me just thank you but if you could see here
on the
it'll be located right here
And that's just the vent for the outside.
That's just venting all those, well, part of it, I'm sorry, not the vent, it's the intake.
And here is the proposed exhaust on the drawings.
So the kitchen area will be right here.
The cooking area will all be right here.
There's been, I believe there's letters that are also attached of approval from the RCO.
i think the proviso on the letters indicates that they want um notification to both of the tenants
as to the time that the uh that the uh that the vents and the exhaust and all the repairs
without repairs but the additions that are going to be improvements are going to be done in the
kitchen area that they be notified they also have two letters here uh one is from one for both
tenants uh Mr. Angel Rivera who's on the third floor and Anisha Rowland this is Ms. Rowland's
letter this is Mr. Rivera's letter of having no objection um to the uh to the isolation of a hot
food kitchen in the area again the RCO has approved with certain provisos this is one of them um
yeah that was pretty that was pretty much it is there any questions from the board
how about would you want your uh client to adopt your testimony please uh yes if we could get
them back if we could get them on mr vargas can you come on
mr vargas mr louisca steel has his hand raised that's that's his accountant
he's at his office
Mr. Bergman
I also believe there is an interpreter
that my client has
I believe you may want to
swear her in
so have you
talked to your client
yes I have
and your client's conveyed everything to you
absolutely yes
Okay, so then we could take your testimony as an officer of the court, and that way we won't have the interpreter here, okay?
Absolutely.
So questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from RM1 to RSA 5 at this location.
However, the proposed use is consistent with the documented prior legal use
and with the physical configuration of the building.
City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variances.
Thank you.
MI 2022 -000050 -3601 -North 11th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Allen, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Vishnu Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Counselor.
Thank you, Mr. Bergman.
Thank you, members of the board.
MI 2022 -000055 -617 South 9th Street.
Attorney is Mr. Kirk.
Attorney is Mr. Kirk.
We have.
Mr. Crick has been promoted to panelists, sir.
Mr. Crick, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Justin Crick, J -U -S -T -I -N -K -R -I -K.
DO YOU SWEAR OR FURM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?
COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOUR CLIENT, THE RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROPERTY?
YES. ANDREW AND MELISSA MILLER, THEY ARE THE OWNERS OF THE REAL ESTATE.
OKAY. MR. HALLMAN HAS A FEW QUESTIONS.
GOOD MORNING, COUNCILOR. DO YOU AGREE TO WAIT THE REFUSAL AND STIPLATORS ACCURITY?
did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required such as proof of ownership tax
clearance copy of the refusal or referral pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance
of this hearing did you meet with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all the photographs
of posting came slightly after but all the required documents were submitted thank you
please mercy and share your screen thank you
members of the board we are here today on the property at 617 south 9th street
the applicants are the owners of the building having purchased the property in 2012. they are
seeking to erect a rear deck in the in the yard of their property the refusal that we have received
is basically based on the situation of the property, the physical situation
and characteristics of the property. Because the property is set between two
streets, the property is designated with two front yards whereby prohibiting
the deck structure that we are seeking in the rear yard because there is no
technical rear yard with which to put it. That is the only reason for the
refusal and essentially the setbacks we will deal with when after addressing the the location of
the deck and the front rear yard discrepancy but at this time the setback is no longer at issue
for geographic purposes the property is situated between south 9th street and south shell street
which is what gives it a through and through nature and creates two front yards to the property
This is an aerial view for reference and a little bit closer up than a photo later will show.
But as you can see, there are some roof deck, rear decks along this block, some of which, including this one, go all the way back to the rear property line at the highest level of the building, as later photos will show.
But roof decks and rear decks along this block have previously been approved and are common.
This is an RSA zoning district with some commercial on the side.
And as you'll see, our subject property directly in the middle is flanked by two roof deck slash rear deck structures that are not as far back as our proposed deck will go.
but there are some further on the block, as you'll see from photos that do extend.
Here's a picture of the front of the property on South 9th Street. Nothing extraordinary to
report. All the action is in the rear of the property. And as you'll see here, here's one
of the roof decks that goes all the way back to just about the property line, and another one
along the block that's pretty far set back. I'm sorry, not far set back, pretty close to the
property line. Our property is situated in between the two properties right here. You can see the
one neighboring roof deck and the other neighboring roof deck structure. Here is a picture of the
current existing yard where the proposed rear deck would go. And there is a door here that
currently leads to nowhere but would lead onto the deck. Another vantage point from inside looking
out the property owners have this legal approved gate at the rear of the property as you'll see
on the in the plan the intention originally shows the plan with the deck going back with a three
foot setback after meeting with the RCO we understand that they are seeking that we bring
that they are seeking that we bring it back an additional two feet to create a five -foot setback,
it back an additional two feet to create a five foot setback which is one of the conditions of
which is one of the conditions of their approval, which we are not opposed to.
their approval, which we are not opposed to. I will indicate also that the RCO did have
I will indicate also that the RCO did have statements or concerns with the footings for the deck.
the footings for the deck. However, we did not receive a refusal for this issue and we believe
However, we did not receive a refusal.
that it would be taken up when and at the time of the building permit should there be any issues
with the location of the footings and the setbacks from side yards. Again, the building permit we
believe would address those matters and concerns. Here's a copy of the deed to the property showing
ownership tax clearance and the letter from the neighborhood association again it is not opposed
if conditions are honored those conditions being an additional two foot setback so that there's a
five foot total setback from the property line but that first condition of support posts being
required 18 inches from the property line again the applicant's not necessarily opposed however
However, this is not a refusal and we would address that at the building permit stage.
There was some relatively small attendance, but approximately nine people at the meeting.
And again, that opposition that is there is with those with those intended provisos by the RCO that they would strongly support this if those two items are met, which I believe they will be met either way.
we're prepared to agree to the two -foot setback and address the footings and settings with the
building permit. The remainder of the package includes proof of mailing of the notice of the
RCO meetings and then followed by proof of the photos of the posting that were done on the front
and the rear of the property. At this time I'd like to call my client Andrew Miller to raise his
hand to adopt my testimony. Mr. Miller has been allowed to speak. Hi. Could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter? Andrew Miller, A -N -D -R -E -W -M -I -L -L -E -R. Right. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. Thank you.
Actually, before I ask that question, I would like to state one more thing, a few more things that
that the proposed deck would not increase congestion in the area, be a hardship to
neighbors, increase burden on utilities, or create any environmental concerns. And we believe that
there is a legitimate hardship here based upon the situation of the property having the two front
yards and no rear yard designation. With the rear yard designation, the proposed deck with the RCO's
proviso would meet the setback requirements and would generally otherwise not generate a refusal.
With that said, Mr. Miller, have you heard my statements to the board this morning?
And do you believe my statements to have been true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt the statements that I've made as if they were your own?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergmanian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at this location as we've seen this
is a through lot with shell street serving as the rear street for this and all the adjoining
properties on this block the proposed dimensional variance we believe is consistent with the
arrangement of adjacent properties and the city planning commission recommends that the board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022 -000055 -617 South 9th Street. I vote yes with the following
provisos. One, vertical support elements must be at least 18 inches from all lot lines as required
by the zoning code two deck must be a minimum of two feet from the existing roll down security gate
for a total of five feet from the property line on south shell street thomas howlin my vote is
yes with provisos james snell my vote is yes with proviso this is my vote is yes with proviso
thank you counselor thank you very much all right mr chairman i'm going to accuse myself yes yes
Yes, sir, Mr. Holloman. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kelman.
MI 2021 -005 -302 -7037 Large Street.
Letter of non -opposition received from the coordinating RCO,
Take Back Your Neighborhood. Nelson Emanuel Amante.
I'm sir, Mr. David Garcia has been re -promoted to panelists.
Fine. Good morning, Mr. Garcia. Good morning. Again, you would think that I would know how
to do this after a while. So you've already been sworn. Could you identify your clients
and their relationship to the property?
Yes, Mr. Bergman.
My clients are Nelson Almonte and Mabel Caba,
I believe are present.
And have you supplied all ownership,
deed, tax information, RCO information, et cetera?
As with my previous case, Mr. Bergman,
I have been recently retained,
but I've had an opportunity to review
all the submissions
so I would say yes to all
please start your case
share your screen
that's wrong
no that's not the one
here we go
Mr. Bergman, members of the panel, this is a refusal basically seeking to a variance
for the legalization of an already erected deck in the rear of a property located again
at 1737 Large Street.
The first exhibit would be the refusal itself.
um there's also tax clearance certifications that were certificates that were sent however
if you note the certificates identify my clients as tenants and they're not tenants um here's the
deed that i believe was also filed uh showing Mr. Almonte and uh Ms. Caba or Ms. Caba Nunez as
the owners of the property. The photographs, if I may, this is the rear derrick area where the
construction has taken place, the build has already taken place. If you will note in the
photographs as I show them, the size and dimensions of this proposed deck are pretty
consistent with those of the neighboring properties. There's no encroachment. There's
really no environmental issues here or hazards. If I can show you some of the other decks in this
area. Certainly the erected deck as it stands is not inconsistent with that entire area. In fact,
I believe the property next door, as you can see here, has a deck that is quite similar,
at least in the material build. Again, this is just for purposes, just legalizing
that which is already there. It certainly will enhance the appearance of this building and
certainly of the neighborhood. The RCO, I think Mr. Radinsky, has given it his blessing with
certain provisos, but that is pretty much it. Could I just get my client on to ask her to adopt
the statements that I've given the board? Please, please, get your client on first.
Yes, Mr. Almonte, Ms. Cabo, would you please come on?
And it should come out as Luis Castillo raising his hand again.
That is our accountant.
I will be with you, sir.
I've allowed him to speak, Mr. Cabo.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Nelson Emanuel Cabral Almonte.
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes proceed mr garcia yeah mr i'm sorry chair yes we would need a spelling of that name
Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
N -E -L -S -O -N -C -A -V -R -A -L
Mr. Bergman, I could spell that in English.
Mr. Burke, but I could spell that in...
Sure, good. Why don't you do that?
Sure, good. Why don't you do that?
And this would be for Mr. Nelson Cabral. It's capital N -E -L -S -O -N, Cabral, capital C -A -B -R -A -L.
Mr. Garcia, does he need an interpreter?
Well, I was under the assumption he did not, but this whole setting may make him a little bit...
Let me ask you this. You have spoke with him.
Yes, I have.
And he's communicated everything about this project to you.
So as a court officer, we will take your testimony for that, okay?
Very well. Thank you, Mr. Bergen.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands, sir.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. The comprehensive plan recommends, sorry, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location. The proposed dimensional variance is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code, and so the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI 2021 -005 -302 -7037 Large Street. I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Garcia. You have the votes.
Thank you, Mr. Bergman. Have a good day for all of you.
Thank you. Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. We'll reconvene at 2 p .m. Thank you, everyone.
All right.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's EPA hearings.
With me is Jamal Shahid, our board secretary.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Sitterman.
James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, our executive director, Tanya Sunkett, and our board attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Bill, I'm here.
And here is Carol Tenere, our vice chair.
Present.
Before we begin, here's our virtual format.
The advised proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you do knowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phillip .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if 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 testimony or comments. Any comment should be directed to Tanya Sunkit, our executive
Director. Let's take a look at continuances for the two o 'clock meeting. Number six, MI 2022 -001 -058 -322
Delancey Street. Is there anyone in the audience who has a comment or statement relative to that
continuance. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Jason Hand. Mr. David Orphanides has his hand raised.
I will speak at this time. Sure. Mr. Orphanides, please wait to be sworn in, sir. Could you state
your name and spell for the court reporter? Certainly, David Orphanides, first name D -A -V -I -D,
last name O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D -E -S. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth. I do. 332 Delancey Street, sir. Yes, just stating that I'm here on behalf of
the applicant, and we did submit a request for continuance, and I thank you very much for
granting that. Fine, that's fine. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Have a good day. All right, and I want
Number two was a request from an RCO for a continuance, MI 2021 -004397.
004397 um could mr knockamson come on too please and also the coordinating rco north central
philadelphia susquehanna cdc
mr chair members of the board alan knockamson of knockamson pc
C -A -L -A -N, last name Nockamson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Is the CDC from North Central Susquehanna here?
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
tina marie russell north central philadelphia cdc t -i -n -a -m -a -r -i -e -r -u -s -s -e -l -l
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes you're requesting a continuance yes can i ask why well the first meeting we had um we didn't have
anyone from the community there it was no one there um and as i walked around the neighborhood
I found that only one person actually got to receive the letter, and the one person who received it, she said that she didn't know what it was at first, but she happened to open it up, and when she opened it up, she didn't understand what she was supposed to do about it, but she didn't understand it, so we find a lot of people who are older, they just didn't understand what to do, and we just wanted to make sure that the community, the people who I did talk to, they said,
listen, I would like to have heard from the applicant and we'd like to give them that
opportunity to hear from the applicant. And I think, so this way it'd be fair for the people
in the community. It's a house, they're homeowners and they've been here for a long time. The
community is also zoned incorrectly. So zoned as a CMX2, but everyone there is a two story
single family houses so we also wanted more time to talk to um the city council because we talked
to planning commission and they told us we need to talk to city council we just kind of want more
the people to be more more aware of what's happening so that they can actually um feel
part of the the whatever this decision is mr knockamson yeah so mr chair we filed this appeal
on October 12th of 2021 we had an original hearing date of February 8th of 2022 we were unable to
secure a hearing a community meeting date before our February 8th uh hearing uh and so at the
request of Miss Russell uh and she we we already agreed to a continuum she wouldn't even give us
a date before February 8th I did we finally got a community meeting date of April 21st
we're essentially six over six months into this zoning expedited zoning matter um we have
there were if memory serves me right there were an individual or two from the community there
um we have miss russell has made special requests on how our notices go out to the community
including on the front page of the of our of our uh notice it says important community meeting
circled in red, please zoom in. I know that Ms. Russell also goes door to door as well with
papers to the affected area. So we can't force people to come out of their houses or hear it
even on Zoom. We've been here six months and this is a CMX2 property. We're technically under the
code, we're allowed to build four residential units and one commercial. And all we're looking
to do is repurpose a two -story structure to put two residential units this is not you know so it's
a pretty straightforward case and we had a 90 minute community meeting but i actually had to
go to another community meeting that you know which you know where i gave i said listen i can
give you an hour you know we can talk through all the issues and they you know basically made me
stay for an hour and a half so i think this has been well fleshed out and we've waited a long
time let me ask you this that was swamp poodle to meeting yes and they're actually they sent a
letter in support in respects and that's in my presentation materials where we we would agree
to provide those maximum two units not putting a roof deck on there garbage stored inside we're
agreeing to reasonable provide those okay all right so we're going to go on with the case
when it's called it'll be number two on the list so but we're going on today thank you thank you
both uh does anyone else have a continuance
um sir uh mr donald stevenson has his hand raised i have allowed him to speak
hi could you state your name and spell for the court report
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hello?
Yeah, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Stevenson?
Then it's spelled D -O -N -A -L -D -S -T -E.
Are you breaking up?
Yes, I pretty much raised my hand because it was a reference to 2028.
But if it's going to be continued, I can just hold off.
I'm from Tioga United RCO.
We were one of the affected RCOs as well.
2028 Westmoreland?
Yeah, the one missed.
That case is going to go on.
Right.
It'll go on.
My hand is raised.
That's why I could put it down.
That's fine.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Right.
Are there any other continuances?
sir i have mr jared klein with his hand raised i have allowed him to speak
good afternoon mr chair members of the board could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter certainly it's jared klein j -a -r -e -d last name is k -l -e -i -n right
you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do what case uh requesting continuance for uh 7034 north broad street it's a
MI 2022 -001060.
Hold on.
Let me get it out one minute.
Sorry.
Give me one minute.
That's number 10 on the list, Mr. Chair.
M -I -2022 -001 -060 -7034 -North Broad Street.
It will be continued.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Have a good afternoon.
Any other requests for continuances?
Mr. Jeffrey Young has his hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak, sir.
Good afternoon, members of the board.
Mr. Young, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Jeffrey Young, J -E -F -F -E -R -Y -Y -O -U -N -G, here representing the applicants for 3251 Fox Street.
You swear firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
You want a continuance, Mr. Young?
Yes, sir.
So on this past Monday, we received a letter from the RCO, Upper North Neighbors Association, asking for a continuance of this matter.
We did meet with the RCO on April 14th, had a long discussion with the RCO about our variance requests.
It seems that the RCO has some outstanding questions that they would like to ask the property owner and not necessarily the clients, the applicants of the various requests.
And so to, you know, to continue the conversation and discussion, we asked to have a continuance and we asked that the applicant be made the moving party to try to get a date as soon as we can.
Thank you. Thank you. MI 2022 0010573251 Fox Street, continued attorney moving party.
Thank you. Any other continuances?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Number one on the list, MI 2022 -001 -007 -1639 Dyer Street.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from Frankfurt Neighbors Advisory Committee
and also letter of opposition from Councilwoman Sanchez.
okay he's been promoted to panel sir thank you
mr wellin you've already been sworn could you could you identify your client and the relationship
to the property? Certainly. Again, Sean Whalen from Vintage Law here on behalf of 1639 Dyer
Street. The owner is 2, spelled out, T -W -O, River Holdings, LLC. Thank you. Our vice chair has a
few questions. Good afternoon. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership,
tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, voters under plans of the property five days
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter uh yes to all okay you may
proceed and please share your screen thank you very much thank you all right so hopefully now
you're seeing an aerial map. The red marker is 1639 Dyer Street. This is an existing corner
property with an existing three -story building on it. We are one block off of Frankfurt Avenue,
and this is a major commercial corridor right here. We're also one block off of away from Pratt,
and this is the very large frankfurt transportation center and you can see the garage up here and
the major l stop
just a little bit closer you can see we're right on the corner here of
dara street and dyer street this is homes behind us and homes all along in each direction with
like I said, major commercial along Frankfurt and major commercial development right up here off of
Dara Street. So here you can see this portion of the neighborhood, this is sort of at the edge,
but it's entirely built out. This block of Dyer Street and this block of Dyer Street right here
are all two or three story homes that are completely built out and also go into going
forward. Almost all of the homes in this area are either rentals or are already converted
multifamily. So again, just a close -up of that that'll come in. So here's the, you can see all
the CMX2, CMX3 along Frankfurt Avenue. Immediately behind us is RM1, and we are zoned RSA3, which is
single family attached housing um as is uh the entirety of all the block and basically the
properties that we'll be discussing now um and here's here's our property here you can see it's
an existing three story uh there are um multiple uh multiple additions here and i have the sorry
about that. Let's see if I can get this better. This is the gutted version of the building. So
the building is quite large. It is approximately 2 ,400 square feet in its interior, which plays
directly into the variance that we're requesting because we are seeking to change this property to
a triplex. It was purchased in very dilapidated condition and has been gutted throughout this
process. You can see everything being stripped. This is just sort of an understanding of what
the overall nature of the property was. I don't want to go too fast, but I don't want to belabor
the point. So again, we are seeking three units. Here's a copy of the refusal. We have two refusals.
One is for multifamily use, which as I said already is prohibited in the RSA 5 district.
The other is for required parking in residential districts.
RSA 3 requires you to have at least one off -street parking space for each unit.
When this RSA 3 neighborhood district was put in place, essentially every single structure in this area is deemed nonconforming at this point because none of them have off -street parking.
Not a single one of the houses up and down the street. As the chair already mentioned, we have a letter from the Frankfurt NAC. I will leave it here.
They did not have an issue with the three units, but they did have an issue with the fact that we were offering no off -street parking, and they were concerned that parking is already an issue in the neighborhood, as it is in most neighborhoods, and so they were opposed to the project because we did not offer any parking spaces.
any parking spaces. Pardon me, Council, what about the egress?
I'm sorry. Doesn't it say, too, they have a concern about the egress emergency?
Oh, yes. So, let me see. Sorry, the second sentence. Yeah, I had the site photos up for you.
and um it uh it closed on me and i apologize for that so let me see if i can
pull up because it'll be more obvious if i can get these up there we go
everything's easier with technology until it isn't
We lost you.
That was a helpful photo, wasn't it?
It's very helpful.
Are we ready to vote on it?
All right.
So what these photos are is I'm just showing you contextually.
We can't see it.
We can't see it.
You're definitely going to have to unshare and then retry.
We only see like a white strip down the center.
It's very strange.
There you go.
Did that work?
Yeah. Interesting. So this again, I'm standing right here taking this photo. 1639 Dyer is right
on my right. And I'm just looking across the street. It's just showing photos of this is 1639
Dyer right here. And it just shows again, it's all two and three story existing homes, no vacancy,
no vacant lots on these two blocks right here. That would be the relevant neighborhood.
Um, so again, the, uh, the neighbors, uh, they did not raise any questions about the, um, egress during our meeting.
Uh, so we were surprised to see it in their letter, but I understand their question.
Uh, the egress, there is a back stairwell with, uh, egress out the back.
So there is a front stairwell and a, and a rear stair stairwell.
and obviously we would have to if we had a triplex here we would have to meet all building
code requirements which would require us to have sufficient egress for anyone in or out of the
property but you can see there's been a number of additions to this property over time back here in
the rear so we actually have a very large existing property let me see and then these are
that's not i'll just leave it there because that'll be the most helpful for you to see
um so again we have uh the the two refusals i'll start with the parking refusal um because again
every single house in this neighborhood has uh every single building in this neighborhood has
no parking no off -street parking there's no room for off -street parking and there are no rear
alleyways of any sort. So it's actually not possible to include a rear parking space. And
even if we were asking for a single family home at this point in time, we would generate the same
refusal. So the issue first and foremost is our property, according to the city Atlas map is 14
and a half feet wide. When I actually measured it on Atlas, I came to 15 feet wide. Regardless,
it doesn't really matter because under table 14 -803 -1, as the board probably knows,
a required parking space in the city has to be eight and a half feet wide by 18 feet deep.
And therefore, just dimensionally, we can't fit even a single parking space off street because
it would be wider than our property, and we'd either have to park hanging out over the sidewalk
or going into our neighbor's adjacent yard, which certainly would not be allowed.
Additionally, with regard to the parking variance necessary, we would be required to put in a curb
cut. There is no curb cut at that location now. Let me see if I can go back to, here you go. You
can see cars parked up and down uh this is dara street again no parking is allowed on a front
access street so dyer street which goes this way no parking would be allowed obviously we'd have
to park into the front of our building which wouldn't be possible anyway um so any parking
would have to be accessed off of this uh this side street however under zoning analysis from
LNI, even the side street on a corner is considered a second front street, and therefore we would not be
Even the side street on a corner is considered a second front street, and therefore we would not be permitted to, by right, put in parking even if we asked to.
Additionally, in the RSA 3 district, we can't put in parking because that parking would be in our required rear yard and therefore would be also generating a refusal.
So, in essence, we would lose street parking, add a curb cut, put in off -street parking, and all that would do is generate about three additional refusals that aren't on our current application.
And contextually, we are in line with the rest of the neighborhood, which is all mostly multifamily and single -family rentals, again, none of which have even a single off -street parking space.
So that's the first refusal. The second refusal is, as this board is well aware, in the RSA 3 residential district, that's a single -family district, we are seeking multifamily living.
first and foremost as I showed in the zoning map if this property was in the RM1 district which we
are immediately adjacent to we would be by right and actually not have to come before this board
for a hearing and secondly and most importantly you have you see all of this block and the next
block over, these two are really the immediate blocks right next to Frankfurt, they are all
zoned RSA 3. However, if you look at an analysis of the Dyer Street properties on the two blocks,
you can actually pull together, there are more than 70 properties on the two blocks,
and uh only 39 remain single family um and i could walk through this but we have attached for
the board's uh care if you want the official records and permits and rental licenses for
all of these properties if necessary if the board has any questions but in summary
only 39 of those of these two blocks remain single family this block here on both sides
and this block here on both sides and actually notably of those 39 15 are actually have active
rental licenses so you really only have what 25 home you know single family homes remaining
out of over 70 houses built here. You actually have 19 two -family buildings. You have six
three -family buildings, two four -family buildings, and you have a five -family building and a six -family
building. And especially poignant for our case is that, again, this is for 1639 Dyer Street.
So if you look at just the most immediately adjacent properties to us, 1635 Dyer is a single family rental, 1637 is a two family duplex, 1641 on the other side of us is a three family building, 1643 is a three family building, and that five family building, the one on the block is actually at 1647.
And the photos of those properties are also in the record, should the board have any interest.
So what you can see here and what Pennsylvania case law makes very clear is that a variance can be substantiated solely by the changing of a neighborhood.
And simply because you have an underlying zoning district, if the fabric of the neighborhood in the context of the neighborhood is fundamentally changed, that does warrant a variance.
And here we would argue that we are asking for three family. Again, most of the two families in the neighborhood that I'm referencing here, and I can show you if you want to get into it, are actually two story buildings.
We are a three -story building, and we're a corner lot, which makes us a much larger building.
And my corporate representative will testify more in depth to some of this.
But essentially, our building is just so large that it's not appropriate either for a single family, which is not contextual for the neighborhood,
or for a two -family because you would have two absolutely enormous, four, maybe even five -bedroom units in this property.
So we intend to and we'll have zoning plans drawn up once the board approve to whatever number of units.
You know, once the board approve whatever to whatever number of units the board approves, we do not have plans now, but we do have we have done a preliminary analysis, which would show we have, like I said, about 2400 square feet in the interior, which all right now is completely gutted because it had to be gutted and stabilized because it was in such bad condition.
and it needed to, that would generate basically two 700 square foot units and a 950 square foot
unit. So already in this building, we're talking about extremely large multi -bedroom units,
which would be appropriate again for families and neighbors to stay in. The target price,
if this were to open today, and we all know that it is not opening today, would be between $1 ,000
and $1 ,400 per unit based on the number of bedrooms. So again, this is being priced
in accordance with the neighborhood and the ability to build in there. And most notably,
the reason why I bring up the existing building is, again, as this board I'm sure knows fully,
an applicant in order to become compliant with the code cannot be required to demolish any or
all of its building in order to get that code compliance. So, you know, we certainly understand
and appreciate that the RCO was frustrated about the parking issue. However, we believe that,
you know, the parking issue certainly is the situation. It is the normal condition here,
But based on an analysis of all these blocks, you can easily see that the entire fabric of this community has been changed to a multifamily neighborhood, and we can't dimensionally put in those parking spaces anyway.
Again, we believe that this is the least minimum variance because the building size itself is not feasible for less than three units.
Obviously, four units would be better, but we purposely went with three units because
we are trying to meet the least, what we believe to be the least minimum variance here.
And additionally, you know, in order to justify cost -wise the feasibility of an entire gut
rehab of a property this size and renovation of it, you know, we need three units in order
to justify that overall cost.
The final piece for a variance would be the health, safety, and welfare, and making sure that there's no detriment to the health, safety, and welfare at this property.
We have, you know, I think made that clear through testimony I've already provided, but essentially there's no curb cut.
this building was vacant for a long time prior to my client's purchase of it, and it would be
completely contextual with what is already in the neighborhood. So with that, I'm happy to answer
any questions, or I can call Solomon Silber to testify. I call Solomon to testify. All right.
so silver has been allowed to speak sir would you state your name and spell it please for the
court reporter oh yes absolutely it is solomon silver s -o -l -o -m -o -n -s -i -l -b as in boy e -r
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed all right and uh before i get there uh i did i do apologize i misspoke earlier
uh there was an additional transfer of this property from two river holdings llc the owner
is uh ludlow l -u -d -l -o -w brothers llc and that's in a recorded deed from late last year
So, Mr. Silber, are you here on behalf of Ludlow Brothers LLC?
I am indeed. Yes, sir.
All right. And did you hear all of the testimony that I already provided in the case today?
I did.
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief?
Absolutely. I do believe that.
And would you adopt that testimony as your own?
I would adopt the testimony. Yes, sir.
Thank you. And now, Mr. Silber, I just have a couple of questions for you on a few of the things that I think more appropriate for you to discuss.
You and your companies manage and own more than 15 properties in this immediate vicinity, correct?
Yes, that is correct.
And are all those, generally speaking, are all those existing buildings that were rehabbed or were they ground up construction?
Those are all existing buildings that we've done very careful.
Those are all existing buildings that we've done very careful rehabs of.
We're definitely a believer in this area.
And as such, I've tried to do pretty high level rentals because we believe in the neighborhood.
We want to be there for a long time and we want to provide great housing to the community.
That was our intention.
Thank you.
And are all of those 15 plus properties that you own and manage, are they all rentals?
They are all rental properties.
Correct.
And are they all one, two, three bedroom units or do you have other unit sizes?
No, they're all, as you said, the biggest of them would be three bedroom units.
Obviously, some are smaller, but yes, one, two or three bedroom units.
Correct.
Okay. And approximately the average size of your unit, what would it be? Six, 650, seven,
eight? Where are you? Yeah, the average size is about 650 square feet per unit. Obviously,
the more rooms are bigger, but that's the average size, 650 square feet. Okay. And you heard me
already testify that generally three units in this property would be approximately 650 to 700
square feet for two different units, and then 950 square feet for a third unit, correct?
Yes, that is correct. And, you know, as I heard you testify to, and I just want
to reiterate, it would be possible architecturally to put four, but we thought that
appropriate to the neighborhood, which is why we went for three, because that's the minimum number
of units that allows us to renovate the building in the manner that we want to do so.
Right. And just to finish that thought off, this building would be simply far too large for just two units, in your opinion, correct?
Far too large. Yes, absolutely. I mean, it's a building that is, in my opinion, tailor -made for the three, actually.
I think that's exactly what it's supposed to be and would lay out comfortably and spaciously for those three units, for those three occupants.
Thank you. And if you were constrained only two units, even though we believe three units is the minimum number necessary, do you think that two units of four or five bedrooms each would be able to be rented here? Or would that make it extremely difficult for you to rent in this neighborhood?
I think it's tough in this neighborhood. We like to obviously keep to the three bedroom
and it enables families and couples to occupy the units and have that be economically feasible both
for the occupants as well as for the ownership. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Silber.
uh with that question yeah questions from the board yes mr chairman counselor do you plan to
use the basement for living space uh mr holloman uh i knew this question was coming uh we would be
happy to stipulate that there will be no bedrooms in the basement um we do anticipate that there
will be you know washer dryer facility uh something of that sort in the basement so i
want to say i don't know if you would qualify that as living space um there may also be like
a bonus room but we can certainly stipulate that there would be no bedrooms uh in the basement
thank you the questions from the board no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission good afternoon david vecto f -e -c -t -e -a -u
with the city planning commission do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed thank you sir mr chairman members of the board the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at this location
Due to the configuration of the lot, the requirement for off -street parking would cause a clear hardship.
There are a significant number of duplexes on the block, so two dwelling units would seem to be the minimum variance needed for this lot.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use variance with a maximum of two units and no off -street parking.
Chair, if I may just respond very quickly.
We do not disagree with the Planning Commission's analysis for most of the units and most of the properties on these two blocks, which are duplexes, but that's because those are two -story units.
The three -story units are the ones that are actually larger, and that's why we're asking for the third unit and not limiting our request to just a duplex.
uh the third unit and not limiting our request to uh just a duplex thank you thank you
Thank you.
mi 2022 001 007 1639 dyer street i vote yes three units uh proviso no bedroom in basement
my vote is yes with proviso thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shaheed yes with proviso
thank you thank you very much
mi -2021 -004 -397 -2028 west westmoreland street alan knockamson is the attorney
um letter of support from swamp poodle rco which was not the lead rco um
okay mr knockamson has been promoted to panelists sir
Mr. Nockleson, you've already been sworn.
Is he on?
He should be.
He'll be coming.
Good afternoon, members of the board.
Alan Nockleson, A -L -A -N, last name Nockleson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N, 123 South Broad Street,
Suite 1600, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19109.
I believe you've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Wise Holding Group, LLC.
And with me today in the virtual audience is Brian Wise, the member of that organization.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockamson.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter uh yes in all respects other
than we do not have a letter from the coordinating rco we do have a letter of support from one of the
rcos for this property though okay you may proceed and share your screen thank you
Again, good afternoon, Alan Nockmson of Nockmson PC and I'm here to present 2028 West West
Moreland.
We'll go over our packet of materials, first a notice of refusal, then the correspondence
we did receive from Swampoodle Neighborhood Parcels Association, maps of the area, photographs
of the property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings, proof that we met with
the community on April 21st, our deeds to the property showing that Wise Holding Group LLC
is the owner of the property, our application for appeal that we filed to the zoning board
regarding this matter, and our certificate of tax clearance. Along with me in the virtual
audience is Brian Wise, an owner's representative, and he will adopt my testimony. I'm taking
any questions from the board uh as well uh notice a refusal so this is a cmx2 property
uh and we are on the 2000 block of west west moorland uh and we're between 21st and 20th
essentially uh and allegheny and ontario as the major streets uh the commercial corridors that
are nearby are Hunting Park Avenue, Broad Street. I saw a number of activities on 22nd Street and
Allegheny. We're here to propose two dwelling units in an existing two -story structure. Again,
this is a CMX2 property. Given the last square footage of 2 ,161 square feet, as of right, we can
build a commercial and four units but we're only looking to do two residential units uh we did
meet with the north uh with the community on april 21st north central philadelphia sesquahanna
community development corporation uh was the coordinating rco we never did receive a letter
from them regarding the results of that community meeting we did receive the results though from the
swamp poodle neighborhood organization a letter of support with certain provisors all trash you know
all trash and recycling stored indoors except on collection days we have no objection to that
limit of two multi -family units we have no objection to that no basement of living just
No basement and living. Just like the other proposal that was heard just before us, we have no intention to put bedrooms in the basement. We would have no issue with the proviso, no bedrooms in the basement, but similar to the matter before us, we do plan to have our washer and dryer down there, maybe some storage and other items.
Just like the other proposal that was heard just before.
So if there was a proviso, we would say no bedrooms in the basement.
And then the fourth proviso would be no rooftop structures and rooftop access limited to maintenance only.
We have no plans to put a rooftop there. It's not part of our application.
But if the board seems so inclined to also limit the erection of a rooftop at some point, we have no objection to those provisos.
So again, there were four provisos, basically trash stored indoors, limit to family dwelling, no basement living where we would say no bedrooms in the basement, and no rooftop structure or rooftop access.
Maps of the area.
So this is our property.
Again, we're in West Westmoreland.
This is all CMX2, but you'll see from the pictures there's no commercial nearby on this side of the block.
So again, just a Google map perspective.
Other than the corner property here at 21st and West Westmoreland, there's no commercial on West Westmoreland.
Most of the commercial is down here on Allegheny or east to Broad Street.
And then you also have around here, Hunting Park Avenue.
And then on, I believe, 22nd Street, if you go further down, you would see more commercial.
So really what we want to do is support the commercial corridors by not redirecting commercial here at 2028 West West Florida.
For regards to the property. So this is our property. It's a two story structure.
You know, again, this is the undue hardship, right, to require us to put like commercial on the ground floor would be almost impossible and cost prohibitive.
It would be also out of character with this portion of the neighborhood.
again these are all two -story structures we don't even want to build upwards we just want to
repurpose this two -story structure and put one unit on the ground floor and one unit on the
second floor and that's it although as of right we could demolish this structure put a commercial
unit mid -block on a two -story block and build upwards which we don't on this very sizable lot
2 ,161 square feet. But as you can see from the pictures to the right of the property on West
Westmoreland, all commercial in nature. Our side of the block is two stories. The other side of
the block looks like three stories. West Westmoreland to the left of the property, again,
no commercial activity other than that one corner property, which is not uncommon because most times
in these type of neighborhoods, you will have a commercial component or some multi -family use
on the corners like this. And then Wise Holding Group is owned by Brian Wise. He's been in the
industry for well over a generation. He's also a realtor who can testify as to the feasibility of
having a commercial unit or lack thereof in the structure. But he renovates properties throughout
the Philadelphia region. He is actually from this area, the Nicetown Tioga area. So he's one who
knows this neighborhood very well. His mother still lives in the community as well. But I always
like to give examples of work product of my clients. So a sample kitchen, a sample bathroom,
another sample bathroom, a sample kitchen. Again, he uses really nice products. What he's hoping to
do is that he invests a lot of resources in Tioga, Nicetown Tioga. He wants to improve the
housing stock of where he grew up. And then just sample bedrooms, living areas, things like that,
hardwood floors uh floor plan it's very simple you walk up a flight uh you know the front steps
go left you have unit one uh it also has a basement area um as you can see this is where
the washer and dryer is downstairs but we don't intend to put any bedrooms down there so we have
no objections to no bedrooms in the basement you go up a flight of steps and you have another unit
Again, no roof deck. You know, trash would be stored indoors. Each of the units have its own ventilated trash room as well to make sure that is responsibly stored.
Meeting notice. We met on April 21st. As you can see, this is something that's specific that Ms. Russell asked us to do.
um but on the front of the envelope well it's a trifle but the front of where the address is
it says important community meeting please zoom in and we actually have it in red highlighted
in color to make sure that we direct the people saying that essentially this is not jumping out
to make sure that we direct the people saying that essentially this is not junk now right and
right until
to alert them the fact that this is going to be pertaining to a community meeting nearby
there are 142 addresses that were notified according to the city planning commission
these are the addresses and this is our proof of mailing we mail we try to mail these notices
what we do two weeks beforehand so our meeting was the 21st we mail it out the 7th
and proof of mailing. Our deeds of property showing that Wise Holding Group LLC is the
owner of the property. Our application for appeal for this property, as you can see,
we filed it on October 11, 2021, which is over six months ago.
And our certificate of tax clearance showing that they are in good standing with respect
to that property. With that being said, I would ask that Mr. Wise virtually raise his hand.
He can be sworn in, adopt my testimony, and then we can take any questions for the board.
Mr. Wise has been allowed to speak. Mr. Wise, could you state your name and spell it for the
court reporter? Yes, Brian Wise, B -R -I -A -N, last name W -I -S -E. Right. Do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed. Yeah, Mr. Wise,
you heard everything I stated today. Yes. And is it true and correct? Correct. Do you adopt it as
your own testimony? Yes. Okay. And specifically regarding the viability of a commercial unit
mid -block on this two -story block, in your professional opinion, as a licensed realtor,
what's the viability of having that commercial unit there? I mean, in my opinion, it just
wouldn't make sense to do commercial right there, even though the zoning code states that that can
be done by right it wouldn't make any sense there okay what would there be a commercial unit be
viable mid -block there no what questions from the board no no mr chairman no mr chairman
all right questions or comments from the virtual audience
sir i have miss tina marie russell with her hand raised i have allowed her to speak
Hi. Ms. Russell, you've already been sworn. Just state your name and then you can testify.
Sure. Tina Marie Russell, North Central Florida of the CDC. First of all, we want to say thank
you very much for hearing this case in light of the confusion with the continuance. So this is a
zoned, this area is zoned incorrectly. As you can see, as Ms. Nakasim indicated, it's a CMX,
in a residential two -story, completely home -owned, majorly home -owned block. So it's so out of
proportion. We as RCOs, after the meeting we had on April 21st, was so confused by it that we
actually went to planning commission and we talked, we had to do some research because
none of us had ever been um apprised of a situation similar to this so that's part of the
delay and um one of the things that struck us was that we did not have anyone from the community
there so i had out you know some of us had allocated that we would go out the next weekend
and we would go and knock on doors well it rained as everyone can remember cats and dogs
the wind was carrying on so we didn't do it when i got out there started knocking on the doors
I realized that when I let the community know what the situation was, it wasn't as if they
were unopposed to the two story with the two apartments, but they are unopposed to,
but they were opposed to, they just wanted to meet the owner. They just wanted to have that
time to say, hey, I didn't understand what was going on. Because most of these people are older
people. They're not younger. They don't understand. They didn't get it. No one's just their first
time actually seeing us this type of a variance coming to their neighborhood um and all they
wanted was a meeting so you know it wasn't as if they said no they just said we wanted a meeting
they wanted to meet the owner to make sure that when they put in these departments that they
actually have an understanding of who this person is so i'm hoping going forward that the owner will
that brian will meet with these individuals in the community so they get to meet them because
that's what they wanted. So that's why they asked for the meeting. Okay. So with my door knocking
that I found out the Sunday just passed on Mother's Day, so when I went door knocking,
they have no problem with the two apartments. So therefore, us as RCOs also have no problem
with the two apartment residents. We just want to make sure that going forward,
We protect this community who's rezoned to this, or they're incorrectly, the variances, I can't think of the word right now, but they're not correct.
The variance is, well, I can't think of the word right now, but they're not correct.
CMX 2 is not what this area is.
CMX2 is not what this area is.
It should be an RSA 5.
So we're going to try to work to make sure that it gets done by following the instructions
from the Planning Commission.
So overall, we don't have a problem with this variance, and we just wanted to make sure
that the community had the opportunity to meet the owner.
Thank you, Ms. Ruff.
Thank you, Ms. Ruff.
Provisos are similar to swamp poodles.
We just want to make sure that it also says
that there's no bathroom in the basement.
It's clearly just the laundry.
And there's everything else in the balconies,
the exteriors to stay as in common with the community.
I think that was all the provisos we have.
And I think one of the other RCOs,
Tayo, would like to speak as well.
Thank you very much for calling in.
is there any other comments from the virtual audience
i have a mr donald stevenson with his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time
hello hi mr stevenson i think i swore you in already right yes you did okay could you state
your name and then just start testifying yes donald stevenson uh from tayoga united
it rasheed all right we're one of the affected rcos as well and uh everything that uh north
central uh miss uh russell pretty much said we agree with um and the proviso with no basement
living and no bathroom in the basement um and uh we pretty much want to agree with that i just
wanted to also state like this is very complex because like you said this is it's all this
CMX2, but if you look at the structures and the housing around it, it's really RSA5. So there is
a mistake. And that's why we also wanted a continuance in the beginning, because the
community is really not aware of what's going on and how everything is zoned. And like Mr.
Knocklemson said earlier, like, you know, realistically, they can put commercial at the
bottom and units above, and the community is not aware of that. And that's why we wanted the
continuation so the community could be aware that their neighbor can technically do that by right
as well but we also wanted to get city council involved as well as the planning commission
because something has to be done and that's all i have thank you all right thank you thank you
very much for calling in is there anyone else in the virtual audience um yes sir mr charles
richardson with his hand raised i have allowed him to speak at this time mr richardson i believe
you've already been sworn just state your name and testify please yes sir charles richardson
from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room 312 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting this variance.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience who wants to testify?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in the zoning
to residential single family at this location.
the requirement for a ground floor commercial unit presents a clear hardship and conflicts
with the recommendation in the comprehensive plan the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the use variance uh mr jordan just one point just to stress um i know
there's a delineation we just want to make clear that we have no objections to no bedrooms in the
basement um we would like to you know the ability to to put a washer and dryer and have you know
potentially some living down there, but no bedrooms. Thank you. MI 2021 -004 -397 -2028
Westmoreland Street. I vote yes with the following provisos. Trash and recycling stored inside.
No basement living, no rooftop access or structures, no rooftop access limited to
maintenance only. Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso.
Mackamson, could you stay on please, Stu? Sure.
MI 2021 009. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Hillary. Sorry, Tanya.
Yeah. We just had a request to call number four next due to a time constraint.
Can we call number four and then we'll come back? Is that okay, Mr.
Nockamson? Of course. No, I'm always funny to comment. Okay. All right.
Thank you. We had a, we had a time constraint for our number four.
Okay. All right.
MI 2022 -000 -480 -2623 Westerod Avenue.
Melanie Lacey is the attorney.
Letter of support from Brewery Town
Chargewood Community Civic Association.
Ms. Lacey has been promoted to panelists, sir.
Ms. Lacey has been
promoted to panelist, sir.
Ms. Lacey, could you state your name and
Ms. Lacey, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Good afternoon, members of the board.
Melanie Lacey.
I'm with Claire Harrison Harvey in Brandsburg, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
M -E -L -A -N -I -E, last name L -A -C -E -Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you state who your client is in the relationship to the property?
Yes, I am accompanied by Peter Hoban, who is a representative for the tenant, Sir Cleta LLC.
Okay, thank you.
Our vice chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Hi, good afternoon.
Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
rco and do you have a letter yes all of the above okay great you may proceed and share screen are
you seeing my screen yes great okay as mentioned um my name is melanie lacy i'm car harrison and
i'm here on behalf of circletta llc um with reference to their application um for special
exception for a takeout restaurant, and it's for an ice cream shop specifically located at 2623
West Girard Avenue. The applicant, as I said, is seeking the special exception, and they received
a referral letter on January 14th, which I'm showing here, of 2022, because the takeout
restaurant use requires ZBA relief in the CMX 2 .5 zoning district. And I'll clarify that
the applicant previously received a buy -write permit for a prepared food shop on December 6th
of 2021, which I've included here. But the motivation for this new application for takeout
restaurant is to properly seek approval for a walk -up service window that will allow for
continued operations during any future restrictions associated with COVID outbreaks and to protect
staff and customers from exposure. So the service window would allow the ice cream parlor to serve
patrons outside. And this flexibility is particularly important as many small businesses
have struggled to survive under these circumstances. So the existing permit for the prepared food shop
it contemplates limited indoor seating. And this application would really be perfunctory.
The ice cream parlor hasn't changed. The use hasn't changed. We're simply adding that one
component, which is a takeout window, as I described. And the applicant is really seeking
to do things the right way in converting from a prepared food shop to the takeout restaurant use
to accomplish this end. So I did show briefly that we met with the RCO. The application was
supported with overwhelming, it received overwhelming support.
You see there's 44 people in attendance
and most voted in favor and we have the letter as well.
Here's a zoning map, it's zoned CMX 2 .5.
This portion of Girard Avenue is predominantly
commercially zoned.
Here is an aerial and street view.
and i'll just briefly go through some of the photos um i've circled the specific units of
ground level which i'm hovering over here if you can see next to the pharmacy
i think okay and the surrounding area once again close -up view posted notices
and this is a rendering um showing the takeout service window that they would like to install
and on in here's a floor plan and i'll just go through it very briefly ice cream parlor will
take up the entire first floor as mentioned approximately 970 square feet trash will be
stored internally at the rear of the building near the alley in the back um applicant will
commercial trash collection. There's a small office behind the kitchen area. Kitchen would
be used only for ice cream production, no cooking on the premises. And there's a flex space that
would be used in the future for kids birthday parties when that becomes appropriate to offer.
So at the front of the building you can see closest to the sidewalk is where the takeout window would
be located as well as the sales area inside.
But the intent is for customers to order
but the intent is for customers to order and pick up their purchases from the outside
and pick up their purchases from the outside at the window.
at the window um the applicant is you know hoping to open um the summer if possible if all goes well
with this application so that summarizes my testimony um now i'll have my client peter
hoban adopt the testimony so uh peter if you'd raise your hand um busy we'll promote you to the
panel he's been allowed to speak hi mr hoban could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter. My name is Peter Hoban, P -E -T -E -R -H -O -B -A -N. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. Thank you. Peter, did you hear my
testimony that I provided to the board this afternoon? Yes, I did. Do you affirm that my
A permit of the property showing that it has a significant multifamily history.
Here it showed that it was actually three residential units and a vacant commercial store.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area.
Also, the photograph will show that this property has been a vacant lot for some time, and partly probably because of the zoning classification.
maps of the, excuse me, architectural plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, our application
for appeal to ZBA, our deed to the property showing that Kumas Homes LLC and IRA Development
LLC are the owners of the property, our certificate of tax clearance showing that the property owners
are in good standing with respect to this property. And with me is Mr. Eze, the owner's
representative who will adopt, testify and adopt my testimony. And of course, we'll take questions
from the board after that. Notice the refusal. So this is an RSA 5 property, but you'll see from
the history of what we pulled from the zoning file, this is RSA 5 in name only. It has significant
multifamily use history. And we're looking to put three units in this 1 ,200 square foot structure
lot. And the only refusal we have is for the use. There's no dimensional variances. It's a corner
property. You'll see that we're trying to responsibly use it in terms of our trash storage
by storing trash in the basement, excuse me, not in the basement, in the rear yard.
So the letter of non -opposition, again, just to point out, it's non -opposition. So again,
we did meet with the community uh there was no opposition at the community meeting and then they
waited some time to hear from both the rcos that were affiliated with this property as well as
anyone in the surrounding area and no one opposed this project that's why the council member the
council president uh issued that letter of non -opposition to this project and again just
Again, the zoning permit from 1952, this was a three -family plus store, and then it became a three -family plus vacant store.
So it does have this significant multifamily history, and we're only looking to put three units rather than three units plus a commercial there.
And then maps of the area.
Again, you'll see that we're at the corner of 24th and Montgomery.
There is a significant commercial corridor on Ridge Avenue as well.
So we're looking to support that commercial corridor by way of this increased density.
And as you can see, here is all the commercial use.
Also, there is a significant commercial corridor on Cecil B. Moore that we're trying to support as well by way of this project.
Photographs of the property, as you can see, we're just a vacant lot at the corner of 24th and Montgomery.
This is from actually Montgomery Avenue. We went on Google Earth to see the history of this property, and we went back as far as September of 2014, showing that this has been a vacant lot since at least that period of time.
So it's almost a decade. This has been a vacant lot.
And then here are pictures from Montgomery, 2348 West Montgomery Avenue from 24th Street.
West Montgomery to the right of the property, as you can see, there's vacant lots of pressure
streets. West Montgomery to the left of the property, again, significant vacant structures
throughout. North 24th Street to the right of the property, again, significant vacant lots.
And then North 24th Street to the left of the property, again, a lot of vacant lots. We're
trying to fill in this part of the community, hoping that a significant corner property will
help that walk. And then it's not uncommon to have RSA 5 properties that are multifamily structures.
So we looked and researched and we found 1737 North 23rd Street, 1733 North 23rd Street,
1723 North 23rd Street. And again, this property is being developed by Kumas Homes. Kumas Homes
has been in business for almost 20 years.
They're headquartered in Point Breeze
on Point Breeze Avenue.
They are not just property owners.
They also do the general construction
and the property management.
But just this is examples of some of their product.
Again, hardwood floors, that's the living area.
Give you an example of a kitchen with their kitchens,
stainless steel appliances, granite cano tops.
Again, another example of their kitchens.
and then their bathrooms as well and bedrooms another bedroom another bathroom so these are
our plans and drawings as you can see this is a corner property each unit
As you can see, this is a corner property.
Each unit is going to be its own floor.
Let me just see, I'm trying to find where it is right there.
All right, so these are our floor plans.
I just wanted to make sure we note this,
but we're gonna be storing the trash in the rear.
We would agree to our proviso
that trash would be stored in the rear yard.
But each of the units has its own floor.
Unit number one is a bi -level first floor, lower level.
unit number two is on the second floor and unit number three is on the third floor we also have
our roof deck and our meeting notice we met some time ago with the community february 24 2022 at
5 30 p .m there were 163 addresses affiliated with this property these are the addresses
and this is our proof of mailing
and there are applications for appeal that we followed with the zba in june of 2021
it took us some time to get a community meeting with this group as well
and there are deeds to the property showing that ira development
and kumas homes are the owners of the property
and our certificate of tax funds showing that they owe no money with respect to this property.
With that being said, I have the corporate representative, Mr. Eze.
If he can virtually raise his hand about my testimony, and then we can take questions from the board.
Mr. Eze has to speak.
Would you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yeah, sure thing. It's Ifani Chukueze, I -F -E -A -N -Y -I -C -H -U -K -W -U, last name E -Z -E.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yeah, Mr. Eze, you heard everything I stated today.
Is it true and correct?
and do you adopt this in your own testimony i do questions from the board and mr chairman
no mr chairman no question questions or comments from the virtual audience
do not see any hands mr chair planning commission
good afternoon david vecto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location.
This is a 1 ,206 -square -foot lot.
There is no unique physical condition that would prevent this lot from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
We are aware of one legal multifamily dwelling on this block.
The remaining homes on the block are single -family.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the requested use variance.
Mr. Knackinson, do you want to respond?
Yeah, so there are examples of other multifamily uses we did point out. So we're between 23rd and 24th on West Montgomery Avenue. I believe there were three or four instances, and I could bring it back up, of multifamily use that were RSA 5 properties, as well as the fact that we do do our homework in terms of how long this lot has been vacant.
It's been a vacant lot since at least 2014, could have been a little bit longer, so basically a decade.
So this is a decent -sized lot for an RSA -5 property of 1 ,200 square feet.
The district council member, who's also the council president, was in non -opposition, given all those factors.
Plus, the history of the property has not shown to be single -family in nature.
It has had a history of three -family plus commercial.
And all we're asking to do is allow that type of usage, eliminating the commercial to put three units in there.
We also have a responsible trash management plan in place, along with a responsible developer.
Thank you. MI 2021 -002 -825 -2348, West Montgomery. I vote yes. Proviso, trash stored in the back of the property.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with Proviso.
James Snell, yes with Proviso.
Is Snell Saheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Number five, MI 2022 -000 -772 -2617 East Venango Street.
Esteban Alavarez is the owner, Pro Se.
letter of support from ProPAC.
Mr. Stepani, it's been a lot to speak, sir.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Mr. Stephanie, are you?
Yes, I'm here.
Could you state your name?
Benjamin Estepani, the architect of the project.
you're the owner no I'm the architect the owner is on on the call as well no we need to talk to
the owner yeah he's okay he should be raising his hand he's on the call
okay I just promoted the owner to Panama sir
sir could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
mr guinness if you're available please unmute and wait to be sworn in
hello yes could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
uh hi my name is esteban gines is e -s -t -e -v -a -n -g -i -n -e -z okay i'm the you what are you
the owner yes okay do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth yes okay our our vice chair has a few questions for you okay hi do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy am i saying that is this person
an attorney no he's not he's the owner okay okay sir have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof
of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes. Okay, you may proceed and share your screen, which is already up. Thank you.
All right, so here's what you, sorry, you're going to have, tell us what you want to do.
Okay. So I'm the owner of this property, 2617 East Benango Street. I recently purchased this corner property on September 16th of 2021. The building currently has an apartment on the second floor, and it's a vacant space on the basement on the first floor.
so we're looking to propose a sit -down restaurant at the first floor with a food storage in an
office in the basement. I have another restaurant located at 4653 Rising Sun Avenue that we are
looking to move into this new building. The property has a previous history as a bar and
So it has already the hood and some kitchen equipment that we are planning to reuse.
And what's on the second floor?
The second floor is an apartment.
Okay, thank you.
Yes, and it has a separate entrance and it's ready to be used for tenants or we can use it as well.
And in the basement is empty basement.
so we're planning to do our storage there and i'm planning to to do like small small uh office
small office okay do you have a pick do you have a copy of the uh the pro pack letter
the letter from the rco yes right there could you blow that up a little bit for us
okay thank you
questions from the board no mr chair no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands mr chair planning commission good afternoon david vecto city planning commission
mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed
use of zoning at this location the zoning archive shows that this property has a history of
commercial use so the proposed restaurant will not have an impact on the use of adjacent properties
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the use variance thank you very much
mi 2022 000 772 2617 east venango street i vote yes carol tenary my vote is yes
Thomas Hullman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Congratulations.
Thank you.
I don't know if you can hear me, but I want to say yes also.
Okay, good.
Thank you, Ish.
Okay. MI 2022 -000 -765 -5200 Whitaker Avenue. Attorney is Gussie O 'Neill. Letter of non -opposition
from the Coordinating RCO 35th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
He's been allowed to speak, sir, and promoted.
Good afternoon.
dude. Hi, how are you? Can you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Sure. Augusta O 'Neill, A -U -G -U -S -T -A. My last name is spelled O -N -E -I -L -L.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, because nothing but the truth?
I do. Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Northeast Donut Shops. They are the sub -lessee of the property at 5200
Whittaker Avenue. Our vice chair has a few questions for you. Hi Augusta, do you agree
to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under
plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO,
and do you have a letter? Yes, to all of the above. Great, you may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you so much. Sure.
So good afternoon, members of the board here today on an application related to the property at 5200 Whitaker Avenue.
My client is the Northeast Donut Shops. Its owner, Sunny Ho, is with me this afternoon, as well as our project architect, Dave Kiefreiter of Albert Taus.
this property that we're here for this afternoon is actually this site that's on this aerial that's
on my screen this is the aldi store that's on 5200 whittaker avenue so this is currently just
an empty lot which i have some more pictures of but mr ho currently operates a duncan store that's
in this shopping center so the intent would be to relocate the business to this location because
the current location does not have drive -through capabilities, which since the advent of coronavirus
drive -through has become more popular, so the intent would be here for the really location
so that the store would have its own standalone site. So I included in my exhibit package just
a few pictures of what is currently on the property. Just resize it for
okay so currently this is just a weed strewn lot that's surrounded by concrete blocks
So, currently, this is just a weed -strewn lot that's surrounded by concrete blocks.
It seems to be a dumping area for trash and appliances, and there's quite a bit of graffiti at the property, as you can see from pictures I've also included.
so the intent would be here to take what is currently this empty lot again that's not being
used and to beautify it and to put a nice store which would also be held to duncan's standards for
cleanliness and maintenance so again this would require improvement of not only this pads this
pad, but also the neighboring areas, which seem to be, as I said, a dumping area for trash.
So this property is zoned CMX2, and in the CMX2 zoning district, the drive -through requires
special exception relief. Pulling up a copy of the refusal, which I also included in my exhibit
package. So the proposed use is consistent with the other retail that's in the location. Again,
there's a shopping center that's adjacent to the property it's right behind an aldi and i also
wanted to point out there are no dimensional uh variances that we're asking for as part of this
application it is by right with the exception of the need for the special exception
on page 44 of the exhibit package i provided a copy of our site plan and the site circulation
is going to work so that drivers can come in off of Fulkrod Avenue, come into the drive -thru,
and then it would go around the building, and it would start at the side of the drive -thru that's
closest to the Aldi, so here's where the existing Aldi is. Again, cars would come in, circulate,
and then go back out onto Fulkrod. We did meet with the assigned RCO for this property, which is
the 35th Ward Democratic Committee. We met with them on April 5th, actually out at the site.
After meeting with them, they advised that they had no opposition to this application. They agreed
with us that it would be a great improvement over the situation that currently exists at the
property. And before I close, I just wanted to tell the board a bit more about Sonny Ho,
who's with me this afternoon. Mr. Ho is the owner of the Northeast Donut Shops. His franchise has
over 44 different locations. He employs over 1 ,000 people in the Philadelphia area. He's been a great
community partner in all the neighborhoods in which he's open to business. So with that being
said, I would like to call forward Mr. Ho just to adopt my testimony. Mr. Ho, could you state your
name and spell, please, for the court reporter. Mr. Ho, if you're in the virtual audience,
please raise your hand. Okay, he's been allowed to speak, sir.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hello, yes. My name is Sonny Ho, S -O -N -N -Y -H -O. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth is nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sonny, did you
get a chance to hear my testimony this afternoon? Yes, I did. And was everything that I said true
and accurate? Yes. And do you wish to adopt my testimony as your own? Yes. Thank you. Members
of the board also available is our project architect to the extent that anyone has any
questions related to the zoning plan that was provided as part of my exhibit package?
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Sir, I have a Mr. Dillon Mahoney with their hand raised. I have another to speak.
Mr. Mahoney, could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter?
Yes, sir.
Dylan Mahoney, D -I -L -L -O -N -M -A -H -O -N -E -Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Dylan Mahoney from the Office of Councilwoman Sherelle Parker.
Our office received the letter of non -opposition from the 35th Ward RCO, and the Councilwoman is also not opposed to the project.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
any other comments from the virtual audience
planning commission
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry.
planning commission
Planning Commission.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the commercial mixed -use zoning at this location.
The applicant has shown that a takeout restaurant will have no more of an impact than a takeout
restaurant would be expected to have, and so the City Planning Commission recommends
the Board grant the special exception.
Thank you.
MI 2022 -000765 -5200 Whittaker Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Number nine.
Thank you.
MI -2022 -001 -064 -6602 Haverford Avenue.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.
The RCO HMC Square did not take a position,
but noted some concerns.
Mr. Mattione has been promoted to panelist.
Sir, he should be coming back in shortly.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Certainly. Michael Mattione. That's M -I -C -H -A -E -L -M -A -T -T -I -O -N -I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
certainly the client is south 29th street partners llc and they are the owner of the
property and gary farrell the principal is on and available today thank you our vice chair
carol tennari has a few questions hi mr mattione do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days
in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I will be above.
Great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
And again, I'm Michael Matamoni, and I represent South 21th Street Partners, LLC,
the owner of this property, and I have Gary Farrell available.
As you can see, I have submitted exhibits in advance, including the tax clearance refusal, letter from HMC Squared Community Association coordinating RCO, letter of support from Congressman Brady, the leader of the 34th Democratic Ward Executive Committee, letter of support from the 34th Ward Republican Committee.
Judge Pantapinto is the chair there, and letters of support from owners of 15 surrounding properties, including 6600, 6604, 6606, and 6608 Haverford Avenue,
and a map showing all of the letters of support that are located with respect to the property in question.
the survey, the site plan, floor plans, photographs, a map showing surrounding uses, affidavit of service of the RCO, meeting notice, and the deed.
South 29th, again, is the owner of this property, and it has been vacant for a long time, and it is in a dilapidated condition.
Just there's the RCO, coordinating RCO letter, the 34th Ward Democrat Executive Committee support letter from Congressman Brady, where he specifically says that he's in support and notes that this has been a vacant building, deteriorated for a long time and has become a blight.
A letter of support from the 34th Republican Ward RCO, which, again, is signed by Judge Pantapinto, a resident in the area.
And again, his support for the variants.
Map showing all of the supporting letters.
This is the project.
And the neighboring properties all around on Haverford Avenue all support the project.
I'd like to show some site photographs.
This is the building.
As you can see, it's got a seafood store next to it.
It's got a CVS across 66th Street.
Next to it again, you have a roofing company and what appears to be a residential structure.
And what appears to be a residential structure in the rear of the property, which is accessible by a vacant street, we would add two parking spaces.
I'll get to that in a minute.
That's just to show the context.
And there's the roofing company that's on the other side and their back.
They use that for their trucks and other equipment.
Again, here's the front.
This is the building.
This is the roofing company.
This is the building.
that's the italian american social club um a very large building on the block uh just again
showing the property and then showing uh surrounding properties the roofing company
next door which one is that which one is the property right there the white one
building the three -story building the larger building got it and then yeah that's us sorry
for that confusion um and then if you go in the back again there's the roofing company again
their rear and there's the non -american social club going farther down the block you'll see
there is a church again the church another shot of the church and farther down is a daycare center
which is legal for eight residential units above the daycare center that's all in an rsa3 zone
district. Again, we are seeking
back up to the refusal. We were refused because we were seeking to go from the four units that
this was last used for up to six units. I'll explain that in a minute. And because we are
going, while there are no parking spaces at all at the property now, we propose to add two parking
spaces, but if we have six units, six parking spaces are required. So, and it's just a survey
of the property. It's a long lot. It's about 3 ,800 square feet, and down at the end of the lot,
you can see Adams Street. It's not legally open, but it exists, and again, the roofing company over
here, they park off of Adams Street. We would add two parking spaces off of Adams Street.
if you look at the site plan this is where the existing structure is today let me move that over
a little that's the existing structure three -story structure and it's been last used as four units we
would add an addition and add two additional units to preserve the structure not change the
front other than clean it up not change the existing 33 foot height again add two parking
spaces. We do have come down to the floor plans. We have a trash area in the back, which would be
accessed off of 66th Street. We have a one -bedroom unit in the front, one -bedroom unit in the back
on the first floor. On the second floor, it would be a two -bedroom unit, two -bedroom unit in the
front, there's the front door to it, and a one -bedroom unit in the back. And on the third
floor, again, a two -bedroom unit in the front and a one -bedroom unit in the back. All the units have
a little outdoor area, a little balcony space attached to them. Again, this property has been
vacant for a long time. It's a 3 ,975 square foot lot. If you look at the zoning map, this part,
which has the seafood store, our building, the roofing company, the Italian American club,
the church, and the daycare center with eight residential units, for some reason, is on RSA3.
We're surrounded by either RM1 or CMX2 or the CA2, which is a large grocery store
with a lot of parking.
So the zoning really doesn't make a lot of sense
given the uses that are here.
Much larger properties, none of them are residential.
We're proposing to keep ours residential
and go from four to six
to allow the cashflow necessary to do the renovations
to save this really unique building.
Again, you can see on Haverford Avenue
what uses we have here.
the seafood company, our site, the roofing company,
social club, the church, and the daycare farther up.
Again, that's the property.
We hope to be able to preserve it.
It is dilapidated.
That was noted by Congressman Brady
in his letter of support.
Also, the units are larger than 600 square feet.
We would access it for the two parking spaces.
Again, we're going from four to six units if this were to be granted, and the two new units would each have one -to -one parking, but there is nowhere to put any other parking.
And the two new units would each have one -to -one parking, but there is nowhere to put any other parking.
So you could not have six parking spaces.
And this has long existed as a four -unit structure with no parking.
And I also have Gary Farrell, who is a CPA, and he is the developer.
And he prepared a cash flow analysis.
And he showed that doing the renovations necessary to make this a modern structure with modern safety features as a four -unit structure just doesn't work.
As a six -unit structure, it works financially, but it is by no means a windfall.
I will have Mr. Farrell answer a few questions about that, but his cash flow analyses are in the materials provided, and he will explain them.
So this property cannot be used as a single -family structure, cannot be redeveloped even with the four units that it has long been.
We're requesting the two units.
It's a really, Mr. Farrell will explain, really expensive to come in and add sprinklers and other life safety features to this building.
And to deal with four units, it just doesn't work.
The variances will allow this property to be redeveloped and keep the original building and just have an addition on it.
We meet all of the dimensional requirements.
We're only 33 feet.
You can be 38.
It's a 3 ,900 -square -foot lot.
We have a 20 -foot rear yard.
actually, I believe it's 50 foot rear yard,
but we well exceed what's required.
We have the open area that's required.
Again, it's surrounded.
If this were across the street in the RM1 zoning district,
you could have eight units here with no parking
because we happen to be on the side of the street
that for some reason is owned RSA3.
We're required to have one -to -one parking,
but you couldn't have one -to -one parking here.
And it doesn't have it with the four units
that presently exist.
So again, the requested variances will have no impact on the surrounding non -conforming
structures such as the seafood company and roofing company.
It will not be detrimental to the public welfare.
They'll provide for the renovation of this dilapidated structure and maintain the architectural
character of the community.
It will decrease the likelihood of fire and other public health threats by having a building
in compliance with modern safety features.
Again, it's five foot lower than the permitted height, so it will not have any adverse impact on light and air to surrounding properties.
It will not have an adverse impact on public facilities.
We're even adding parking where none exists, and it will make environmental problems less likely.
You've got an older building.
It probably has lead paint in it, may even have asbestos.
All that would go away, and the building would be preserved.
So we believe that the requested variances are proper and should be done.
I would like to call on Gary Farrow, if he may be promoted.
Mr. Farrell, state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter.
Mr. Farrell, you're free to speak. Please unmute.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Mr. Farrell
can hear me yes could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
Gary Farrell G -A -R -Y -F -A -R -R -E -L -L do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes proceed thank you Mr. Chairman and Gary are you a CPA yes and do prepare
the cash flow analyses in Exhibit 10A and 10B? Yes, I did. And is Exhibit 10A on the screen now?
Yes. And in your opinion, both as a developer and a CPA, is this renovation project feasible
as a single family residence? No, it is not due to the cost of bringing the fire life and safety,
the you know fire alarms the sprinkler line that needs to go to the street and also the sprinklers
that need to be updated and are added and to all the units as well and is this project feasible if
you continue the long -standing four unit use uh no it is not as you can see at the bottom we'll be
you know we'll be losing money the first couple years and even after that that's if everything
goes perfect, we still will be breaking even. And is this project feasible if you make it a
six -unit project? Yes, it is because we will be able to spread the significant cost for the
smoke alarms and sprinkler and running the new lines to the street among six units instead of
four units. And just to be clear, did you prepare exhibits 10A and 10B? Yes, I did.
Yes, I did.
And again, if this variance were denied, what's likely to be happened?
And again, if this variance were denied, what's likely to be happening?
Will this property be demolished?
Given the current state of it, we'll most likely have to demolish the property as there are structural issues with it.
Thank you.
And did you hear my earlier statements?
And are they true and correct?
And do you adopt them as your testimony?
Yes, I do.
I have no further questions.
Hi, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions from the our comments from the virtual audience
um sir i have a miss jacqueline blyther wells with her hand raised i will
sure hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
sure my name is jacqueline blyther wells j -a -c -q -u -e -l -i -n -e blyther b as in boy
l y t h e r hyphen wells w e l l s all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do proceed um mr chair and the board uh we had a meeting a
community meeting i reside at 6619 west gerard avenue um the homeowners from 6601 gerard avenue
to 6619 Girard Avenue, we have a private driveway. The roofing company, which is next door to 6602
Haverford, they have no access to our driveway. They only had a backyard. And when they decided
to convert that backyard to a driveway, which is a safety issue for the people on our side,
on gerard avenue coming out uh they decided to convert that and i had called 3 -1 -1 thank you
mr chairman i don't know why the roofing company next door is relevant to us
so so ma 'am listen listen a minute i'm sorry you know so this is about the particular property
we're talking about i i can't have you testify about the roofing company what they did next door
I guess the real
the only question I have
are you in favor of this property
getting the variance
what else you may unmute yourself please
I can't have you testify about the roofing company
roofing company has nothing to do
with what the variance has to do with this building
okay Ms. Wells yes Ms. Wells to hear what I'm saying you can't testify about the roofing company
in a case relative to this property here no I'm sorry yes you're you're absolutely correct but
what he said was that because of the parking that they need they wanted to also convert it
and and that is no i i think i think what he said he's going to park behind his property
but there's no parking there they had no deed to a parking lot when they purchased the property
there was only a backyard and he's coming into the private driveway okay okay so so so thank you
very much here's what i'm going to do is i'm going to give him a chance to respond that he'll explain
But thank you for calling in and bringing us that information.
Mr. Chairman, as you can see on the screen, we have the survey.
And at the rear of our lot and the rear of the other lots is Adams Street.
It's no longer open on the city plan, but it still exists on the city plan.
So that is used by everybody to access their properties.
If you pull up the deeds for the ones on Gerard Avenue, like I have,
they note that Adams Street is the rear of their property.
uh adam street on the style street and it's 25 feet wide so we have a 25 feet
paper street that exists as shown by my photos and we would access the two parking spaces behind
our property off of this street that uh this paper street that does exist that everybody else uses
as well so we would be doing just what everybody else does in the community thank you is there
anybody else in the virtual audience that has a comment
miss eloise young with her hand raised i have an honor to speak sir okay hi could you state
your name please and spell for the court reporter my name is eloise young first name e -l -o -i -s -e
last name young y -o -u -n -g do you swear or affirm tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do proceed good afternoon mr chair and members of the board i was a little surprised
to hear you say that the coordinating rco hmc square did not take a position because
The coordinating RCO, HMC Square, did not take a position, because we did take a position,
and the position is that we are opposed to this project. On April 7th, I facilitated a virtual RCO
meeting, it was actually the meeting that Ms. Blyther Wells was referring to, to discuss 6602
Haverford Avenue on behalf of HMC Square Community Association, and none of the 20 members
of the community who were present voted to support this project as it was proposed.
Now, that alone is a very strong statement, especially when you consider that 6602 Haverford
is currently a vacant blighted eyesore. We certainly don't like vacant blighted eyesores,
especially in our community. So why didn't anybody at that meeting vote to support this project as it
was proposed? Well, there were several reasons. Let's talk about the demonstration of hardship
first. We believe that the only hardship these owners have demonstrated would be of their own
making. And I say that for two reasons. First of all, we were told that the owners purchased the
property under the auspices of 29th Street Partnership LLC, an entity that they own,
and that the property would be managed by Broken Ground Properties, another entity they own.
We asked them, how did this property even get on your radar? And they told us that the previous
owner came to them because that person couldn't afford to make the needed building repairs.
These are seasoned real estate professionals who understood the condition of the building
and the cost to repair it when they chose to purchase the property.
It was interesting today to see exhibits, I think, 10B, the cash flow analysis, because
none of that was presented to the community.
But the second reason that I say that the hardship would be of their own making is that
the owners insist on creating six units, even though they told us that the building is already
set up for four units.
This significantly increases renovation costs, yet they were unwilling to consider leaving the property with four units.
During our meeting, community members, including Ms. Blyther -Wells, expressed vehemently.
Anything anybody else said, Mr. Chairman?
I'm sorry, could I please?
Ma 'am, ma 'am, ma 'am, ma 'am, Mrs. Young, listen, you can't, she already, she already spoke here.
you can't testify to what she said so you can't you can't do it you know hearsay so you just
you know tell me what you believe and that's where we want to be okay
yes during our meeting community members vehemently voiced concerns
so i i think the fact of the matter is they did not take a position there was some comments about
some people wanted four units some people wanted to support what they had which what changes 11
people are against it but the rco did not take a position so that's where we are chairman bergman
the the copy of the the meeting summary that's right there don't move the version that i emailed
highlighted oppose i see i see but what i'm saying look at the look above there that doesn't
take a position. So when I say they didn't take a position, they didn't take a position.
No, this was highlighted, opposed. It says final position. If I could show my screen,
I have the letter and it says final position taken by coordinating RCO is one of opposed
is highlighted on the letter that I emailed on Sunday, April 10th at 7 55 PM. It's highlighted
in yellow. It's opposed. I'm just telling you what we had in front of us today. And the reason
we're opposed is because we have concerns about density, parking, unit size, affordability,
and accessibility. For all these reasons, along with the owner's failure to demonstrate hardship,
we oppose this project. Okay. Thank you, ma 'am. That's fine. Is there anyone else in the audience
that has a comment? There's someone here with just the name of Galaxy A51 with the hand raised.
do you want me to allow them to speak sir please okay they've been about to speak
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
hello hi could you hi could you state your name please and spell stephanie mccullum okay s -t -e -p -h -a -n -i -e
m c c o l l u m right and um wait a minute you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
Right. Wait a minute. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
I am opposed to this project because it is a hazard to our neighbors that share this driveway.
It's not enough room. He's only showing photographs of the back of his property only.
And the construction would be a total mess.
The people can park on the street. I'm not opposed to him having a four unit.
that's fine, but opening up a driveway to create a space for parking, no. It causes a hazard
between the neighbors that share this driveway coming in and out. We don't know who's coming in
and out, and I'm not testifying against trauma, but trauma didn't do their thing right anyway.
They did what they wanted to do. Okay, thank you. Okay, yeah, you're welcome. You're welcome. Thank
you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Ms. Stephanie McComb had her hand raised. I have an auditor to speak.
Did I already have her?
Yeah, I think they're the same person.
That's the same person.
Stephanie McComb? Okay. I'm sorry.
All right. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. David Vecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for commercial mixed -use zoning.
under that zoning multiple dwelling units would be allowed by right the zoning here presents a
clear hardship to the reuse of the property the character of the block is primarily institutional
so the proposed multiple family dwelling units would not negatively impact the surrounding
properties and requiring parking would not be feasible due to site constraints so the city
planning commission recommends that the board grant the use variances thank you mi 2022
two zero zero one zero six four sixty six oh two Haverford Avenue I vote yes
Carol Tenere my vote is yes Thomas Holloman my vote is no excuse me excuse me Mr. Chair um
there are two refusals on this one and I want to make sure I'll get I'll I'll Mr. Mattione there
was two refusals one dated the 24th and one the 25th which one is it I thought it was the one
dated 25th there are two refusals on the refusal there's a refusal for the number of units and
there's a refusal for not having six or three parking spaces both on the 25th right on the 25th
right yes no Mr. Mr. Mationi this is Hillary just when I went on Atlas to pull the refusals there
was one from January 24th and one from January 25th they appeared to be identical but I wanted
to check with you before so that we make sure we put the correct one in the record correct and I
use the one from the 25th i believe that's the only one i got okay okay the other one may have
been released this is granted per refusal dated the 25th all right thank you mr chair i vote i vote yes
are we refuting now yeah go ahead carol carol tennari my vote is yes
my vote is no james snell my vote is yes
thank you so
we have one one more case left on the uh the two o 'clock list i'm going to take a five minute
break mr matione it's your case we'll be back in five minutes and then we'll finish that and
then go right to 3 30 because i think we only have a few cases so let's take a five minute break
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
our five minutes are up here as you wish i'm i'm ready okay so we're going to go back to the
2 o 'clock list, number 11, MI -2022 -001 -009 -748 -North 40th Street, Mr. Matteoni.
Also, a letter of support from the West Belmont Civic Association.
He's coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Mr. Chairman.
Hi, Mr. Mattione, you've already been sworn. Could you identify who your client is on 40th Street and the relationship to the property?
Who your client is on 40th Street and the relationship to the property?
Certainly.
Certainly. It's 748 North 40th Street, LLC. They're the owner of the property.
And Robert Sherman, the principal, is available today as well.
Harold Tenere, our vice chair, has a few questions.
Mr. Matione, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all those above.
You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Sure, thank you.
Is the screen up?
yes it is all right thank you sorry about that uh again i represent it's michael maddione
and i represent uh the owner of 748 north 40th street and i have robert sherman here with me
today the principal and we presented tax clearance information the refusal the letter of support from
the west belmont civic association the coordinating rco that was joined in by the belmont alliance
civic association and other rco in the area the zoning site plan floor plans renderings
trash plan photographs of the property notice letters regarding the rco meeting and the deed
and the llc is again the owner and developer hopeful developer of this property
and we met with the rco in a hybrid meeting and received the overwhelming support
from the RCO and the community.
As you can see, they took the position of support
in their letter, and there was at least 21 in support
and who were non -opposition.
We're seeking several variances to permit 12 residential units
in this RSA -3 zoning district.
And I want to come down and show just the site photographs.
First, it is a vacant site.
That is the site.
And the land use in this area is predominantly multifamily despite the zoning.
There are at least nine other nearby properties that are multifamily zoning.
The variances would permit the development of the property in conformity with the surrounding multifamily structures.
Again, it's a vacant lot.
And if you look surrounding the property, there are several other vacant lots.
across the street, and multifamily structures there as well.
This is 746, which I will talk about in a minute, just to the south, and that's looking down the street.
As you can see, large properties, many with front porches, most of which are multifamily structures,
as you can see, again, from the other side of the street.
Directly across the street, two multifamily structures with vacant lots in between.
And again, on the corner, another multifamily set of structures.
And again, that's the property in the context of what we're talking about.
What we're requesting is the development and conformity with the surrounding property.
And when I look to the floor plans, it would be three.
Each floor is the same.
It's four floors, each floor with three residential units, all of which a front unit, which is two bedrooms in a living area, a middle unit with two bedrooms in a living area, and a rear unit with two bedrooms in a living area.
And the units are at least 800 square feet.
They're larger units.
They'll have modern amenities and conveniences.
And importantly, the rendering show not just 748, which is this project, but 746, which this board in 2021 granted a variance or variances, the exact same variances we're asking for today to allow 12 -unit structure.
You can see they will all have, both have, if this were granted, red brick facades.
They would have porches like the other projects have porches, mansard roofs like the others have.
And again, they would have bicycle parking out front.
They would share a courtyard entranceway.
Again, this one, 746, was granted by the board for the exact same uses that we're talking about here.
They would have windows that share a courtyard in between the two.
There was a rooftop deck used for one of the units only.
Having these buildings with the modern safety features is important given that there have been many tragic recent fires in older homes that don't have things like sprinkler systems and hardwired safety smoke.
things like sprinkler systems and hardwired safety smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors.
Again, another view of the properties and how they would look and how they would look in the context that they're in.
The most significant feature of this property is that it's a mirror image of the property at 746 North 40th,
which is just to the south of 748.
As I said, this board granted a variance in 2021, 4746, to be developed into 12 units, virtually the same floor plan as proposed for this property.
There are no material differences.
The lot sizes are the same.
Everything is the same.
The only request from the community was for us to show that we would have a gated trash area for use by both properties with a walkway down the middle.
The trash would be picked up by private trash pickup.
walking through the area between the two buildings and out onto the street and then move back and put into the dumpster would be placed back into the gated trash room for trash area for both properties in the rear of 748.
That was the request of the community.
The community supported this because they looked at it and said, we want to see exactly what was on 746 replicated at 748, the same facade, the same porch, and the same uses.
and get rid of this vacant property,
which is problematic for the community.
The variances will benefit the public
by providing a modern building with life safety features.
They meet the goals of the code
by providing for a use consistent with the adjoining property
and other properties that are all multifamily in the area.
The grant of the variances will not adversely impact
light and air to adjacent properties
who meet the 38 foot height requirement that will benefit the public by reducing the likelihood of
illegal dumping or other environmental problems at a vacant property in the community.
What I would like to do is call Robert Sherman to be presented to the board.
Mr. Sherman has been about to speak sir. Hi Mr. Sherman could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter please yes uh good afternoon robert sherman r -o -b -e -r -t -s -h -e -r -m -a -n
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do proceed thank you mr chairman uh rob uh did you hear my statements yes and are they
true and correct yes they are and do you adopt them as your testimony i do and do you have any
further comments for the board no thank you i have nothing further questions questions from the board
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
do you know further answer mr chair planning commission thank you mr chairman david effecto
city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends a
change in the zoning to a residential multiple family zoning at this location under rm1 which
is the most common in this neighborhood the applicant would be allowed eight dwelling units
by right so the proposed 12 dwelling units we don't believe are the minimum necessary to derive
value from this land the applicant has failed to prove that a hardship exists that would require 12
units as opposed to eight regardless of what is built providing parking on a lot with no rear
access would be impractical so the city planning commission recommends the board grant the use
variances but limit the number of dwelling units to eight units which would be allowed by right
under RM1 with no parking. What was the last approval for for the other building?
MI 2022 001 009 748 North 40th Street. I vote yes with provisos. Commercial trash pickup
three times a week trash stored in rear and that's the that's the provisos harold tenery
my vote is yes with provisos thomas halliman my vote is yes with proviso james snell yes with
proviso ishmael shaheed yes with proviso thank you mr chairman thank you uh is there anyone
in the virtual audience whose case from the two o 'clock listings have not been heard
there are no hands at this time mr chair okay we're gonna we're gonna move right to the 3 30 list
So, good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman. I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearing.
so good afternoon my name is bill bergman i will be chairing this afternoons
With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair. Present. Ismael Shahid, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chair. Thomas Holliman, our board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. And James Snell,
our board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. Also here is our executive director,
Tanya Sunkit, and our board attorney, Hillary Emerson. Our virtual format is this. Be advised
these proceedings are being recorded. By participating, you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. A video will be available by contacting tanyasunkit at phil .gov. For the
benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before
testifying. If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your
hand and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email
and the address of the property in question. And finally, please note the question answer box is
not for testimony or comments. Any comments have to be directed to Tanya Sunken, our executive
director. So let's look at the continuances on our 330 list. Number two, MI 2022 -00397 -2005
south 4th street and number five mi 2022 000290 5651 to 63 walnut street both these cases are
continued is there anyone in the virtual audience has a comment
you know i asked mr chair are there any other contingencies requested for the 3 30 meeting
again i see no hands sir case case number one mi 2022 000 278 1333 snyder avenue
henry clinton is the attorney letter of support from the east passion crossing civic association
Mr. Clinton will be rejoining
as a panelist, sir. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Howie, could you spell your name for the court reporter,
please, Mr. Clinton? Sure. Henry Clinton,
C -L -I -N -T -O -N. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify
your client in the relationship to this property? Sure. The owner is Karkim, C -A -R -K -I -M Holdings,
LLC. And the principal is Dimitri, D -I -M -I -T -R -Y, Starominsky, S -T -A -R -O -M -I -N -S -K -Y. And he is on the
call. All right. Our vice chair, Carl Tenere, has a few questions. Hi, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or
plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you
have a letter yes to all of the above okay great you may proceed and share your screen thank you
thank you is that visible mr nary it is all right good afternoon mr chairman members of the board
Henry Clinton for Clark Kim Holdings, LLC. This property concerns 1333, excuse me, 1333 Slater
Avenue. And with me is also the architect, Rustin Olwer of Harman Deutsch Olwer Architecture.
This is my table of contents, and I'll walk through each of the documents as we proceed,
containing exhibits AA through A11, which I ask be admitted into evidence. This is my appearance
statement. This is the refusal. So this is a current three -story vacant property between
Watch Street and Juniper on the north side of Snyder Avenue. It's a half a block from the
commercial district of Broad Street and directly across the street from South Philadelphia High
School. And I'll show you from aerial photographs where the property is situated in relation to two
of those locations. So the property sits in the CMX2 zoning district, as do all the properties
between Watts and Juniper on that side of Snyder Avenue. However, all the properties save one are
However, all the properties, save one, are completely multifamily.
completely multifamily.
And as you know, Mr. Chairman, member of the board, CMX2 requires commercial on the first floor with residential above.
What we're asking the board to consider is instead of having commercial on the first floor to convert that or switch that out for residential on the first floor and keep the two residential units above.
The reason being is that all the homes on this side, save one, are multifamily residential, so the requested use is consistent with the use there, plus the zoning for this area is CMX2, but the commercial corridor is Broad Street.
Plus, as I'll show you in the zoning archives, this property historically was used as a three -family dwelling.
This is a letter of support from East Pass Young Crossing. The only proviso was that each of the units be outfitted with trash compactors, and my client has certainly agreed to that.
and these are photographs of the property it's right here situated between watt street and
juniper street it's a south Philadelphia high school broad street is to the west this is
Santander bank this is the subject property as you can see from the front of the other properties
they're all residential
Again, this is the view looking west towards Santander Bank and this strip of residential
multi -family on the north side of Sider Avenue. Interior photographs showing you that there
were four meters and it will be four meters, one for each unit and one for the common space.
again some more views different perspective for the board this is the the zoning map indicating
that all the properties as i mentioned are cmx2 although they're used as multi -family residential
again another perspective of where the property is situated between the other homes on that block
So basically, what we're asking for is on the basement of first floor will just be one
apartment rather than a commercial unit.
And on the second and third floor, there's an existing one -bedroom apartment on the second
and one -bedroom on the third.
When I say existing, it was used as one bedroom.
It will be continued to be used as one bedroom, but it's not occupied right now.
This is the tax certification.
What I wanted to get to was our zoning records attached as Exhibit A8 are the historical zoning records for all the properties between Watts and Juniper in this row.
1333 Snyder, which is a subject property.
You'll see from my attachments that from years 2004 to 2020, there was a residential rental license for three units.
For a time period, the first floor was used as a construction office, but it really wasn't viable, and it was returned to residential use.
We have existing permits for a roof deck, an existing permit for a rear addition.
1327 is three residential units.
1329, the same.
1331 actually has five units, although the rental license has gone inactive.
At one time, it was five units.
1335 is two units and 1337 is the one property that i mentioned earlier which has three units
one of which is a doctor's office on the first floor uh and mr chairman i can go through each
of the records quickly if if uh you're so inclined just to show that my summation is accurate
this is 1333 mr clinton we're fine okay
Okay. So I'll entertain any comments from the board or from the virtual audience. And my client
is here prepared to adopt my testimony. Why don't you adopt your testimony?
Mr. Sterominski, can you unmute yourself?
he's been allowed to speak sir i could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
dimitri starominski d -i -m -i -t -r -y starominski s -t -a -r -o -m -i -n -s -k -y do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed mr clinton uh mr
Mr. Jarominski, were you on the call when I presented the project for 1333 Snyder Avenue?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as true and correct?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as true and correct?
Thank you, sir.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
Comments?
I see no further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
Hi. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to RM1 Multifamily Residential at this location.
The proposal is consistent with the recommended zoning, and the applicant has demonstrated a longstanding multifamily use.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022 -000 -278 -1333 Snyder Avenue, I vote yes. Proviso. Interior trash compactor to be provided
for all units. Harold Teneri, my vote is yes with Proviso. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with
Proviso. James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso. Vishnu Shahid, my vote is yes with Proviso.
number three thank you thank you Mr. Chairman have a great day everyone right MI 2022 000 302
4459 Silverwood Street Allison Roof Burkhart is the owner pro se
um letter of support from the Mani Yonk neighborhood council
Ms. Burkhardt has been promoted to panelist, sir. She'll be rejoining shortly.
Hello.
Hi, Ms. Burkhardt. Could you state your name and then spell it for the court reporter, please?
Sure. My name is Allison Roof Burkhardt, A -L -L -I -S -O -N. Last name, two words, Roof, R -U -F, as in Frank, E, Burkhardt, B -U -R -K -A -R -D.
Do you swear or, please, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Our Vice Chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions for you.
Hi, good afternoon. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Okay, you may proceed and share your screen.
All right, is that up for everybody?
It is.
All right, great.
So good afternoon. Thank you. My name is Allison Ruth Burkhardt and my husband Andrew Burkhardt
and I live and we own and live at 4459 Silverwood Street and we have a variance application to
present you to you today. So we went last month to the RCO on April 6th and received a letter
of support from them. Our property is located in the Maniunk -Rocksboro section of Philadelphia.
It's near the intersection of Carson and Silverwood Street. It's on the northeast side of a residential
street. The zoning is RSA 5 with a fourth district overlay. And you can see here the view coming down
Silver Ridge Street in the same direction the traffic flows. The street sign on the right
is for Carson and the property here is on the left.
So here's the property. This is our house 4459 on the right. On the left is 4461 and the driveway
and the building in between is really what we're going to be talking about. It's currently part
the 4461 parcel and we're hoping to purchase it and make it part of the 4459 property.
Our goal really is to maintain the existing configuration of the property, preserve the
existing parking, the light space, open air, and the vegetation that's there. And we did post the
zoning notice at the property. There are photos of that in a separate exhibit document.
here's the site from the other direction green lane is beyond
so we had these plans prepared by a civil engineer they got
survey district approval and then they were submitted to lni for the zoning permit application
and then they were submitted to L &I for the zoning permit application.
And the properties are owned independently, 4459 is owned by us, our neighbors own 4461,
so we also submitted this letter of authorization that's included also in the exhibit packet.
So for the proposed lot line adjustment, you can see here that the existing property line is between
4461 and 4459 and we're proposing to relocate it to the other side of the property.
When we submitted that permit application we got this notice of refusal from the survey district
or from we got approval from the survey district but notice of refusal from LNI.
The lots themselves comply with all the required area and frontage things. The variances that are
requested that are required or related to existing conditions. There's two use variances and one bulk
variance. So we did a little research. Here you can see the property. This map is from an atlas
created in 1929 and revised in 1945 so the configuration of the property with the building
on 4459 the building on 4461 and the building at the rear of the property has existed since at least
1945 and we're not sure exactly about the time frame of the parking use between but it's been
there at least at least since the 90s when our neighborhood bought it our old neighborhood bought
it and there's a 1973 document in the public record that labels this building as a garage.
So as far as we can tell, it's been there for quite some time.
So our variance request summary, like I said, we're not planning to modify anything about
the existing conditions. It's really just the lot line adjustment that has prompted
the variance requirements. The conditions right now are grandfathered to the 4461 lot,
but would become part of the 4459 property with the purchase agreement. So the existing property
line is here just to be relocated to the other side of the driveway. The existing parking use
is to remain. The existing building at the rear of the property is to remain. And that's a use
variance for a second principal building on the property. That's what L &I determined for that
existing building. And the dimensional variance is for the rear setback. It's right on the property
line. There's a four foot alley behind it. And then there's a parking lot on the other side of
that um whoops oh sorry about that so um i also have here the um all the exhibit document that
includes all all the additional information with our certificate of tax compliance deeds for the
property existing and proposed um but it's fairly straightforward it's really just um
this lot line adjustment that will require the grandfathered conditions to be you know to be
changed um so uh that's all i have i'm happy to answer any questions questions from the board
thank you no mr chairman no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual questions or comments
from the virtual audience
i did not see any hands mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5 single family residential
zoning at this location we feel the applicant has demonstrated a long -standing use and that the
lot line adjustment is de minimis accordingly the planning commission recommends the board
grant the variances mi 2022 000 302 4459 silverwood street i vote yes harold tenere my vote is yes
thomas halliman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes yes thank you thank you okay
MI 2022
5316 Diamond
Street, Allen
Nocklinson.
Coordinating
Coordinating letter of opposition
letter of
opposition from
from the Coordinating RCO
the coordinator
Winfield Residents Association.
Mr. Nockamson, let me get back in
as a panelist, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair
Members of the Board, Alan Nockamson
of Nockamson PCV.
Mr. Nockamson, could you, being you've already sworn,
could you identify your client
and the relationship to the property?
Yes, her name is Brenda Howard. She is actually the owner of the property.
Our Vice Chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Mr. Nockamson, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
voted as under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with your CO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Okay, you may proceed.
I may share your screen.
All right, so I'm here to present 5316 Diamond Street.
In my presentation packet, you'll see the notice of refusal, the correspondence from the Winfield Residence Association, a petition.
um there's 102 addresses within the affected area uh my client actually got almost all of
those addresses uh to support her project and we'll show you that um there are of the 102 she
has 85 uh signatures showing support from those properties uh 10 of them of those 108 102 are
vacant lots uh one is her property uh there are two uh in opposition so she was honest about that
and the remaining uh homes were not available uh so you know she really did make a conservative
effort to reach out to the community a little information about her bake shop is nisera's
Bake Shop. We have, you know, the internet site. Miss Howard lives at the property. She has
cooked from her home in her kitchen, baking goods for special events. And, you know, she does have
one restaurant client. Given the volume of business, she wanted to create a commercial
kitchen in her basement level where the garage is. And we'll go through that as well in terms
of our architectural plans and drawings we did provide uh you'll see uh nearby residentially
zoned commercial uses according to google maps uh we have maps of the area photographs of the
property in the surrounding area our meeting notice showing that we did meet with the community
and we did notify the surrounding uh property owners our application for appeal to zba our deed
to the property showing that miss howard is the owner and their certificate of tax clearance at
At the conclusion of my presentation, we will have Ms. Howard adopt my testimony and, you know, we'll, you know, we'll feel, you know, we'll take, we'll feel questions from the ZBA.
Notice of refusal.
So this is an RSA -5 property.
This is an application for wholesale sales and distribution in the same building as an existing single family home.
plainly stated all we're trying to do is she's she's trying to bake her goods in a more commercial
like kitchen to deal with the volume that she has she's willing to agree to a temporary variance of
five years there will be no customers coming to the site she does have off -street parking in the
rear and as you're going to see we have overwhelming support from her nearby neighbors and people
within the affected area. Now, with that being said, I mean, we were really surprised. Ms. Howard
hired me to handle the, you know, the community meeting as well as this hearing. She handled the
rest of this, including mailing all of the letters and giving the requisite notice to the surrounding
properties. But we were really shocked, honestly, that there was such overwhelming opposition from
the people in that meeting. Now, I will say this, that there were two other projects that seemed to
be very controversial prior to hers. I think that those individuals who were not in the affected
area stayed and voted in opposition to this project. Even the introduction by the head
of the coordinating RCO seemed like, okay, this is a straightforward project. Let's present and
less votes and then all of a sudden we found out that we lost overwhelmingly um so that's why we
really did make a concerted effort to like reach the nearby neighbors so this is the map we're
green right here and this is all the anything that's in red is particular
And this is all the, anything that's in red is petition signatures, anything yellow, we got letters to support.
But as you can see from all these properties, there are 86 properties, one of ours, but the rest is everyone else.
We got 85 people, excuse me, 85 addresses in support of this project.
There's only 102 affected addresses.
We got everyone, including the people, to left and right of us and right behind us to support us.
So I can't speak to who was at that meeting.
Maybe the individual who is the head of the coordinating RCO could shed light on this.
But we were really shocked about this.
So as you can see, my client reached Lebanon is, by the way, right behind us.
Right. So she literally hand wrote like all the addresses and then went to every single address.
painstakingly over the course of several weeks to make sure she got everyone she could to decide
if they were in support or in opposition. There was only two, there was only two addresses in
opposition. And she was completely honest. She wanted to make sure that every address had a say
in this process. The only ones that she, you know, obviously couldn't get any indication were the
vacant lots or if it was a commercial property. So she really did try to, you know, honestly make
an effort to find out and people were overwhelmingly in support of this project
the only people you would see is 5303 lebanon and 5306 lebanon they were in opposition but everyone
else of the 102 uh well 85 of them of the 102 were in support she was one of the addresses
10 were vacant two were in opposition the rest you couldn't reach but she really made an effort
This is important to her. Like most businesses start as an idea and then start in that person's house.
Like I actually looked up on the Internet, you know, before this hearing to see like, you know, you hear the apples of the world, you hear Amazon, you hear, you know, Google, everyone, you know, they all started in a garage in the house.
right and microsoft even but you know those are office you know those are ideas from computers
but even yankee candle company started in a garage uh so you know it's that's how you know
that's the american dream that's how people start their businesses it would be impossible for her to
to rent a commercial space she's been looking for commercial space that would be affordable
and it'd be really difficult it would be a shame because she's definitely getting traction with her
business. But these are all the people that sign on her behalf, her neighbors. And she's been there
and she lives there. And so she also got letters to support. We tend to do the letters to support
with the directly impacted properties. So you'll see 5314 Diamond Street, 5317 Diamond,
5319 Lebanon, which is behind us, 5318 Diamond. So again, you'll see that both neighbors on
both sides who would be directly impacted or in support and a little bit about her business the
sarah bake shop um you know she you know she's been around some time she she you know during a
pandemic uh she quit her job to start this because she's really gaining traction and she you know
does nice you know baked goods for you know both cakes and pastries and baked goods for special
events and for some restaurants and you know she wants to continue that uh by way of of using her
her house so again you can just see like you know she takes a lot of heart into what she does
and then you know we we looked on google um earth uh to see like what else is out there that is
residentially zoned which has also a commercial component and so it's not uncommon right you
You know, if it's something that's similar to what we're proposing, you know, that's something that makes sense from a variance point of view.
And we really did look at that as well.
And then these are the addresses of these properties, which are zoned residential, but have commercial uses.
And then maps of the area. Again, we're on Diamond Street, but against Lebanon.
And you'll see there's a common driveway where we do have a driveway, you know, to load and unload our materials for our baked goods.
Again, we're not going to have any customers there.
And then just from a Google Maps perspective, where we are.
And then photographs of the property.
This is the front of the property on Diamond Street.
This is the rear of the property.
As you can see, she has a parking spot there.
She's going to repurpose this used -to -be garage area for, hopefully, her kitchen, commercial -ish kitchen.
Existing conditions, she just keeps storage down there.
And then her plans and drawings, very simple.
You walk in, you have two tables, you have a fridge, you have a freezer.
You walk in, you have two tables, you have a fridge, you have a freezer and you have a oven and more table for use for preparation of her baked goods.
And she's just going to use the whole first floor level where, again, it's ground level.
It's not a basement where she wants to have a commercial kitchen here.
And then, you know, the meeting notice, again, our firm didn't do it.
So it looks a little bit different than what we usually show the board.
but you can see she hand wrote every single one of these it was really important to her
for her to do things the right way and we again really surprised by who was at the community
meeting who voted against it um but you know that sometimes happens with these projects
but there were people who voted against it oh they did yeah they did oh yeah i mean that's
the thing like we don't know who those people are because she didn't recognize any of them
and they were there were different projects out there uh that would seem controversial and
unfortunately sometimes you get the the spillover effect but that's why she reached out you know
after the the community meeting and reached and that's why we did that petition where she went
day after day after day to really find to get that support from her her community um including
her nearby neighbors like directly adjacent to her are you saying this is something common
in Winfield? It's my belief it's not. I used to live right across from there. All I can say is
that we went on Google Earth and that there were other residents and I'm going to go back here.
Okay. No doubt she's got a great business. Yeah so I mean it's a business in its infancy and it
be very difficult for her to have to have a commercial space. And so she's kind of stuck
in that middle ground. And that's why she really, if the board is, you know, inclined to grant
variants, we would agree to a temporary variants to give her that opportunity. You know, hopefully
she'll grow enough where maybe she then has the ability to go into a commercial space. But right
now she's kind of in that purgatory. But, you know, we looked online and we found these businesses
here um that were in residentially zoned properties um that are commercial in nature
so and here's a list of the properties um that we found so i'm going to stop sharing my screen i
mean we also have the tax clearance certificate i know it's late you know but like you know i
could show it to you i can show you the deed but you know i figured we'll unshare our screen for
now um i asked that miss howard virtually raised her hand and i don't know if anyone else is in
virtual audience to either support or discuss this project further. So, Ms. Howard, can you virtually
raise your hand? Ms. Howard has been allowed to speak, sir. Hi, could you state your name and
spell it, please, for the court reporter? Ms. Howard?
can you hear me yes could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter
okay my name is brenda howard b -r -e -n -d -a howard h -o -w -a -r -d you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed i miss howard you heard everything
i stated today yes is it true and correct yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes yes and
then you you know we went through that petition you personally walked door to door gaining the
of those individuals right yes i knocked on each and every door and there were 102 doors that you
knocked on correct well except for the ones that are vacant yes there are 10 vacant lots and there
other than the two properties uh that did voice their opposition which we noted everyone else who
did have an opinion of those 85 are in support of this project correct okay thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman mr chairman no no questions or comments from the virtual
audience i see no other hands mr chair oh mr chair the other thing is i did reach out to joshua
cohen a member of council member uh jones's uh uh staff yeah they did state you know he did state
that they would leave it up to the board to decide you know this variance that they were
not going to take a position okay thank you uh planning commission
Okay, thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single -family residential at this location.
The proposal is for a warehouse distribution which is recognized as an industrial land use
and is not consistent with the character of the surrounding residential land uses.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission strongly recommends the Board deny the variance.
mi20220002775316 diamond street i vote no carol ternary my vote is no
thomas halliman my vote is no king snell my vote is no
thank you
is there anyone
left in the virtual audience whose case
hasn't been called
I see no further hands
Mr. Chair
thanks everybody
appreciate everybody's work today
have a good night everyone
have a good night
bye bye
Bye, y 'all.
Good night.
Bye, y 'all.
Good night.