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.