ZBA Hearing - December 4, 2024

Apologies for getting the last name wrong.

Bianca, did you hear my testimony just now regarding the contractor you hired for this property, the work that was done, and what you're seeking to legalize?

I did.

At the time the contractor was doing the work, were you aware that there were no permits pulled and that they were required for what was going on?

No, I didn't. I didn't know that I had to have a permit.

okay um did you believe the contractor was handling all all of the associated

appropriate licensing and permits that were required here i believe so yeah okay all right

um and do you adopt all my testimony as your own otherwise yes okay i have nothing for questions

questions from the board

not question but comment um the well because there was no uh pulling of permits ahead of time

uh decks are not allowed to have a permanently affixed roof or stairs and that has been so

for since that legislation was actually approved back in the 1990s.

So, you know, this is nothing new.

And, you know, again, it's the usual, I didn't know,

or the contractor didn't let me know.

with the whole idea that you're doing this without proper permits.

The whole idea that you're doing this without proper permits and then asking for approval after that, you know, the asking for forgiveness rather than permission is a problem for me.

We understand that. I guess the only response would be is that my client, if you need to speak to her further, she's available.

This is not someone that bought the property, you know, two years ago and did this work.

This is a family that's had it for, I mean, at least she's been involved since 2006.

Bianca, prior to 2000.

But who is living in this space?

I mean, it looks pretty lived in.

My family, my mom and my brother.

So it was done to accommodate other family members?

It's not being rented out to the public?

Not to the public, only for my family.

Okay.

i see and how long have your family owned the property bianca excuse me how long has that

property been in your family since 2002 2002 okay um and uh i i guess regarding the the stairs um

If the board has some intention of approving at least the deck generally and not the stairs, that's something my client would have to be open to.

Yes. Well, why do you need them now?

Is the violation just for the stairs?

no the violation stairs from the ground level to the deck are prohibited on attached structures

that's one zoning refused are permitted except in the case of attached structures

oh got it okay so were this to be a non-attached structure then that these stairs would be

would be appropriate so i guess we are seeking approval for for the stairs as it does match

other decks that are that are on the block

other questions

questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson

not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience

i see don't hear his chair planning commission

thank you thank you having our planning commission staff the comprehensive plan

recommends no change to the existing RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.

There is no unique physical circumstance or condition that prevents the property from

being used in strict conformance with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends

that the board deny the use variance for two-family household living and variances for the proposed

deck. Mr. Counsel, we're going to hold this for a vote so we can talk about it in the executive

session. We'll vote on it next week

on the 11th at

9.30. The

case is closed other than that.

Okay? Thanks. Thank you.

Is there anyone in the virtual audience

whose case has not been called?

I see

the hands, Cher. Thanks

everyone. See everyone at 2 p.m.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's meetings.

Our vice chair, Ismail Shaheed, should be here shortly.

Here is our board member, Cheryl L. Gaston.

Present, Mr. Chairman.

Our board member, Tanada Graham.

Present, Mr. Chairman.

Board member, Michael Johns.

Hello, Mr. Chairman.

And our board member, Taya Nguyen.

Present, Mr. Chairman.

Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Ian Haggerty.

Proceedings are being recorded.

With your participation, you agree to be recorded.

Video will be available by contacting ZBAexecutiveDirector at phila.gov.

For our court stenographer, we asked attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.

If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.

To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.

Leave your email address and also the address of the property in question.

And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for testimony.

money. Any questions, contact ZBA Executive Director at phil.gov. Here's our schedule for this afternoon.

at philadelphia here's our schedule for this afternoon

number two mi 2024 005 262 1311 to 13 north 27th street that case is continued number three

MI 2024-005-732, 15-17 South 2nd Street, TA-30461, cases continued.

Number 10. MI 2024-005-752. 4028 Westminster Avenue. That case is continued.

And number 14, MI 2024-005-790-3625 North 16th Street, that case has been continued.

Are there any other requests for continuance?

Good afternoon, Chair. This is Jevette Benton. I'll be your co-host for this afternoon.

I see no hands at this time.

Thank you. And number seven, MI 2024, 005-739, 1454 South 28th Street. Vassal Giddaf is the applicant from Giddaf Construction. No exhibits, first listing.

i see the handshake thank you so number seven mi 2024 005 739 1454 south 28th street

that case continued mark must be heard we're going to go to our add-on list

Number one on the add-on list. MI 2024-002-706-2141 East William Street. I vote no to request for reconsideration and rehearing.

Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.

Tana Graham, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.

Iowyn, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.

there oh michael's in yeah all right

okay uh number two mi 2024 002 707 2143 east william street i vote no to reconsideration and

re-hearing. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no to reconsideration and re-hearing.

Tynetta Graham, my vote is no to reconsideration and re-hearing.

We're going to go to our regular list. Number four, MI 2024-005-734, 1935 North 20th Street,

Al Nockmson is the attorney.

There's a letter of unanimous support from Beach Corporation.

Mr. Nockmson is coming back in as a panelist here.

Good afternoon, Mr. Nockamson.

Good afternoon.

Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?

Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-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, a relationship to the property?

Yeah, from 1935 North 20th Street, my client is Zane Real Estate LLC, the owner of the property.

And in the virtual audience is Michael Ali Dodd, one of its members.

Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and do you agree with its accuracy?

I do.

Please share your screen and start your presentation, sir.

Thank you.

All right, so I'm here to present 1935 North 20th Street during our presentation.

So I'm here to present 1935 North 20th Street. During our presentation we'll review first a

notice of refusal. This is an RSA 5 property with that is a little over 1400 square feet of lot size

so it's a rather large lot. We're looking to put a quadplex there which is not out of character

to the neighborhood and so we have two refusals and we'll see that one is for use and one is

for open area. We do have unanimous support from the community by way of Beach Community

Services Incorporated. They were very favorable to this project. We have an aerial view of the

property or the block as well. You'll see that there is not much development here. So it again

is definitely screams that like this zoning classification is putting constraints on

development, and we're hoping to put a four-unit development on this property. We'll review maps

of the area. Again, I believe across the street is RM1, but unfortunately, our side of the street

is RSA5, which is preventing development, not just for our property, but most of the properties on

that side of the block. Then we'll review photographs of the property, which is just a

vacant lot. And then my client is a well-known and thought of developer in the city of Philadelphia,

So I have some sample interior photographs of the type of work product he puts into his properties.

Then we'll review the plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, along with proof of mailing of that notice,

our applications for appeal that we filed on behalf of Zane Real Estate LLC,

the deed to the property showing that Zane Real Estate LLC is the owner of the property,

and the Certificate of Tax Clearance showing that Zane Real Estate LLC owes no real estate taxes as it pertains to this property.

At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Ali Dodd virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and have a few questions for him about my presentation.

So notice refusal is this.

This is an RSA 5 property, but again, it's a rather large lot for an RSA 5 property, a little over 1,400 square feet.

We're looking to put a quadplex here, and during our presentation, we'll review why this is a responsible project.

first things first if this board feels so inclined to grant the zoning variance requests

we would ask that the board also include a proviso commercial trash pickup that was something that

we brought up to the community and I think they viewed that favorably as well so we would ask

that the board include that as part of any approval so we have two refusals here one is for use of

the property. Again, not out of character. If you look across the street, there's many

multifamily structures across the street that are on one. Unfortunately, our side of the street is

RSA 5, and there's really no development on our side of the street at all. There's no building

structures, and for good reason, it's really hard to develop over there without increasing some

sort of density here. And we think four units is a responsible use of the property. The second

refusal we have is for open area. Again, we're not affecting anyone's light in there. There's no

building structures here. And in order to create a more thoughtful floor plan and just have bigger

bedrooms and living space, we are asking for additional occupied area in a sense, which means

less open area. But either way, the request for variance is de minimis in nature, where we're

We're seeking slightly more than or slightly less than 100 square feet of lots of occupied lot size for that variance request.

Letter support from Beach. Again, unanimous support.

Aerial view of the property. So as you can see here on our streets, this is where we are.

there's really no development at all for any properties on this block facing our side of North

20th Street. Again, you know, there are properties here and here, which are R1 in nature. So we think

that by adding this density will encourage development and hopefully more development

on that side of the street and create eyes on the street as well. Maps of the area here, as you can

see this is RM1 right here, which we're using as a guide to for our project. And you can see we're

really surrounded by RM1 all around. And then where we are in the neighborhood, we're between

Norris and Berks and Uber and Woodstock in the North Philly part of Philadelphia.

Photographs of the property, this has been a vacant lot for some time. This is proof of posting of

for the notice posters for today's hearing.

Again, Google Earth or Street View

Again, Google Earth or Street View goes as far back as 2007.

goes as far back as 2007.

This has been a vacant lot as far as Google Street View goes, and I suspect it's been a vacant lot for a lot longer as well.

This is north 20th Street to the right of the property, to the left of the property.

Sample interiors.

So Mr. Ali Dodd and his real estate group really take great pride in the craftsmanship of their projects.

and they put high-end materials and appliances into their apartment units.

So whenever I have a developer who does a lot of work in the city,

I always try to highlight their work product.

So the proof is in the pudding.

And then there are plans and drawings here.

We're not seeking any other type of variances other than the use,

as well as the occupied or open area.

We're proposing to have a height of 35 feet.

Even our rear yard, even though we have an open area issue,

our rear yard is, for the setback, is 11 feet, which is well within code.

So we have a pretty massive size rear yard.

Everyone is going to have access to that rear yard.

So that's the other thing.

We're going to store our trash back here, but we'll still do commercial trash pickup.

but every single resident can go from front to back in this property. There's four bi-level units.

Unit number one, which is 910 square feet, is the first floor and lower level. Go further out,

unit number two is, and that's a one-bedroom, one-and-a-half bath. Unit number two is 924

square feet. Again, first floor and lower level. You go up a flight of steps to the third and

fourth floors, and you're looking at, or second and third floors, and you're looking at units three

and units four. Unit three is 1,066 square feet, which is a two-bedroom, one-bath,

and unit number four is 1,110 square feet, two-bedroom, one-bath. Our meeting notice,

so we met with the community on October 23rd at 5.30 p.m. via Zoom. We emailed that notice a few

weeks beforehand to show proof that we mailed that notice to 120 addresses. Here are the addresses.

The proof of mailing to those addresses. Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf

of Zane Real Estate LLC, along with the notice of refusal. And then the project information form.

The deed to the property, showing the Zane Real Estate LLC is the owner of the property.

and a certificate of tax clearance showing that they owe no money.

Now, while, you know, this is not an enforceable restriction on the property,

my client does affordable housing,