Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have 36 attendees and we can start when you'd like.
Thank you.
Good morning.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our Vice Chair.
President Mr. Chair. Ismael Shaheed our board secretary.
President Mr. Chairman. Thomas Holliman our board member.
President Mr. Chairman. And James Snell our board member.
President Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Also with us our board attorney Hillary Emerson
and our ZBA hearing supervisor Lakeisha Dandy. Before we begin here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phillit.gov.
For the benefit of a 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 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box that's on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumter.
Let's look at our continuations for today.
Number two, MI 2022-003-329-435 West Burke Street.
That case is continued.
Number three, MI-2022-003-293-2409 North 17th Street, that case is continued.
Number eight, MI-2022-003-335-5216 Whore Rock Street. That case is continued.
you. Number 11, MI 2021-003-715-414 East Roosevelt Boulevard. That case is continued.
Number 12, MI 2022, 001-010, 6800 North 16th Street. That case is continued.
And number 14, MI 2022, 003-365, 1216 Lycoming Street. That case is continued.
you does anyone have any comments relative to the cases that have been continued
good morning chair this is fatina l and we have someone by the name of shola last name ending in o
please unmute yourself you're free to speak okay good morning could you good morning could you
State your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
My name is Shola Olunloyo.
The spelling is first name S-H-O-L-A and the last name O-L-U-N-L-O-Y-O.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case do you want to talk about, sir?
The case of 2701 Oakford Street.
Shall I proceed?
Well, one minute. Is that on the morning's list?
Yes, Mr. Chair, that is number six. Okay. Okay, proceed, sir.
okay okay proceed sir yes i am the immediate neighbor to 2701 2703 and i did not get
Yes, I am the immediate neighbor-
notification of the community meeting however okay so so what what what what's going to happen
here is when when um we call that case you will have an opportunity to respond okay great that
case is going to be called yes thank you okay sure is there anyone else who has comments about
the cases that were continued yes chair we have stefan last name ending in f okay good morning
um hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter sure uh it's stephen v
fabiani f as in frank a b i a n i do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth uh yes i do what case do you want to talk about sir uh i'm actually calling about
1401 South 13th Street, which I understood was to be at 3.30 this afternoon, but I just received
notice that it may be at 9.30 this morning. Hillary, do we have that? I'm looking, Mr. Chair.
Give me one second. 1403? 1401 South 13th. That one is on the 3.30 list. Okay. Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
Are there any additional requests for continuance?
Chair, we have Jennifer Bazzillo.
Hi, this is Jennifer.
Counsel, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Jennifer Bazzillo, B as in boy, A as in apple, Z as in zebra, Y, D as in David, L as in Larry, O as in Oscar.
All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth? The whole truth is nothing but the truth?
In what case?
6142 Callow Hill Street, MI2022-003390.
Okay. One minute, please.
It's number seven.
Okay. Proceed, counsel.
I was just hired this morning, and there's some issues that we need to resolve.
So just asking for a continuance.
Absolutely.
Okay, so number seven, MI 2022-003-390-6142, Cal Hill Street.
That case is continued.
Thank you so much.
Any other requests for continuances?
I see no handshake.
Also, I have a few cases here that have no exhibits.
Number four, MI-2022-003-397-3034 Titan Street.
I have no exhibits.
Joseph Bernardino is the attorney.
Chair, we have Maude Martin.
Ma'am, please unmute yourself.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Maude Martin.
M-A-U-D-E-M-A-R-T-I-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you the owner of this property, 3034 Titan Street?
Okay, what's your interest in this case, ma'am?
Oh, I'm sorry.
That's okay.
That's not the one that I'm here for.
Okay, good.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
is there anyone here for 3034 titan street there's no handshare okay thank you so number four
mi2022-003-397-3034 titan street that case is continued and number 13
hold on a minute number 13
Number 13, MI 2022-003-336-1140 South 54th Street.
We have no exhibits.
This is the first listing.
Ronald Tolbert and Nick's Realty are the listed owners.
I see no hands, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
So MI-2022-003-336-1140 South 54th Street, that case is continued.
We're going to go to our list.
Number one, MI-2022-003-393.
MI-2022-003-393-2612 North 17th Street.
Attorney at Jermaine Harris, the RCOs are both requesting a continuance for today.
Is there anyone from the RCOs on the line?
Mr. Harris, were they one of continuance?
uh no i wasn't aware that they wanted a continuance i know the coordinating
mr harris let me swear you first okay state your name and spell for the court reporter
uh good morning uh jermaine harris counsel for uh the owner mogul tier llc all right just just
for the record spell your last name please uh sure h-a-r-r-i-s do you swear for him to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i i so do all right thank you is there anyone from
the swan poodle neighbors association north central philadelphia cdc online chair we have
a calling user with the phone number and then three five five two okay please unmute yourself
you're free to speak
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
Yes, Adrienne Fernandez, Swamp Poodle Neighborhood Partners Association, RCO.
And my first name, Adrienne, my last name is spelled F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
All right.
Do you swear from tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
You're requesting a continuance?
Swamp Poodle and also North Central Philadelphia, RCO, requesting a continuance.
As the meeting, the meeting was not continued. The meeting was not completed, and the applicant is aware of that. There were significant factors that were not completed by the applicant, like trash management plans, occupancy information, and other parts of the plans that the RCOs had questions about.
Also, there were problems, significant problems with the mailing two times, and even when the meeting was held, there was just one affected neighbor there from two doors away.
We are familiar with many of the neighbors around here, and none of the other neighbors were there at all, and they are very concerned about the negative impacts on the block and overuse of variances for multifamily properties.
They just want to come to the meeting and be able to speak to the owner of the applicant party, and they've not really had that opportunity.
We're not really sure they received notices because they were mailed from Sicklerville after the applicant did not mail them out when he claimed to be ready for the first and second meeting that the RCO coordinator scheduled.
All right. All right. Thank you. Mr. Harris?
Yes. So we had a meeting on the 13th and these concerns, we had seven people that were there that were nearby neighbors that were there.
And the coordinating RCO, there was going to be a vote, but the other two, the other RCO, Swampoodle, they wanted to have a second meeting.
And they were supposed to schedule it.
They were supposed to schedule another meeting because it was within a month.
They were supposed to schedule another meeting within that time.
That didn't happen.
And the concerns that they addressed at the RCO, because it was a pretty lengthy RCO, it was about an hour, we presented that plan to the coordinating RCO as well as the CC, and we CC'd Ms. Fernandez addressing their concerns.
And also, we got significant support from members of the community, which is listed in our exhibit packet.
There were 30 signatures for this in the support of this project on that same block.
So we're surprised.
Mr. Harris, this is what we're going to do.
Yeah. Hillary, we're going to go on with the case. We'll hold the vote till we hear from the RCOs.
All right. Sounds good, Mr. Chair. All right. So, so, Mr. Harris,
list who your client is again, please. Mogul Tier LLC. And he's actually on the.
Okay. So our vice chair has a few questions for you. Present your case. We'll go to planning.
We'll go to planning.
we'll hold the vote until we hear from the rcos okay
We'll hold the vote until we hear from the RCOs, okay?
All right.
Carol?
Good morning, Mr. Harris.
Do you agree to wait for 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 and or plans to the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
I do. Okay, great. You may proceed and start with sharing your screen.
Thank you. Thank you.
Okay, can everyone, just want to make sure, can everybody see my screen? Yes. Okay. That's great.
All right. So this is concerning 2612 North 17th Street. And what we're seeking here is, well, first of all, we have the exhibit here, which is evidencing ownership of the property for the applicant, which is mobile tier.
They obtained ownership of this property on March 1st of 2022.
And here is the tax clearance on this property.
Here is the property.
It's actually a show.
It's been vacant for the past four.
As our understanding, it's been vacant for about four or five years.
uh it's a three-story uh building it's a pretty large building it's about 2200 square feet
and here are uh pictures of what it is now
evidencing that it is a shell it's vacant it's the basement
it's part of the first floor
part of the first floor is part of the second
so what we're seeking what what we're seeking to do here this is the and this is the third floor
as well as evidence of the posting of this uh of this hearing now what's what they're seeking
to do is for this property uh to be a a legal triplex a legal three family and here are the
plants. This is the first floor where we would be looking at two bedrooms.
This would be the front walk into the kitchen, bathroom right here.
This would be one bedroom. This would be the second bedroom. And then in the back,
you have the laundry room second floor is a bedroom you walk upstairs
bedroom bedroom living room and bedroom so this would be three bedrooms with a kitchen
then you walk up the stairs to the third floor which is a bedroom
uh bedroom in the middle bathroom and then you have your common area with the kitchen
so uh that's pretty much uh the layout of this particular uh what the proposed layout
of this particular property is. Now, there is significant support for this particular project
as noted uh as i opened with uh there are signatures from and these are all highlighted
uh that indicate members within the community who support this uh project and if you note there are
about 30 signatures they're all highlighted are with the numbers are all from the 2600
block of North 17th Street. And we have a total of 39, again, of which 30 are of the particular
are of the particular block that would directly be affected by this particular project
block that would directly be affected by this.
in question. When we had the RCO meeting, just so that you know, again, there were seven people
there. And if a vote would have been taken, then a vote would have been successful based on the
comments. A vote would have been for the approval of this particular project. And when I spoke to
coordinating rco all in the family afterwards um they wanted to know because there were concerns
about the trash plan our concern uh and we told them that we would have that the applicant would
have uh trash being placed in canisters in the front and a trash contractor going by uh every
daily to make sure that the trash is placed and maintained within the canisters
And then on trash day for the trash to be neatly placed out in the for for trash pickup on trash day.
Now, there is also history in this block of there being multifamily on this block.
We just have we have 20. In fact, two blocks. I'm sorry. Three houses down.
2618. That's a three-unit active rental license. We have 2608, which is multifamily.
We have 2629, which is also multifamily. So there is history, definitely, of there being
multi-families within this block. Now, the hardship is that this is a shell, this is a
very large, this is a pretty large building, and we feel it would be significant hardship for it
to be used as a single family. And we would ask that in light of the community, the significant
community support, particularly on that block, that this project be granted. And also the
meeting summary that was presented by the coordinating RCO, it notes that the parties
couldn't reach an agreement on the application as well. That wasn't submitted in my package,
but i did submit it to uh miss emerson this morning so that is also part of uh this as well
and i have the applicant here and i would ask that he be um promoted so that way he could adopt
the statements that's being said here okay mr alexander
You have to raise your hand, Mr. Alexander.
Mr. Alexander, you're allowed to speak.
Okay, thank you.
Hi, could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter?
My name is Michael Alexander, M-I-C-H-A-E-L-A-L-E-X-A-N-D-E-R.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Okay, Mr. Alexander, could you state what your position is with this, with Mobile Tier?
I am the sole owner of Mobile Tier, LLC.
Now, you heard the statements that I just presented, the evidence that I just presented to the zoning, to the board members.
Do you agree with those statements?
Yes, I do, sir.
do you adopt those do you adopt those statements yes sir and do you have anything that you would
like to add to what i've stated is there anything you don't necessarily have to but is there anything
else that you would like to add to what i stated uh no i don't i don't have anything okay
and i would just open it up for any if anybody has questions questions from the board
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
Questions or comments for the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Odessa, last name ending in T.
Ma'am, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
hello can you guys hear me yeah could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Hello, can you guys hear me?
Yeah, could you?
yes my name is odessa tate o-d-e-s-s-a-t-a-t-e all right do you swear from the child truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor no i am all in a family group
okay could you all right what's your testimony so i also wanted to mention that there is no
consensus because the other rcos wanted to go with another public hearing meeting so that's why
there's no answer of confirmation on the form that jermaine received but in the meeting and from our
point of view on one of the neighbors sean phillips asked what was done with the property what was
Van Dyne and that the property
incurs squatters and unwanted
activity takes place from drugs
to individuals leaving trash.
I think that we all agree that
fixing the property to habitability
would be a great asset to the block,
but we can also stay true to the
fabric of the community by leaving
larger three-story single-family
homes accessible for families
that need them. So as a
suggestion for Mr. Harris
and for his client,
PHA has
the housing choice voucher program for owners hdv owner pha makes their projections according to
small area fair market rents so for a five-bedroom home such as this within the 19132 zip code
he could receive 1846 for rent he can also utilize opportunities that hud may be able to provide
but according to the x247 there must be adequate planning to meet the housing needs of present
residents and of those individuals and families anticipated to reside in the municipality which
may include conservation of presently sound housing rehabilitation of housing and declining
neighborhoods and the accommodation of expected new housing and different dwelling types and
that appropriate densities for households of all income levels section 604 states that the
ordinances should promote protect and facilitate any or all of the following the public health
safety rules and the general welfare coordinated and practical community
development and proper density of population to prevent one mentioned the
overcrowding of land it is important that the intensity of use or density of
development is determined the development is a violation of density of
population and intensity of use which is did not show what each floor looks like
from front to back so we could not get a feel for the current layout and what
can actually fit in the space according to the architectural drawings but there is an overuse for
the space being presented by taking the number of bedrooms from five to seven all in the family is
not in support of the various change to a triplex all right thank you thank you for your thank you
for your comments and thank you for calling it thank you is there any other people in the virtual
audience would have liked to make a comment chair we have a caller a phone number ending in three
five five two okay i could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes this is adrian fernandez again adrian you've already been sworn just just so you know uh we're
not going to vote today on this and we're going to wait to hear from the from the rcos yes i
understood what you explained earlier. And with reference to that, I'm asking, is it possible you
can hold a vote for at least three weeks? If you wait to hear, we're going to hold a vote for 30
days. Okay. Thank you. Also, Odessa has mentioned some options that are in line with other
variance hearings that we've had on this block, and we would like to present those to the
neighbors because they're in line with keeping a single family. And we have successful rentals on
this block by families that are kept in single family homes. All right. So thank you for calling
in again. We appreciate it. You'll hear the results shortly. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair. Hi. Planning Commission, please. Good morning,
Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. That last name is
spelled h-e-g-a-r-t-y right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes sir proceed thank you board members in 2014 the zoning map was amended at this location
from rm1 to rsa5 in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan however this existing
building is a relatively large three-story structure and there is evidence of two and
three family uses and similar structures on this block city planning commission recommends that
the board grant the variance thank you um mi 2022-003
Thank you. MI 2022-003-393-2612 North 17th Street. We're going to hold the vote on this. We'll wait 30 days to hear from the RCOs. Mr. Harris, thank you very much for your presentation.
Thank you for having me again.
I just want to note the record is otherwise closed except for letters from Swampoodle
and North Philadelphia CDC who were not able to submit letters yet.
Thank you.
The record is closed other than the letters from the RCO.
All right, Mr. Harris?
Yes, thank you.
Thanks for having me again.
All right, thank you.
number five mi 2022 00908 6302 morton street leo movihill is the attorney
there's a letter of support from the chew and belfield neighbors club incorporated
with proviso council person bass's office is not taking a position in this matter
good morning members of the board mr mobile could you uh spell your name for the court reporter
please yes it's leo l-e-o last name m as in michael u-l v as in victor i h-i-l-l right do you
swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do mr mulvihill could
you identify your client in relationship to the property certainly my client for purposes of this
application is ms bernicia salman that's s a l m as in mary o n as in nancy d as in delta
she's the principal of watch us grow learning center llc the tenant at the property the property
owner is also on the line our vice chair has a few questions yes hi mr malvahill do you agree
to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit
pact with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or referral voters under plans on the
property thought is in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
You may proceed and start with what you've started with your screen.
Certainly.
Good morning, everyone.
Leo Mulvihill on behalf of Ms. Bernicia Sellman.
She's the proprietor of Watch Us Grow Learning Center, LLC, and she's a longtime resident
of this particular neighborhood.
She grew up a couple doors down from the subject property, so she knows the area well.
This application is for a daycare center, not for 24 hours, maximum occupancy around
20 for younger students in a really large building with a nice open play area outside
that's fenced in. We'll get to that in a moment. So for purposes of this hearing, our materials,
I have the refusal appeal on project information form at page 1. Area maps at page 9, lease
at 11, commercial activity license at 12, tax clearance at 13, zoning notification letter
at 15. We didn't have an RCO letter at the time of the submission of this packet but I believe we
have since received one indicating non-opposition. I have photos of the property beginning at page 20
and then we have the floor plans of the property beginning at page 75.
So as noted this is a refusal for a daycare located in an RSA 3 zoning district and as we
As you know, RRC 3 does not permit zoning, pardon me, RRC 3 zoning does not permit daycares.
This is a map.
So we are located right here in the corner on these relatively large properties on Morton
Street at the intersection of East Washington Lane.
There's a number of large multifamily properties here along Morton on our same block.
And then this brick of RM1 properties directly to our northeast multifamily as well.
number of multi-family on this block along Washington Lane. So in addition to the mailings,
I went out at the request of the council person's office and ensured that these multi-family
properties were personally hand-flyered just to make sure that we had attendance at the meeting.
This is an overhead Google shop so we can see we're located by several bus stops
and otherwise it's largely a residential area. This is at least the first page of our lease.
I have a full copy as well, but Libby Goodman is the landlord.
She's on the line as well.
And here's my tenant, Venetia Salmons, for a five-year lease of the property.
This is my client's commercial activity license and the tax clearance for the property.
This is the mailing that went out.
Copy of the refusal, proof of mailing.
This is the hand delivery one that I personally gave out with orange flyers.
And this is the property itself, so this is the view from Washington Lane.
And this is the property itself.
So this is the view from Washington Lane.
This is the entire property, so there's three apartments above and then the ground story
is basically set up for a commercial use like this daycare.
There's two separate entrances, one on Morton off to our right, we'll get to that in a sec,
this one on Washington Lane, and this will be the primary entrance for the daycare.
There is a gate here, it's just open in this photograph, and there'll be some signs here
as well to direct parents to come in via this entrance up the stairs in their rear the entrance
along morton street that's a handicapped accessible entrance so it is ada compliant with the ramp in
case anybody needs to get in on the ramp so back here as we can see where i'm indicating with my
cursor these are the fences for the adjacent properties these are all going to be uh there's
going to be a new fence installed that's solid wood to completely fence in this back area to allow
privacy and security,
both for the students who will be at the daycare
and for the nearby neighbors.
Get a shot of the property from the other side.
These are the nearby twins that I was discussing earlier.
This is our zoning sign on the Morton Street side.
And this is a view from Morton Street.
So our building is a twin.
The part with the black on it is the house next door.
It's a multifamily house.
Here are the three mailboxes and separate entrance
on walkway for the three units that are present in this building already. This walkway leads up
to a set of stairs to the other entrance as I discussed previously on Morgan Street and this
ramp here is for the ADA accessible entrance. I have a million other photos there as well but we
pretty much got the gist. This is taken from the interior of the property where I was showing
everybody earlier that we'll be installing fences on the interior for privacy and this is going to
be showing the general play area for the kids. As I discussed earlier, this is going to be
replaced with solid wooden fencing for security and privacy. This is the interior of the property,
so we're pretty set up to go. We have several different rooms, play area, cleaning area,
kitchen, bathroom. Cubbies, and what I'll show you in a sec, we do have security cameras on
premises. This is our floor plan page 75 of our presentation packet. So initially where we were
or here doing the photographs that I was showing, this is Washington Lane off to the right here,
this is Morton Street. So our primary entrance would be coming in through this way up the stairs,
arts and crafts area is immediately there with office, kitchen, closet storage,
decent sized daycare area with our sink, daycare slash office area and the changing area which is
off towards the Morton Street side of the property. Again, as discussed, here's the entrance from
Morton. Here's our ADA ramp. The building next door is a multi-family structure with apartments
in it. The concerns of the community were essentially based upon safety of the kids.
My client Ms. Selman has a history of working in child care. She has another location.
As I noted at the outset, she's a long-time resident of this neighborhood and frankly of
this very block so she's quite familiar and she's dedicated to performing pardon me to providing
rather a daycare that's safe for all the kids in the neighborhood that nobody else has to worry
about and will be an asset to the community neighbors concerns at our meeting which we held
on on monday night included um more or less concerns about parking namely there were concerns
that folks coming to this daycare might be parking in adjacent neighbors' driveways.
We came to an agreement with a community group that we will be placing signs
indicating not to park in other folks' driveways.
Generally speaking, drop-off and pickup hours are not during rush hour peak times,
and the drop-off and pickup system is relatively streamlined. Ms. Salmon can explain it further
if necessary. But the parents will come, they get their kid, and then they leave, and that's the
extent of it. So we try to be cognizant of community concerns. So overall, because this
will not enter the community, because there is a demand for daycares in the area, there's a lot
of kids, a lot of families, because Ms. Salland is a long-time resident and long-time daycare
provider and has the experience and training necessary to do so, we'd ask that the board
grant this variance as there's a hardship because frankly there's no way that this can really be
turned back into a single family home at this point considering the apartments above and the
fact that this used to be some sort of doctor's office so it makes sense if you would continue
the use of some sort of commercial use uh that's why we face a hardship and that's why i'd ask this
board to grant a variance uh we're happy to build a building you want to have your client come on
and you're going to adopt your testimony can be adopted sure miss salman if you're present would
I heard your testimony can be adopted.
Ms. Salmon, if you're present, would you please raise your hand and ask to be unmuted?
Would you please raise your hand?
Ma'am, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Great.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
My name is Bernisha Salmon.
That's B-E-R-N-I-S-H-A.
Last name Salmon, S-A-L-M-O-N-D.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
yes sir hi proceed council okay miss salmon you've heard my testimony today yes and uh is there
anything you'd like to add to my testimony um no okay no thank you and you're satisfied with my
testimony it would be uh your testimony if you were to testify today as well yes sir and you
fully adopt my testimony as your own correct yes correct great i don't have any other questions
for you all right questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman all right
questions mr chairman this is mr chairman this is hillary i just have a quick question for mr
mulvihill um with regards to the proviso that was suggested by the rco is the applicant
in agreement with that proviso if the board should decide to grant in this matter which which element
specifically i think oh i apologize there were two the one that was enforceable would be the
access point for the child care facility from the morton street entrance right so we we need
to keep the second entrance open because it is ada but the primary entrance is going to be here
along washington lane as there were concerns from neighborhood residents about using morton
street as the primary entrance due to the fact that there's a residence next door
and due to traffic concerns on morton street so this will be the primary entrance we don't have
a problem with that but we will have to use the secondary entrance for ada purposes from time to
time because the the rco asked for the to use primarily the morton street entrance
they must have typed that backwards because that is not what was suggested during the meeting by
Okay. Okay. Maybe there'll be somebody on when we get to the virtual audience. Okay?
Okay. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room three.
Oh, I forgot we moved. 503 City Hall.
Okay. Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth? Nothing but the truth.
I do. Just with regard to that proviso, the RCOs after the fact did come up with that.
They looked at the entranceway on Washington Lane as being very problematic because that is a state highway
and very highly traveled. So, you know, if people are double parking things along those lines,
it will cause some confusion. That's why they said that they would prefer to have
the primary entrance on Morton Street where there is ADA and also that was the main entrance to the
doctor's office as well. And again, we have no position on it other than I just want to make
that clarification. Oh, Mr. Richardson, just so I'm clear. So during our meeting, we discussed
having the primary entrance be on washington that switched after we left yes sir okay cool
that's why the letter is different than what i remember thank you okay okay all right is there
anyone else in the virtual audience i see no hands chair planning commission thank you chair bergman
ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing rsa3 single-family zoning at this location however
this property was converted to a medical office in 1952 and established as a legal non-conforming
non-residential use this proposed use we feel is consistent with the configuration of this
existing building and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant
this variance thank you and um mr mobile are you comfortable with that morton street entrance
I am. If we could have my client unmute just to verify that. Ms. Salmon, would you please raise
your hand and unmute yourself just to clarify that since that is different than what we initially
discussed? Yes, that's perfectly fine. That's perfectly fine with me. Great. Thank you. Thank
you. MI 2022-000-908-6302 Morton Street. I vote yes. Proviso. Primary access to the child care
Primary access to the child care facility will be from buildings, Morton Street entrance.
facility will be from buildings more
Harold Tineri, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
So, number six, MI 2022-003386-2701 Oakford Street.
It's a pro se.
Jerry Janjigalino is the owner.
Letter of support from resident organized for advocacy and direction.
he's been promoted to a panelist hi sir could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
oh um i apologize can you hear me that's fine just just state your name and spell for the
court reporter please uh jeffrey jan julio uh g-i-a-n-g-i-u-l-i-o it's a mouthful all right
do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do and
you're the owner of the property sir i am our vice chair has a few questions okay hi good morning do
you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes have you emailed
Zip a 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, I do.
Okay, great.
You may proceed and begin sharing your screen.
Carol, do me a favor.
Carol, read the request.
The capitals, capital letters.
Wait a second.
which capital letters where we're on number so i'll do i i have it this application is for the
visitor's accommodation in existing structure the proposed visitor's accommodation is prohibited
in the zoning district rm1
i saw that i apologize no no no get out of here not to apologize
let's proceed sir okay yeah let me share my screen
all right can you see my screen we can awesome thank you so much so um yes my wife and i bought
this property back in 2018 and um we do short-term rent the property uh most of the people we try to
rent to are from CHOP and Penn is really the tribe that we go for. So I know there's a lot
of mixed emotions about this. A lot of people don't want it. A lot of people do. All I can do
is basically give you all the issues that I see. And over the years, what we learned to
fix these issues. So again, it's really to provide a safe place for guests to go who are going to
hopefully chop and pen, bring local revenue to the local businesses. Our cleaner is actually
local in Grace Ferry. We also, so is our maintenance man. And we call out a lot of the
stores, like the corner store with people to our future guests. So I know, again, our goal is to
respect the community by avoiding parking, XX noise, parties, and trash. The issues that come
with short-term rentals. So how do we do that? And I'll tell you, it was a learning process.
In the beginning, it was a little rough, but we've learned. And so we screen people very thoroughly. There's certain things, if they book the maximum amount of people, if they book zero in a house that fits eight people, then it's immediately going to draw the flag.
And if that flag is raised, we actually, well, we do make everybody put in writing.
I understand if outside cameras, neighbors, or hosts detect more than X amount of people, they're going to be kicked off the property.
And also, I wanted to explain parking.
Hold on.
So with parking, if we don't continue short-term renting this, odds are we're going to rent it to college kids probably because it's furnished over 30 days, probably three months at a time.
Most of our guests bring one to two cars.
This is what I explained to the community.
With the college kids, they're probably going to bring four or five cars, most likely.
So as far as the party avoidance, we put in a noise device.
When it's over a certain threshold, it alerts us.
When it's over a certain threshold, it alerts us, and we immediately tell the people to turn it down.
And we immediately...
If they won't, we're going to have to call the cops.
So as far as safety, you can tell this is in our first rodeo.
We really worked on making sure everything's in place.
But we have door codes that are only good for the person when they check in to when they check out, and then the code changes.
We have cameras. We don't want random people going back in there and doing anything unlawful.
For trash, we ask our guests to take out the trash. We also have the cleaners take out the
trash. Should that not happen, we partner with a company called Raging Raccoon to handle the trash.
And again, here's our target audience and why we love doing this. This is, I don't know if I can
move this over here. This is from one of our guests recently, and she heard that they were
shutting down short-term rentals um she says it really puts a damper on where people can stay
her granddaughter's in isolation uh will be for the next one to two months she can't stay in big
buildings or hotels and that's that's kind of the situation we run into a lot um so again we're
trying to do this safely properly and not just you know run run rampant and uh and that's about
it so and we're been doing this since 2018 so questions from the board no mr german i've been
doing this in your license to do it what's that are you licensed are you licensed to do this since
2018 so we have a rental license um they have not actually yeah we have a rental license basically
Now, this whole visitor accommodation is new.
Mark Squaila put it in and it's supposed to go in the place January 1st.
Anyone else from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Let me do that one more time because there was someone there.
here we go we have mary jameson okay
ma'am please unmute yourself hi could you state your name and spell the please for the court
reporter my name is mary jameson j-a-m-i-s-o-n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed
i don't like the idea of having this um
this station put here on bring her street this is a residential block
ma'am ma'am hold on hold on i think i think you have the wrong case
this is oakford street
oh i guess i have the wrong case that's fine thank you ma'am thank you is there anyone in
audience who has any comments for 2701 oakford street i see no hands chair planning commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
uh board members the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map amendment from rm1
to rsa5 at this location uh we do appreciate the steps this appellant has taken to minimize
impact but at the end of the day we don't believe this appellant has shown a hardship
to establish a hardship the code requires the appellant to show that the building cannot
reasonably be used as required by zoning the appellant has not shown that anything's preventing
them from using this unit as a dwelling unit rather than as a hotel room so the city planning
commission recommends that the board deny the variance if the board's inclined to grant we
recommend a proviso limiting the term of the variance to two years. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, we do have the other individual who called in previously with their hands up now.
Okay, good. Good. Okay. Mr. Chair, may I ask a question real quick before you go over?
Wait, wait, wait, wait. I have one more person to testify. Am I able to rebut this person?
Because I have... Just wait a second. Okay. Ma'am, you're free to speak.
hi state your name again my name is shola all right and i already swore you in but
state you spell your name one more time for the court reporter s-h-o-l-a last name is o-l-u-n
l-o-y-o all right proceed testify for the last three years i am the person most directly affected
by this property as i am next door i've had a recurring problem of various kinds with the
owners who have been basically operating in an extremely bad place.
Issues from sanitation, trash,
noise at strange hours of the night,
noise at strange hours of the night, no enforcement of capacity levels.
no enforcement of capacity.
Some of the tenants have breached my property, both on the roof,
in the visible area of the roof that you can sit on,
and the connecting roof of both buildings.
There are concerns about activity that is essentially not in my position,
I care about, but illegal, like drug use, potential drug transactional activity.
and i've actually had people come to my door going assuming it was the wrong address who
were involved in things that seem like you know prostitution bachelor parties type situation
those things i don't care about but the general uh you know environmental problems are the
continuous noise and the trash situation we have connecting backyards and for most of the summer
we can't use our backyard because their clients refuse to place trash properly in its receptacle.
So most of the back of the house smells like a dead body and there flies everywhere,
impacting the quality of life of not just the neighbors on both sides.
But also on trash days, there's no consistent removal of trash.
In the way they operate the property, the noise is an issue because what typically happens is someone will check in late.
they're operating on a different time zone say they're flying from India or wherever they come
from they decide to stay up from 11 p.m to 3 a.m we have to go to work at 6 in the morning
we send him a message he doesn't respond till 6 the next day and this goes on this has been going
on for two and a half years I have basically called the 17th district philadelphia police
department to this property at least 12 to 15 times in the last three years for various reasons
this is on file at 9-1-1 i have tried to reach them directly in good faith as a reasonable
person to just sit down and have a conversation about noise abatements can you do something about
your stairs and can you see if you can make your tenants really observe your capacity limits what
happens it's two people will check in and over the course of the evening five to seven people
will stop by and there's a party until like 1 a.m and this happens all the time you know it's it's
really a detrimental impact for people who have to work normally nine to five jobs and we're trying
to go to bed at 11. You know, as you can see, you know, part of why he's trying to pre-bought me
before I've even said something is because he's defensive and he knows he's wrong. I don't want
to get into personality issues, but this is an ongoing three-year situation that I would have
described in the community meeting, except I did not get a notification for it. I'm willing to work
with them to find some solution i don't want to restrict their ability for income but unless
they're willing to actually operate in a good faith and responsible way this application should
not be approved it's just completely ridiculous i feel like i'm living next to a hotel that's open
from 2 a.m to 7 a.m every day and we're basically for 50 of the time living next to people who
operate almost like vampires they're up at from 11 p.m to 6 a.m and then they sleep all day so
when we come home we have to deal with all their noise all night and the only time we can get peace
is unless we change into their schedule this is also compounded at the time when it's football
season when two people will rent this unit next door and then all of a sudden multiple up to 10
12 people will come and stay and there's a big party and there's a tailgate and then they go to
the stadium, and they come back drunk, and they make noise all night. That's what we've been
living with for three years. And this could simply be solved with a conversation with Jeff,
but he refuses to sit down and have a conversation to do that.
That's what it's like.
Sir, thank you for your input, and thank you for calling it. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Do you want to give us some final words, sir?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would.
Had a feeling that was coming.
And the unfortunate truth is most of that is not true.
It's basically not true.
And here's the problem.
This neighbor is completely unreasonable, and it does not matter if it's a long-term rental.
I have actual written.
This isn't just speak.
Take a look at my screen right now.
um this was a 30 plus day stay of a woman by herself who was working at children's hospital
who and just just read on several occasions he came up to me while i'm outside with my dog at
night additionally one night going to bed at 11 30 apparently heard myself and my dog walking up
the hardware stores came over banging on the door loudly i felt very unsafe he continued banging
until i did felt very uncomfortable he said multiple profanities to me he is also has a
He also has a parking cone, which is illegal, and he's blocking parking spots on the street.
parking cone, which is illegal, and he's blocking parking spots on the street.
So if I continue, it's over and over and over.
These people are staying more than 30 days, so it's still going to be a problem.
You can see the noise-sensitive, aggressive banging on the door when he got rowdy because of our kids.
You know, it's over and over.
Jennifer has an extra neighbor who is completely unreasonable with noise sensitivity.
he banged on the door if we were going to bed as we were climbing the stairs right um i have ones
of people wanting to threaten harassment against this neighbor so it really doesn't matter
whatsoever if it over like last thing i want to say here you go this was a two-month individual
lady by herself primary renter he said you know he was he's throwing profanities at her
How am I going to – if I have a long-term renter in there, I'm scared for that person.
It hasn't – so at least these people leave.
So I would like his comments dismissed, please.
All right, thank you.
So MI 2022-003-386-2701 Oakford Street, I vote yes with proviso.
Temporary variance, two-year term, ends 12-1-24.
4. Harold Tenere, my vote is no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no. James Snell, my vote is no.
Vishnu Shaheed, my vote is yes, improviser.
Okay, sir, you have three votes against you, so you've lost. Thank you.
Number seven, MI-2022-003-390-6142 Callahill Street.
ML Project Restoration is the owner.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
That case was continued.
Ms. Bezidlow appeared.
She was just retained and she requested a continuance.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
Number eight.
Number nine.
MI-2022-003-295-230 East Springhurst Street.
Leo Mulvihill is the attorney.
Mr. Chair, sorry, this is Hillary again.
I've been advised by the council office that the RCO meeting that was scheduled to occur last week was canceled because the RCO was concerned that there was not proper notice given by council.
um if that is the case then unfortunately this case will not be able to move forward today
because there was no meeting okay so what why don't we let mr boville get on a minute
yes sir good morning chairman i was the board again i only heard the tail end of
from the rco right and hillary want to continue yes we were just informed by the council office
that the meeting that was scheduled for last week was canceled. So there was no RCO meeting in this
case, and the board is not able to hear cases unless an RCO meeting has occurred. And so board,
I just wanted to address that issue. My client is making a proposal for a surface electric vehicle
lot directly next to a currently existing parking lot on the street in an otherwise empty lot full
of on the block full of driveways we filed this appeal in may maybe end of april we did not get
a community meeting scheduled until monday no last week last wednesday pardon me that's 170 days the
rco is 45 days to get a meeting out right so what happened was a comedy of errors is the best way
describe it notices went out my mailing service never delivered them and never got me my proof
of mailing and upon learning this i went personally through the block hand delivered uh flyers bright
orange to every single property on the address and at the meeting that was scheduled for that night
my client appeared i stayed in the waiting room i wasn't admitted several people showed up and
admitted they had gotten the flyers and the rco chose not to hold a meeting that said i understand
that an RCO meeting is supposed to be held normally there's no recourse to my client when
she has to wait 170 days for a community meeting and the RCO doesn't respond we tried for months
to get this meeting and thankfully with the help of Mr. Richardson you're actually finally able
to get it scheduled but the fact of the matter is my client has time sensitive grants that exist we
but the fact of the matter is my client has time-sensitive grants that exist we don't know
We don't know.
what the lay of the land is going to be for these in 2023 so we would simply ask for a here and hold
my client spoken with uh ms mckelvie of the culminating rco and i understand that we would
be putting pardon me in december for a community meeting at the latest so that's where we stand
with this members of the board um i appreciate the efforts that mr richardson went through to
get us a meeting i understand that the mailed notices didn't get there but the community
members were notified personally by me and frankly this is another instance where we have an rco that
is incommunicado for months and then my client has to bear the cost of continuing to maintain
this lot for another six months waiting for another hearing so while i understand the
obligations of the applicant and RCO also has obligations to hold a meeting
within 45 days. My suggestion, rather than saying you forfeit your rights since
you didn't have a meeting as you're supposed to, but holding us to the
letter of the law, we just hear it, hold it, have our meeting, and then the board
gets a letter and makes its decision then. That's the only thing I'm asking for
today, members of the board. Everybody on the list, by the way, got a copy of our
plans, got a copy of our notification, got a copy of the refusal, and all of my
contact information hillary um i believe the rco and the council office would like to speak on this
matter certainly okay mr richardson hello mr chair i just state your name please you've already been
sworn charles richardson the office of councilwoman cindy bass uh we're going to object to to to a
resumption hearing with regard to this situation. Nobody from the RCO was on for whatever took place
that evening. I certainly was not on. From my understanding, the orange notices that Leo did
distribute went out on Halloween, which was a couple days before the actual RCO meeting.
I never received anything that announced when the meeting was going to be or time or anything
along those lines. And that can be backed up by Ms. Love and also from Ms. McKelvey,
who are the coordinating and the affected RCO in the situation. So they need to have a meeting,
and they need to meet with the community, and we need to do it in a timely fashion.
So we would not be supporting a presumption hearing in this situation.
So members of the board, just to respond to that, my client was there and Ms. McKelvey
was there. Ms. McKelvey explained to the people that they were not having a meeting that evening.
I was never admitted out of the waiting room. I understand Mr. Richardson's position. I used
to run an RCO. I know these meetings are important. What does an applicant do when an RCO will not
respond to an applicant and will not give them a meeting for 170 days after the notification goes
out that they're the rco when they have to have a meeting within 45 days as written in the code
as put in the email that is given to the coordinating rco and on top of that mr richardson
was not notified i believe that's incorrect and on top of that it's the coordinating rco's
responsibility not mine as the applicant or the email and the code to notify not just counsel
but also every affected rco we had months of conversations back in leo leo i hear you i hear
you all right uh hillary can we can we uh how about can we do this in 30 days um i don't know
if we can do this um in 30 days but we could certainly do it in january we can we can make
space in january all right so so leo we're gonna we're gonna continue this the next date will be
marked must be tried and if you can get with the rco fine but the case will be marked must be tried
for the date in january okay okay and understand i'm going to do my best to get us a date uh okay
beforehand i'll work with mr richardson and every other rco i'll host it i just like me then
and leo leo this is this is hillary um please reach out to lakeisha dandy
yes and she will work with you on a date for january okay
Chair, we still have a hand up from Rosalind McKivley or McKelvey.
Ma'am, please unmute yourself.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Rosalind McKelvey, R-O-S-A-L-I-N-D.
Last name McKelvey, M as in Mary, C-K-E-L-V as in Victor, E-Y.
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth absolutely
Right. Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Absolutely.
Did you hear what we just spoke about?
I heard lies and slander of our RCO that need to be verified.
So, the owner.
I object to that.
All right.
The cases continue and you'll be able to voice your opinion at the next meeting.
We're going to hear this case in January.
theory the case will be marked must be tried okay thank you the board have a good afternoon okay
number 10 MI 2022 003 309 630 Glen Echo Road
and then hello and Joan Giglotti are the owner applicants
in addition at the rear of the property letter of support from west mount area neighbors
please unmute yourself hi hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
annette aloe a-n-n-e-t-t-e a-l-o-e right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do you're the owner of the property yes i am okay our vice chair has
a few questions okay and 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 yes we've
on all that okay thank you this is an application for the erection of an addition at the rear of an
existing semi-detached structure for single family household living there's one zoning refusal and
that is insufficient side yard width in the rsa2 zoning district eight feet required six feet three
inches are proposed so you may begin by sharing your screen okay
all right um we just we started this because we're just trying to get a
powder room and our laundry on the first floor we only have one bathroom and um
so that's basically what we're trying to do here um let me go down to uh there's the map i live in
Mount Airy. You can see my house. It is set back from the street. So what we're proposing,
you wouldn't really be able to see from the street. We pushed for the smallest encroachment
possible. We're only asking for a setback of 14 feet. And the width of the setback is eight feet,
and we're proposing six foot three inches.
It's a one-story add-on
and it really won't affect the neighbors
because it's just one story
and there's a lot of trees around.
And the one neighbor that it will impact
is she's fine with it.
Do you have a close-up of the house
where you're going to put the vision?
um that's the back of the house that's the side of the house you see where that big tree is
uh on the bottom picture there yeah that's sort of where it's gonna jet out just a little bit
there just to put that's the inside of the house and um that's my um the postings for the variance
um it's just really going to be like a powder room set out so this is really hard there's only
one bathroom on the second floor here and as we're getting older we really want to age in place
and um it's been difficult so west mount airy neighbors are in support of you yes yes i have
that letter okay there's that letter for that all right questions from the board no mr chairman no
Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. Hi, Mr. Richardson. Hello, Mr. Chair again.
Charles Richardson, Office of the Councilwoman Cindy Bass. Councilwoman has no opposition to
granting this variance. Thank you very much for calling in. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair. Hi, Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia
thank you chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the
City Planning Commission. Board members, the conference.
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa2 single-family zoning at this location however
we feel the proposed dimensional variance is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose
and spirit of the zoning code we recommend that the zoning board grant the variance thank you
MI 2022-003-309-630
Glen Echo Road.
I vote yes.
Carol Cineri, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
All right.
Thank you, ma'am.
Good luck.
Thank you very much.
All right.
All right.
15 mi 2022 003 292 1523 north bailey street
bern anastasio is the attorney letter of support from brewery town chargewood community civic
Association, also submitted a petition and non-opposition support signed by a few dozen
neighbors.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Vern.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Vern Anastasio.
It's V like Victor, E-R-N, last name A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, I represent Mr. Michael Connolly, who is the owner of the property.
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Vern. Do you swear or...
No, that was already done.
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 that okay great you may proceed and your screen's up so
that's good thank you 1523 north bailey street uh we're doing a lot consolidation two lots
into one and then we're proposing three artist studios and seven dwelling units. This is exactly
what IRMX has in mind when the code was rewritten, industrial, residential, mixed use, and that's
exactly what we're providing. Unfortunately, what is required though is two parking spaces
that are accessory we are proposing zero we're proposing zero because if we were to be compliant
we would then be eating up parking for the folks on the block which is not something they want so
I'm going to hold on here
this is what we're proposing it's a double lot and we're proposing an addition
As you can see, and we're going to have, if the administrator wouldn't mind promoting Ian Toner, who's the architect on the project, I'm going to have him walk you through the units.
But while that's being done, the existing house is a two-bedroom, one-bath. It's over 1,000 square feet.
We have unit one is a two-bedroom, one-bath at 8.04. Unit two is a two-bedroom, one-bath at 8.40.
unit 3 is 861 unit 4 is 827 so all ample unit 5 is 523 and unit 6 is 726 and and i'm gonna
back up here um and let me get through this first i guess we also have uh the lock consolidation
plan that's also in my exhibit packet on page 9 and 10.
Let me share some photos. This is the property as it exists. Properties.
the rear interior we have lots of photos that are part of the packet
basement
there's a rear yard
we'll also get to the some of the workspace this artist studio portion
Some of the workspace, this artist studio portion.
My client is an artist, a long-time member of the community,
and just wants to be able to renovate the property correctly.
Here is proof.
I'm going to pull out a little bit, proof of posting.
Here are the various signatures that my client personally circulated to get in support, three
pages worth.
Here's the flyer that went out to everyone and ensured that 103 individual households
were mailed.
So we have proof of posting.
I have an updated tax certificate that I submitted separate, under separate cover, that I'm also going to move into evidence.
I have an email from Doris Aldridge from the RCO letting us know early on about the tally.
As you can see, 15 folks support, two oppose, and three abstain.
And since then, she has sent separately a letter, which you all have on file, and I believe the chairman referenced.
again this is exactly what we sort of imagined when we the code was rewritten in 2012 this is
industrial with the studios residential with the seven units and mixed use we are not going to
provide the two off-street parking spots because that would be actually detrimental to the community
and that's why they've supported us in this appeal with that I'm going to hand it over to
Mr. Toner in the event he wants to add anything.
Mr. Toner, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Ian Toner from Toner Architects, I-A-N-T-O-N-E-R.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Toner, would you like to...
Yeah, go ahead, Vern.
Sorry.
I just want to ask you to walk the board quickly through the units and talk about the trash plant.
Sure. We can keep it right here on this page.
What you see here and what you saw in the photos is what's shown in pink is an existing single-family home that we're going to keep as a single-family home.
and then wrapping around that is an older industrial building two stories which currently
has artist studios and one apartment um you know Bailey Street is full of studios for artists and
makers so it's it's got a really vibrant arts culture and the client being an artist himself
is really interested in maintaining that um because it's what makes this block really special
So the only way we're going to get two parking spaces on this lot is to put them side by side with a 24-foot curb cut, which means we're demolishing the house and a good chunk of the front of the existing industrial building and taking up at least, you know, say one, one and a half parking spaces off the street that exists now.
So it doesn't really help anyone, and it would reduce the amount of artist studio space in the project
and also demolish perfectly serviceable existing buildings.
So, I mean, that's really the reason why we're proposing not to move forward with any parking.
It just doesn't make any sense here and doesn't help anyone in the community.
And I think the community was very receptive to that message at the RCO meeting.
And they would be front loaders, is that right?
that's right yeah yes so they wouldn't even be um you know anything this board
do you want your client to adopt your testimony i do um if michael connelly could raise his
virtual hand and mr chair i move all of this and additional email materials that i have not
presented today that's fine i've already sent over to miss emerson uh i move all of it into uh
into the record. Thank you. Mr. Connolly? Yes. Hi, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court reporter? Michael Connolly, M-I-C-H-A-E-L-C-O-N-N-E-L-L-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Proceed. Thank you. Mr. Connolly, did you hear my presentation to the board today?
Yes. Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? Yes. And do you adopt it,
your own testimony yes thank you my questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have jeffrey last name ending in g okay
my sir could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
well i apologize this was for the case earlier i was asking a question on appeals that has nothing
in this case all right thank you very much anyone else in the virtual audience i see no other hands
here um planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city
planning commission board members in 2014 the zoning map was amended to irmx in accord with
recommendations from the comprehensive plan to encourage this type of adaptive reuse these
existing structures council has shown is uh being retained uh cannot accommodate additional parking
spaces and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
thank you mi2022-003-292-1523 north bailey street i vote yes carol tanari my vote is yes
thomas holloman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Yep, thank you.
Number 16, MI 2021-001-573-2783 Roberts Avenue.
Lynn Nichols is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the East Falls Zoning Committee with accompanying police report.
And there's also another counsel involved for the adjacent property owner, Julie Bernstein.
Good morning, Chair.
Hi, good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Lynn, L-Y-N-N, Nichols, N-I-C-H-O-L-S.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
that is correct is Julie Bernstein available
yes chair I'm gonna allow her to speak now
do you want me to promote her to panelists or just allow her to speak
let her promote her to panelists okay
hi miss bernstein could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
uh good morning julie bernstein first name julie j-u-l-i-e last name bernstein b-e-r-n-s-t-e-i-n
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Who's your client?
MH2 Oaks Portfolio LLC.
They are the owner of 2781 Roberts Avenue, which is the Chiefs of Portfolio.
So we're going to go, Ms. Nichols will present first.
Ms. Nichols, could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes. The owner of the property is Maude, M-A-U-D-E, Martin, M-A-R-T-I-N.
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi. Good morning. 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, 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. However, we met with the RCO and they did
not provide us a letter. I thought I heard from the chair that there was a letter of opposition
and a police report. Yes. Yes. I wasn't aware who, I know that Ms. Bernstein said in a letter
i didn't we weren't aware this says the east fall zoning committee
okay so they didn't share that with us chair just so you know is there any way we can get a copy of
that hillary miss nick yes miss nichols this is hillary i'm sending it to you right now
um i do not see that you were on it um and i did have one clarifying question for you um you
mentioned that the the owner is mod martin are they a principal and an llc because that's not
the owner that was listed on the deed that was submitted? Yes, the deed is in the name of Gracie
Painting, which is Ms. Martin's company. She- Okay. Principal, yeah. Okay, thank you for the clarification.
Was the consulting group LLC cc'd on that email from the RCO?
Was the consulting group LLC-
I'm just wondering.
Hillary?
It does not appear so, no.
Would you like me to forward it to that email as well?
No, I was just curious as to why they didn't send it to us.
I mean, we have two email addresses.
That's the only reason I was asking.
no i do not not see it on the email that i received okay may i proceed with my presentation
chair please please thank you so much if you don't mind may i have permission to stop sharing
my screen or start sharing my yeah sure thank you um and to stop my video thank you
can everyone see my screen we can
Okay. So here we have an application for a special assembly at 2783 Roberts Avenue.
This is the application for appeal. The applicant here is asking to have a special assembly event
space for private events. The conditions at the property are such that we believe
it is configured and is ideal for a special assembly. It would not cause any additional
public congestion to the streets or endanger the public. The variance we seek is the least
minimum possible to affect the code provisions economically, as well as the fact that it would
not harm the use of the neighbor's property, nor will it cause environmental damage, pollution,
erosion. The project details information form, and this was an application that was previously
submitted by the applicant's former attorney. Here we have the deed for the property, which
Ms. Maude Martin purchased in 2016. As you can see, we also have the tax clearance, which shows
that her taxes are paid up to date. We notified the nearby neighbors, which includes, I believe,
a neighbor that Ms. Bernstein represents at 2781 Roberts Avenue. Here we have the zoning notice,
which is posted on the property, the refusal, and now I would like to show you some photographs.
This is a view of Roberts Avenue facing the building. This is the front of the building.
Here you see a view looking across the street from Roberts Avenue. This is, it appears,
another business. I was out there Sunday and I took photos as well, which I will get to.
This is a view looking to the right of Roberts Avenue.
Here's a view looking to the left of Roberts towards 2781.
here we have a view of the interior of the room inside of roberts avenue where miss
martin plans to host the events
this is the driveway going down the side of roberts avenue into a rear area here you see
the entrance to the rear of 2783 roberts there's availability for parking in the rear
this is a view looking towards stokely street this is one of the photos that i took on sunday
which shows parking availability on the side of the building on stokely street
here is a view looking towards both properties again this is a photo i took on sunday which
shows what the property looks like where there's parking on the street as you look up towards
under the um underpass here going past this area another block or two are some residential homes
here is a view looking towards fox street just to give you some familiarity with the area over
here is the shot right fox fox shot right um up here on fox street but along this area here
there's plenty of parking spaces. And I bring that up because one of the issues that the neighbor
had with Ms. Martin's proposal is that they were concerned about parking.
They were concerned about safety issues. So we wanted to show that there's plenty of
on-street parking in this area. These are the plans which show the interior of the property.
It's an open space area that does not need to have any work done to it in order to accommodate the proposal that Ms. Martin has.
um worked on to it in order to accommodate the proposal that Ms. Martin has for it.
I emailed Hillary this morning here's a special assembly license that had been granted to
new material culture it's not an act it's not active any longer but this shows that there's
a history of special assembly license being granted in this area. During the RCO meeting
when the applicant's neighbor got on the call, we heard their concerns and we've attempted
or we attempted to communicate with them and tried to address their concerns by proposing
a proviso. So what we proposed was that we would, Ms. Martin, would only operate during the hours
of 8 p.m. to 2 a.m. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. And they asked to add in that there
would be a maximum capacity of 49 persons, which she had already said would be the capacity,
but we added it into proviso. All events would be restricted to the inside of the building.
No events would be outside. At all times, we proposed that there would be two security guards
present inside the event and outside of the event to monitor gas, trash, and parking.
The neighbor asked that the security guards be from a reputable professional company.
We proposed that we would make sure there were eight off-street parking spaces,
as you saw in the rear of the building. There is parking to accommodate that,
as well as additional on-street parking for all events during the time stated above.
There shall be no parking on the sidewalk during the hours of operation, and all trash should be removed from the premises and surrounding areas, including the driveway and sidewalk daily.
Ms. Martin would also have a private waste management company to pick up trash weekly, and she has a security camera on site that she would maintain at all hours.
And we also suggested that she help establish monthly safety meetings with her neighbors.
the neighboring businesses so we tried to make sure that we were aware of what they were concerned
about and to address them and we thought that we had an agreement and they did not want to agree
to the proviso um so we're here today because miss martin who is a 30-year business professional
she manages and owns a union painting company with union employees which she has managed for
a number of years she's also a certified um i'm going to stop sharing my screen at this point
um she's also a certified supervisor and certified industrial hygienist for her union painting
company and her role as a safety officer and manager includes evaluating and identifying
hazards, as well as putting together approved health and safety plans. So she was very
involved with making sure that she understood the safety and maintenance concerns from her
neighbor at 2781 because of her experience and her willingness to be a good neighbor.
She also owns and manages several real estate companies and properties in Philadelphia.
So we wanted to make sure that the board understood that Ms. Martin took into account all of the things that her neighbor at 2781 had brought to her attention during the RCO meeting and afterwards when we met with her.
So as we stated, this is a unit, this is a property that is uniquely capable of being able to accommodate this particular event space that she would have, and it does not include any live entertainment.
It would only be for private events that are after hours when the businesses near her are not operating.
At this time, I would like to call Ms. Martin.
Well, I'm sorry, Chair.
After her, I have another witness.
That's fine.
Ms. Martin, you're free to speak.
Hi, can you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Maude Martin.
M-A-U-D-E.
Maude, Martin, M-A-R-T-I-N.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Receive counsel.
Ms. Martin, are you the owner of 2783 Roberts Avenue?
Yes, I am.
And how long have you owned that property?
From 2016.
Okay. And do you agree with and adopt the testimony that I've given here today for your property located at that address?
And do you agree with and adopt the testimony
that I've given here today?
Yes, I do.
And as I stated in my presentation, you currently own a union painting company. Is that correct?
Yes, I do.
How long have you owned that company?
For about 25 years.
Okay. And you also have other real estate properties in the city of Philadelphia?
Yes, in the city of Philadelphia and Delaware County.
And you're also a nurse, is that correct?
Yes, I'm still a nurse.
I have a current license, nursing license.
Okay, and you're a certified supervisor and certified industrial hygienist, correct?
Correct, by the state of Pennsylvania, correct.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
I have no questions.
Does the board have any questions?
Not right now.
Okay, I would like to call the other witness. His name is Coleman Copeland.
Mr. Copeland, please unmute yourself. You're free to speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Copeland, you have to unmute yourself, please.
Mr. Copeland, could you unmute your phone, please?
Star six, right?
I believe it's star nine to unmute.
And it's coming up like he's on like a laptop or a device.
Yes, he's still muted here.
Lynn, what's your suggestions?
If we could go on, I'll try to reach out to him to...
So your case is basically presented so far,
but you leave it open just in case you get in touch with him right yes um he's gonna go to
miss bernstein okay yes i would like to make sure that i reserve that opportunity thank you
you have the opportunity if you get all of them thank you bernstein
miss bernstein ma'am you're muted
it apologies no no no proceed miss bernstein good morning as i mentioned i represent mh2 oaks
portfolio llc they are the owner of the neighboring property at 2781 roberts avenue i've been asked
this morning to appear and enter their appearance on their behalf in opposition to this appeal
I'm also joined by Charlie Reed, who's an owner's representative this morning.
As that fourth in my letter, which was submitted to the board earlier, MH2 is quite concerned about many changes in the morning to permit this use at 2783 Roberts, as parties have been hosted at this address over the past few years.
even after the 2021 violation that precipitated this appeal was issued, which have negatively
impacted MH2's property. For example, 2781, Roberts has been contacted as a result of
gun violence allegedly associated with these properties. Surveillance has shown inebriated
patrons urinating on their property. Attendees have been found loitering in the morning when
their tenant arrives at work, which is creating safety concerns. Cars have been parking along the
sidewalks in front of both of these two properties, not just on the street. And the parties have
resulted in a significant amount of litter outside of both of the properties. Further,
they're pretty concerned by the RCO's recent investigation, which revealed even more police
activity than was understood by the owner yes there's numerous numerous um responsive calls
from the police to this property um including for the gun violence that was mentioned um
and we did meet with the neighbors to discuss just mr copeland could you could you mute yourself
we'll get to you in a little bit so as miss nichols mentioned we did meet together to discuss
with the neighbors these concerns and how a proposal going forward could be
could be put forth in a way that wouldn't impact the neighbor. And we discussed all of the
put forth in a way that wouldn't impact the neighbor.
provisions that she went over, but we are incredibly concerned. The owners are very
concerned that these are not going to mitigate the problems that have existed. There's only so
much that private security companies can do. They even acknowledge that if someone chooses to park
the sidewalk. There's only so much they can do to kind of manage people's unlawful behavior.
And if this proposal didn't go forward at all, none of these issues would continue.
Additionally, there's concern that they've been told that this was unlawful, that police have
responded to this, yet they continue to throw parties. So there's a concern that any of these
provisos that are set forth wouldn't actually be complied with going forward to mitigate
the neighbor's concerns, which is why I'm here to oppose the application.
My understanding...
Are you going to...
Ms. Bernstein, are you going to call a witness?
Why don't we call a witness?
So, Charlie Reed, if you could raise your hand for me.
Oh, there we go.
Mr. Reed, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Hi, Mr. Reed. Could you identify yourself and spell your name for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Charles Reed, C-H-A-R-L-E-S-R-E-I-D.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
So, Mr. Reed, did you listen to everything that I just described with regards to the past activity on the property?
Yes, I did.
And was my description accurate?
It is.
Would you adopt this description as your own testimony?
I would.
Do you have any additional concerns that I didn't bring up with regards to this past activity and the anticipated ongoing activity that would occur if this use was permitted?
No additional beyond what you mentioned.
and do you also agree with my description of concerns that any provisos placed on this
use would not be complied with or would not would fail to mitigate the past issues
I agree in light of the history of events that have taken place there and the extensive number
of incidents that have happened prior to, you know, in the past before this use was
permitted, we don't have confidence that permitting the use would eliminate or reduce
the number of incidents.
Thank you.
Ms. Bersie, and anyone else?
No, I don't personally have anyone else.
My understanding is that Hilary Linger, who is the head of the RCO, also is in appearance
today.
Well, I'll get to them in a minute.
Counsel, do you want to bring Mr. Copeland back on?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Copeland?
Mr. Copeland?
All right.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
The name is Holman Copeland.
H-O-L-M-A-N-C-O-P-E-L-A-N-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Proceed.
Thank you. Mr. Copeland, good morning.
Good morning.
Are you a neighbor of 2783 Roberts Avenue?
Yes, I am.
And where is your property located?
I'm located in the rear of the property in question.
And do you own a business there?
Yes, I do.
What's the name of your business?
Cars or us collision.
And how long have you been located there?
About 35 years.
Do you have any objection to the proposal that Ms. Martin has to have a special assembly license at that location?
Thank you. I have nothing further.
Ms. Nichols, I'm going to open it up to the board and the diverse audience.
Did you have a chance to look at the documents that we sent you?
Mr. Chair, yes.
And may I respond to them?
Do you want me to respond to them now?
That's why I'm trying to figure out what you want to do with that one document.
It's a kind of damaging document.
Well, I would like to respond to it.
Yeah, that's right.
All right.
So with regard to the incidents at 2783, what have been identified as Roberts Avenue,
um these incidents appear to be out not even appear to be they're outside of the
These incidents appear to be, not even appear to be, they're outside of the location. If you recall from the photographs, this is a long block of two properties. So for example, there's an incident from August 23rd, 2020, at 5.13 and 10 second AM, which says no premises info. And it's an investigation. It's on a Sunday.
There's no specific, this could be someone just on the highway outside of the property
and a radio call is made, the police get there and they're at that corner.
The second incident is from August 30th, 2020 at 2.37 a.m.
Again, it says highway, outside structure, vandalism, private property.
Someone could have been trying to break into the property.
This is again on a Sunday morning.
um on august 30th 2020 at 5 49 p.m when the business is not open these all have so far been
when the business is not open this is outside the structure it says other assaults simple
on a sunday we don't have any information about what this was and at 5 49 p.m we don't know
on a Sunday who was fighting at that time. And Ms. Martin has proposed to have her events from
8 p.m. on the days she's asked permission from the board to have the variants until 2 a.m. But
again, on August 30 of 2020, we don't know what this other simple assault. It could have been
someone in a car who stopped on the highway somewhere and got into a fight outside or
walking somewhere. On August 31st, the next day, on Monday morning at 4.30 a.m., it says
no premises info, and this is a Monday of an investigation. We don't know what they were
investigating. On August 31st, 2020, auto theft, outside destruction. Sounds like someone was
trying to steal a car on a Monday morning at 4.40 a.m. On October 26, 2020, no premises info
investigation on a Monday morning. November 15, 2020, no premises info investigation on a Sunday.
On February 15th, 2021, no premises information, an investigation on a Monday.
On June 9th, 2021 at 2.36 p.m., no premises information.
It has a code here for what this particular response was.
This is a Thursday.
Without having any more identification of who, if anyone, the police spoke to, it is hard, in my opinion, looking at this to say that these were specifically related to 2783 Roberts, as opposed to the police just being given a radio call and responding.
I was a former prosecutor for 22 years, Chair, and it's hard to know what these incidents are related to without having the actual 75-48 that specifically identifies what is anything.
You even have the number right.
So I hear you.
Why don't we do this, right?
There may be someone, I'm told, from the East Falls Zoning Committee.
why don't we let them testify i think they're the ones that sent the document in
but i i just want to make sure you saw the document before we got to that point okay
yes okay all right so questions from the board first no mr chairman
no mr chairman
No, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, all right.
So, questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Hillary Langer.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hillary Langer.
H-I-L-A-R-Y-L-A-N-G-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes, thank you. We held the RCO meeting. The only neighbor in attendance was 2781 Roberts. The problem with the notifications is that it goes 250 feet. These are very large blocks.
goes 250 feet. These are very large blocks so there's a group of about 150 homes
in the 2600 block of Roberts Avenue that was not included or notified. That is beyond my control
but just to let you know there are about 150 households approximately one block away.
The issue for us when we were on the call which was the census of the zoning committee meeting
was the the principal issue was that events were being held here without the assembly
variants being granted. So that further backs up the
kind of establishing the responsibility of the the use of the property. As far as the police
reports are concerned that was what was made available to me and I think I could say that
those would be incidents of the variety that Ms. Nichols describes but then that may not have
in all the incidents, because quite often the police are not called and they don't make incident
reports. So really, that's all we can say here. It was a meeting with negative input and
our letter stands. Okay, thank you. Chair, can I just respond briefly?
well what why don't why don't we wait to see if there's anyone else in the audience
and then i'm going to give you a chance to respond to it all okay yes thank you all right okay is
there anyone else in the virtual audience that has a comment chair we had mr copeland
okay so mr copeland already testified right i'm not sure did he want to i i don't know if he
wanted to say anything else i don't know why he raised his hand again it's up to you chair
bring him back in a minute yep okay all right mr copen you've already been sworn you have
additional comment sir please unmute yourself yes you have additional comment well no additional
comment uh i was listening to counsel um from from miss martin and uh i agree with counsel
for miss martin there in regards to the the leverage amount of parking that we have here
and uh also agree uh with counsel for miss martin uh that these events i've never even seen one of
events because my hours of operation is 8 a.m. in the morning to sometimes 5 o'clock and again
like I said I've never seen the gathering because the gathering is held when the businesses are
closed we're never here. Okay thank you very much for calling back in. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair. Ms. Nichols, you want to respond? Yes, Chair. Ms. Bernstein,
I'll give you a chance to respond when she's done. Thank you. Thank you so much, Chair. What we
didn't hear was that there were calls made by the neighbor at 2781 Roberts about any of the issues
that they have raised. I didn't go into the second page of the police reports. I can, which is
essentially the same as the first page. These are instances that, in my opinion, from viewing them
are all outside of this property that are between the hours of at least 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.
And they all speak to mostly outside the structure, which, in my opinion, without having the 75-48 to show exactly who they spoke to and what the circumstances were, cannot be directly tied to 2783.
As I stated, it could possibly, not even possibly, these are incidents that were outside.
Who these people are, we don't know.
So I think it's a little unfair for them to bring these incidents up, specifically trying to connect them to Ms. Martin without any other information.
Mr. Langer spoke to some other additional houses.
Well, we notified based upon the list that was provided to us who should be notified.
who should be notified. We don't have any control over who specifically should be notified. So again,
We don't have any control over who.
I think it's a little unfair to try and expand who should be notified. If we were supposed to,
we would have. We followed that process. But Chair, Ms. Martin is a 30-year business owner
with experience, and we have provided a proviso that we believe will address the concerns
You know, with regard to why she should be able to have a special assembly license, as we stated, these events are private, they would be operated between hours of 8pm to 2am. This is economically the least minimum that she can afford with regard to this property. And there's no reason that we believe she should be denied.
I mean, if there's some other basis that they have, again, we've addressed it.
So I really appreciate the board listening to our presentation, and thank you.
All right, thank you.
Ms. Bernstein, do you want to give us a...
Yes, thank you.
Just quickly, and in some ways, Ms. Nichols is totally right.
We don't know for sure what these police incidents are related to,
But we do know that from surveillance cameras that are on 2781, that the prior parties did continue past 2 a.m. into the morning when the tenant arrived, that there was a lot of behavior that was indecent, such as yarn eating on their property, that happened outside.
And so the concern, again, is that if this use were to be permitted, that it would result in kind of this inappropriate behavior that leads to litter and safety issues outside of 2781, even outside of these limited hours that they're agreeing to, that it would be very difficult for them to kind of curb the behaviors past 2 a.m.
if they didn't have security guards there after that time, things of that nature that would be
concerning. Additionally, Ms. Martin has mentioned that she, you know, operates a union business.
This is an industrial area. She hasn't explained any sort of hardship as to why this property can't
continue to be used in a way that is compliant with the current zoning laws and why this new
type of use needs to go into this location in a way that, you know, continuously has created
safety concerns, maintenance, management, you know, other types of concerns for the neighboring
property and the fact that they need to go and clean up in the morning that the tenant arrives
and, you know, has to deal with kind of patrons that have been partying all night and things of
those behavior. But to the extent that you guys feel that this is an appropriate use for this
area, we do ask that the provisos that were placed and that were discussed be the bare minimum
of what would be attached to this use so that there would be some type of enforcement mechanism
to kind of potentially address any kind of issues that take place going forward.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Clark.
Chair, Ms. Bernstein, did your client ever call the police when you stated that they observed what you said they observed?
So my client has a tenant that uses this property, and I'm not aware if they have actually called the police.
Their concerns, again, have been about the parking on the sidewalk, the kind of behavior that they've seen on the surveillance, the people that they encounter when they arrive, the litter that is kind of covering their property, and they have been contacted by the police in connection with a shooting incident.
So, again, we weren't aware of a lot of the others, but there does appear to be kind of repeated concerns and activity, you know, police coming, and I don't believe that they're the ones calling, but I don't know.
My understanding is that they were contacted in connection with the investigation, not that they, you know, reported it.
but again chair my point to these investigations they're not directly tied to 2783 yet they're
trying to make it seem as if they are that's my point i know you get it i appreciate it i hear you
i hear you and i said i think council bernstein did say that they're you know outside or whatever
it is okay planning commission thank you chair bergman in hegarty for the philadelphia city
planning commission board members in 2015 the zoning map was amended in this general area
this parcel remained i2 medium industrial to support an industrial retention goal
The North District Plan, part of the Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in 2017, reinforced this industrial retention goal by recommending that this block remain I-2.
the north district plan part of the comprehensive plan which was adopted in 2017 reinforced
Now, while this structure has a history of non-industrial use, it has never had an assembly and entertainment use.
We don't believe the appellant has demonstrated that there are no other viable uses in this space that would be allowed under the existing zoning.
And so the City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny this variance.
Thank you.
And thank both counsel for your presentations.
So MI 2021-001-753-2783, Roberts Avenue.
I vote yes with provisos.
Hours of operation, Thursday, Saturday, closed, 8 p.m. to 2 a.m.
On from the, I'm sorry, Thursday to Saturday, 8 p.m. to 2 a.m.
Sunday to Wednesday close
all vents inside building
commercial trash pickup
and temporary variants to be issued
12-1-22
to 12-1-24
for two years.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes
with provisos.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
with provisos.
Sorry about that.
I was trying to get on there.
uh chairman uh james snell yes for proviso yes we're providing thank thank both you um okay
thank you thank you is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case is now been closed
i see no hands chair thanks everyone see everybody at two o'clock okay okay thank you everybody
Good afternoon, my name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our Vice Chair.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Ismail Shahid, our Board Secretary.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
Also present is our board attorney, Hillary Emerson, and Lakeisha Dandy, our ZVA hearing
supervisor.
Before we begin, here is our virtual format.
Be advised that proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge 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 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property.
And finally, the question-answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkin.
So let's look at continuances for this afternoon's hearings.
Number 13, MI-2022-003-749-261-South-24th Street.
This case is continued.
Are there any other, are there any comments relative to that case?
I see no handshare.
Can anybody hear me?
Pardon me?
Can anybody hear me?
I'm having a hard time.
We hear you.
I can't see anybody and I can't. You're pretty good, Carol.
I can't mute. You're perfect. I can't mute, unmute, or do anything.
I'm sorry. Go ahead, Keisha. Yes, I was going to suggest the same thing. Maybe you
can go out and come back in.
yeah that's what i i did and i just this is crazy
i keep coming back to this how do i get out oh wait up top keep saying that i have to cancel
this is insane this has never happened just try to hit that leave button and then um
Just try to hit that leave button and then click back onto your email link to get back onto Zoom.
Click back onto your email.
You may also wish to reboot your system.
So are there any comments relative to number 13 being continued in the virtual?
Do you see what's happening?
I have the whole calendar up now.
Oh, boy.
And I only see Bill.
No clue what is going on.
can you hear
she went out chair i think she's going to try to come back in okay
um to answer your question good afternoon this is patina l and i don't see any hands chair
okay thank you are there any other requests for continuance in the virtual audience
Mrs. Chair, we have Daniel Markhine.
Sir, please unmute yourself.
Can I be heard?
Sir, please unmute yourself.
Okay, could you state your name and spell?
I'm trying. I don't know how here.
Could you state your name and spell?
Name is Daniel. Can you hear me?
I can.
Okay, Daniel Markhine, M-A-R-K-I-N-D.
I'm an attorney at Flaster Greenberg at 1717 Art Street, 33rd floor, Philadelphia, 19103.
Sir, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
And you're here for case 7777 State Road?
I am, sir.
Do you want a continuance?
I request a continuance.
I've discussed this with Ms. Emerson this morning.
So MI-2022-003-815-777-State Road, that case is continued.
Thank you for calling in, sir.
Thank you, sir.
All right.
Any other requests for continuance?
Chair, we have David Orphanides.
Counsel, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Certainly.
David Orphanides. Last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Case number one, 1400 South
Edding. Yes, sir. I'd like to request for a continuance with the attorney moving party.
Right. Okay. So MI-2022-004-227-1400 South Edding Street. That case is continued attorney moving parties. Thank you, Mr. Orfanides, for calling in.
Thank you. Have a great day.
Okay. Any other requests for continuance?
I see no handshare.
Okay. Okay. So we're going to go to our add-on list.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just want to interject briefly. We have multiple individuals
who have been testifying or asking if they can testify regarding cases on the list. I just wanted
to remind people, as you said in your opening, the question and answer box is not for giving
testimony. It is for asking questions. If you want to testify in a particular case,
please wait until that case is called and then raise your hand and the chair will recognize you
to speak during the public testimony portion of the presentation. Thank you. Thank you, counsel.
All right, so case number one, and we're at once. This is a request for reconsideration.
M-I-2022-003-148-1513-17 Pine Street, I vote yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Mr. Chair, I just got back on. Can you tell me what your vote was?
We're on number one on the add-on list. It's a request for reconsideration.
And you've already voted? How did you vote?
I voted yes. Yes.
Okay. It's a request for reconsideration. Okay. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. I'm sorry about that problem.
No, no, no. You're fine. You're...
Mr. Chairman, do I have to repeat?
No, I think we have your vote time.
I thank you.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes, you know, I should hear.
My vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Number two, MI-2022-003-399-1716 North Bodine Street, I am yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Number two, MI 2022-003.
Harold Tenneri, yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thomas Holloman, no to reconsideration and rehearing.
James Snell, yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
dismal shahi yes to reconsideration and re-hearing so number three mi 2022
001 709 1746 lombard street attorney is alfred fasadio this is a resumptive hearing
could the attorney please come on
and chair could you call the planning commission as well please oh yeah
Yeah, sure. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Alfred Fiscaldo for the applicant.
Could you state your name again and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. Alfred Fiscaldo, F as in Frank, U, S as in Sam, C, A, L, D as in David, O.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And, counsel, this will be testimony by the Planning Commission.
You get to make a statement, a follow-up, and then other than that, the record's closed, okay?
And then we'll vote.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Chair, sorry, I just wanted to note that we did receive a document from the Planning Commission
that they wanted to submit for evidence, which was a preliminary review of this application
that they provided to the applicant.
Thank you.
planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond planning commission s-a-r-a-h-b-a-n-h
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do so this is a resumptive hearing you get a chance to make a statement
council will follow up and then other than that the records closed okay city planning commission
believes that the development enabled by the proposed variance is unlikely to cause detrimental
impacts beyond what normally might be expected. Therefore, we recommend that the Zoning Board grant
the variance. Thank you very much. Counsel? I have nothing else to add, Mr. Chairman. Okay.
Okay, so let me get the, give me the number here, let's see here.
So it's MI 2022-003-148-1513-17 Pine Street.
I vote.
Mr. Chair, they're different.
We're in Lombard.
Lombard Street.
I'm sorry.
It's 1746 Lombard Street, Mr. Chairman.
All right, I'm sorry.
Let me get back on my right page here.
Okay. MI 2022-001-709-1746 Lombard Street.
I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA on November 9th, 2022.
Carol Tenere, my vote is no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
thank you and then mi number four thank you council by the way thank you number four mi
2022 003 302 320 west cheltenham avenue
so this is going to be a vote we already wrote on this we're going to vote with it
without the proviso it's myself Tom Holloman and Isabel I vote yes Mr. Chair I'm sorry two things
one I think you said 320 it's 300 West Sheltonham and it's you Mr. Holloman and Mr. Snell
okay you're right I thought I saw an IS you're right okay so my vote is yes Thomas Holloman
my vote is yes jane snell my vote is yes thank you we'll go to our regular list
number two mi 2022 003
Number two, MI-2022-003-750-715 West Cumberland Street.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.
Recommendation of support for 37th Ward RCO.
And also, applicant provided a letter of support from adjacent neighbors,
along with the petition in support signed by nine neighbors.
Mr. Mattione. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman. Could you state your name and spell for the court report
please? Sure. Michael Mattione. M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I. Right. 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 relationship
to the property? Sure. It's 715 to 17 West Cumberland LLC, and they are the owner of the
property, and Robert Sherman is with us today. Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Yes. Hi, Mr. Matteone. 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,
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 everything uh miss
canary okay great you may proceed and share your screen thank you thank you
okay um again i represent 715 to 17 west cumberland llc the owner of the property and
robert sherman the principal of the owner is with us as well as you can see we did submit
the requested documents in advance including tax clearance a revised refusal dated september 20th
2022 a support letter from the 37th ward rco so they support another support letter and petitions
from nearby neighbors the site plan floor plans renderings site photographs um this property is
zoned rm1 and the applicant is seeking to develop it as a multi-family project the property uh in
theory could be developed as a five unit project with 16 bedrooms or three bedrooms in every unit
but the community requested a different multifamily development.
Prior to filing the application, the developer walked around and met with the community members
and nearby neighbors, and they told him they wanted to have one-bedroom and studio units at
the property, rather than larger units. They wanted more smaller units. We had two separate
RCO meetings where this is what was requested, and the neighbors said that they were tired.
they had too many larger units being developed in the area. And this was making it difficult
on people to stay in the community. In addition to that, they requested that he have ADA accessible
units. So he has a fully accessible first floor with a wheelchair lift proposed, making the first
floor units accessible for older citizens. And with this, the neighbors fully supported the request
as is shown in the RCO support letter where we had 16 people in support
and three in opposition and one abstention.
Now we received the refusal because we are seeking 16 units where five are permitted
and we have 12.22% of open area where 20% is required.
When you look, you can see in the site photos, this is the property. It is a
long-standing vacant lot. There are several other vacant lots next to it.
And as you can see, the other property down here on Franklin Street has no windows facing us. So
this development will have no impact on light and air to the nearest neighbor on
Franklin Street another photo showing the site and other vacant properties that surround the site.
When you look at the nearest corner that is actually developed 701 West Cumberland
excuse me a block away you can see that that property has 100 percent lot coverage
we're seeking to have about 88 percent lot coverage so again this goes all the way back
it's the nearest property on the corner and they have 100% lot coverage with the new house being
built right behind them we we are proposing to have a rear yard on our property and as you can
see again our property we do have no windows in the property nearest to us as well again we're
Again, we're seeking, we're seeking, excuse me, I'm fighting a cold today, so I'm sorry.
seeking
But we're seeking to develop four units per floor on the lower level, we would have studios.
The first floor, it's fully accessible, there's a wheelchair lift there, the showers are accessible
for wheelchairs, everything is wide enough for handicapped access.
and then on the upper floors again slightly larger one bedroom units as well
when you look to the renderings we have all brick facades
another additional bicycle parking out front there is bicycle parking inside the building
as well as required by the code again the facade similar height to the properties near us
trash storage area in the rear a fenced in rear yard with a zoning compliant fence
excuse me and the property basically conforms to the neighboring properties in terms of lot coverage
and other dimensional requirements it meets the height requirement for the area
again we're seeking this adjustment to the zoning to allow us to develop the greater number of
units that is permitted because the neighbor said that there is a lack of one bedroom studio units
in the area and there is a lack of accessible units in the area so it fills a need it's what
was requested at two separate rco meetings and several other meetings and we also have
um again the next door the immediate neighbor at 713 west cumberland street sent a letter saying
they're in full support of the project and we also have an additional petition from several other
nearby neighbors as well so um again uh this excuse me this will be a modern building with
modern conveniences, washer, dishwasher, washer, dryer, air conditioning. It will have sprinklers,
hardwired systems, et cetera, making it a safer building than many of the older buildings in
the community. It will allow for the development of this property, reducing the likelihood of
things like illegal dumping. There's a large school across the street from it. The variances
will not, the variances, if granted, would not adversely impact light and air to neighboring
properties uh will not overburden public facilities this is a multi-family zoning class
the variances will be the minimum required to develop the property
with that mr chairman i would like to call him robert sherman sure
mr sherman could you please i'm sorry i go name and spell for the court reporter please
robert sherman r-o-b-e-r-t s-h-e-r-m-a-n right you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you mr chairman robert did you did you hear
my statements? Are they true and correct? They are. And in developing this project, did you
seek and request and receive input from the nearby residents? Yes, we work closely with
the community. And finally, do you adopt my statements as your testimony? I do. I have
no further questions for Mr. Sherman, Mr. Chairman. Questions from the board? No, Mr.
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands here planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission the proposed variance is
not necessary to enable viable economic use of this property therefore the city planning
commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance thank you hillary was there
was there any uh provisos with this did i hear an amended there was an amended refusal mr chairman
we need does that have to be in there hillary or no um yes i did not realize there was an amended
refusal it was dated september 20th ms emerson okay so then if if this is being granted it does
It needs to be per the amended refusal dated September 20th, 2022.
So MI 2022-003-750-715 West Cumberland Street, I vote yes proviso per amended refusal 9-20-22.
I vote yes proviso for amended refusal 9-20-22.
Carol Tineri, my vote is yes with proviso. 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. Thank you.
So, number four, MI-2022-004-238-8445 Frankfurt Avenue. Melanie Lacey is the attorney. Letter of support from the Upper Holmesburg Civic Association with a proviso recommended.
Ms. Lacey is coming back in as a panelist.
okay good afternoon mr chairman members of the board
hi counsel could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
lacey that's m-e-l-a-n-i-e last name l-a-c-e-y right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client and their
relationship to the property? I represent the owner. That's North City Development Co.
And I'm accompanied by Paul So, who's a member of that owner entity, as well as Troy Seggers,
representative for the tenant for Zennius Dialysis Center. Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, good afternoon. 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 the 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
okay great you may proceed and begin to share your screen thank you
can you see my screen
yes wonderful all right can you make it a little bit larger
okay so we met with upper holmesburg civic association on september 15th they submitted
a letter of support dated september 23rd which i'm displaying here as you can see 28 attendees
voted in favor of the application whereas no one voted in opposition and this is an application of
appeal to allow a dialysis center in the Holmesburg Shopping Center located at 8445 Frankfurt Avenue.
The property is on CA2, and we're here because it falls within the Northeast Overlay District.
That district requires ZBA approval for all medical office uses, and as you can see,
there are no other reasons for this notice of refusal.
So the shopping center is bound by Frankfurt Avenue at the front, Walker Street at the rear,
Blackiston Street, and Ash Brummer Street. And Fresenius will be the new tenant of the vacant
commercial space that was previously leased by Rite Aid, which is located between Advanced Auto
Parts and Dollar General. And here are some photos of the property and surrounding area.
I think my computer is freezing. Hold on. Okay.
And for context, Fresenius is an established international company with 36 clinics in the
greater Philadelphia area and five clinics here in the city. They're seeking to open this new
location to serve the Northeast because the closest location in West Kensington is close
to maximum capacity. So this is particularly important because dialysis is a life-preserving
treatment, and patients who don't have access to these centers can't get discharged to outpatient
care and must rely on hospital treatment. Therefore, Presenius will be an asset to the
community and filling a gap in local treatment options. That more or less summarizes the
presentation. We'd be happy to address any questions that you may have, but I conclude by
saying that it meets the standards for variance relief because the dialysis center will occupy
an existing commercial space. There won't be any increase in congestion in public streets. There
is adequate parking to accommodate the service. The proposed use and hours of operations are
consistent with the surrounding tenants along Frankfurt Avenue. And lastly, the applicant
specialization in only every once in a while you freeze up oh really you just you freeze up and
you stop so are you hearing me we hear you now we didn't hear you but yeah we hear you now
We hear you now.
We didn't hear you in a couple minutes, but we hear you now.
did you hear my conclusion
Did you hear my conclusion?
How about, would you want to have the owner or your client adopt your testimony?
So can the panel please, can you please promote Paul So, that's spelled S-E-O, to the panel?
Mr. So, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
hi can everyone hear me yes could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
of course my name is paul so uh last name s as in sam e o right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel uh hi paul did you
hear my testimony it sounds like some of it might have um froze out but uh we we have we had most of
But, Melody, we saw when you froze a few times, but we're good.
All right.
Did you see the testimony that I provided to the board this afternoon?
I did.
And do you affirm that my presentation was accurate?
And do you adopt the testimony as your own?
Great.
Thank you.
Melody, before I put this out to questions, I noticed the Upper Holmesburg Civic Association
at Proviso, use limited to an outpatient dialysis facility.
Is that okay?
uh that is that is okay okay questions from the board no mr mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected.
Therefore, the Philadelphia City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022-004-238-8445 Frankfurt Avenue, I vote yes, proviso.
Use limited to an outpatient dialysis facility.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman my vote is yes with proviso James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
thank you counsel thank you
number five MI 2022 003 978 2253 Ingersoll Street
murder fellow is the attorney when she gets on i'm going to talk about i'm going to read
into the record seven cases and we'll hear them all at once
okay and mr chair these will be the ones yes it is it is yes okay
and just to clarify for the record mr chair um mr shaheed is recusing himself
from the set of cases that Ms. Verlinger is presenting.
Good afternoon.
If the administrator could also promote Darwin Beauvais as a panelist,
he's going to be joining me today.
Mr. Beauvais.
Mr. Beauvais is coming back in as a panelist.
he could be promoted to panelists okay thank you
all right could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Sure. Meredith Verlager, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, Dilworth-Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I sure do.
Mr. Beauvais?
Well, we can move along without him, and if he's able to get in, we'll go back.
I'm going to read them all into the record, and I understand you're going to have an opening statement, right?
That's correct.
This is case versus case number five is MI 2022-00-3978-2253 Inglesall Street.
Number six, MI 2022-00.
MI-2022-004-682-2038 Ridge Avenue.
Number seven, MI-2022-004-845-2000 Ridge Avenue.
Number nine on my list, MI-2022-004-228-2016 Ridge Avenue.
number 10 on my list mi2022 004649 2042 to 44 ridge avenue number 11 on my list mi2022
004874 2414 nassau street nassau street and number 15 on my list
MI-2022-003-749, no, I'm sorry, wrong one, here it is, number 15, MI-2022-004-920-1409-North 21st Street, that's all the cases.
My understanding, your client is the Philadelphia Housing Authority?
our client is penrose um and okay okay all right i'll explain the relationship all right so so
first our vice chair has a few questions for you hey meredith do you agree to leave the reading of
the refusals and stipulate to their accuracies on all of the cases yes with the exception of
1409 north 21st street there are two errors on that refusal which i will address in our presentation
Okay, and that is number 15, whatever number it is.
Okay, 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, for all of the cases.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, while I share my screen, I see that Darwin is now in, if you'd like to swear him in while I share my screen.
I most certainly would like to do that.
Mr. Beauvais, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Darwin Beauvais. That's Darwin, D-A-R-W-I-N.
Beauvais is B as in boy, E-A-U, V as in victory, A-I-S, as in stam.
I'm at 1500 Market Street, and I'm with the law firm of Dilworth Paxson, representing Penrose, who is the applicant in this matter.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
That's all I do, so that is in the firm.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Again, Meredith Verliger and Darwin Beauvais with Dilworth Paxson.
We're here today representing Penrose.
Now, the property owner is the Philadelphia Housing Authority, who entered into a master redevelopment agreement with Hunt Development Group, LLC.
In 2017, Penrose became a member of the Hunt family of companies after they successfully closed on a strategic alliance, whereby Hunt acquired a minority interest in Penrose.
Now, as a part of that transaction, Hunt secured a long-term interest in Penrose's future development activities, while Penrose assumed responsibility and oversight for a substantial portfolio of the projects in Hunt's pipeline.
So that explains the connection between Penrose and the property owner, PHA.
Our architect on all of these cases is Wallace Roberts and Todd, and the civil team is Mid-Atlantic Engineering Partners.
do have representatives from both the architecture firm and the engineering firm if there's any
detail questions that we do not address in our presentation today.
I'll start like you suggested with an introductory statement and then we can move along to each
individual property. So as the board knows this concerns seven addresses on your list today.
I'll first give an overall introduction and then from there at the board's discretion I might
suggest that the board hear from the council president's office. I understand that Kareem
Grooms is waiting in the virtual audience and that his statement would cover the project
overall. So when I conclude my introductory statement if the board would like it might make
So when I conclude my introductory statement, if the board would like, it might make sense to let him jump on and give the council president's take on the projects.
make sense.
The proposal before the board today is being pursued by Penrose and represents phase three of the sweeping redevelopment of the Sharswood-Blumberg neighborhood.
The board has heard similar variance requests for several prior phases of this exciting revitalization proposal.
This project has received expressions of support from the City Planning Commission,
as well as received a letter of non-opposition from the Coordinating RCO Brewery Town Sharswood
Community Civic Association. I submitted to the board individual and lengthy exhibit packets
for each of the proposed applications. Given the length of the exhibit packets, I've also prepared
a separate presentation that's up on the screen that will be slightly easier to walk you through.
However, please note that the full exhibit packets include all of the required documentation
such as tax clearances, ownership and applicant verification, code sections, required notices,
and other detailed evidence supporting the variance requests before the Board today.
If the Board has any questions during my presentation, I can happily bring up the
full exhibits for more detailed reference on any point. Now up on the screen right now you will see
an overall key plan of the proposed development which spans a large area from Ridge Avenue to
North 25th Street and from West Oxford Street to North College Avenue. Overall there are seven
separate appeal applications before the board today which represents a fraction of the overall
phase three development, most of which receive permits by right. This phase of the Sharswood
redevelopment contemplates 224 residential units, broken down with 189 affordable units
at 20, 50, and 60 percent AMI thresholds with 35 market rate units. You will note that the
majority of the units are two and three bedroom units with a handful of one and four bedroom
units also available. 74 total spaces are contemplated for this phase.
On the next slide, the board can see where we've specifically identified the location
of the cases that are before you today.
Now, by way of additional background, the Sharswood-Blumberg redevelopment is being
funded with combination of Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency tax credits, as well as Choice
Neighborhood grants. On the next slide, the board will see some general information as it relates
to the Choice Neighborhoods initiative, which is targeted towards communities struggling with
distressed housing that would benefit from improvements catalyzed by public and private
investment. The grant was made up of two phases, referred to as the transformation plan and the
implementation phase. This information will be crucial for the board to keep in mind as we review
the proposals, particularly as it relates to some of the concerns we heard during the RCO meeting.
The transformation plan itself was funded by a $500,000 grant from HUD that laid out a framework of goals, strategies, and outcomes for the Sharswood-Blumberg neighborhood that sought to incorporate public and private investment in three main areas.
Those pillars were housing, people, and neighborhood.
Now, I've summarized some of the critical tenets of each of these goals up on the screen.
The housing plan is focused on aspects of housing that would better serve the community, such as parking and home design.
The people pillar looks to job creation, health, beautification, civic responsibility, and leadership.
The neighborhood pillar seeks to address crime, blight, commercial use introduction, vacancy, and infrastructure.
The Planning Commission's district plan, adopted in 2014, also highlighted the desired public and private investment into the area, desiring to create a mixed income community while strengthening the Ridge Avenue commercial corridor.
Now, the proposals before the board today are being pursued by Penrose and are only seeking to address the housing plan pillar.
Penrose was selected and is only authorized to pursue this one aspect of the overall revitalization goal.
I raise this important note now because many of the concerns we heard from the RCO will be addressed by other pillars of the project, by other
will be addressed by other pillars of the project, by other partners, and other stakeholders.
Now, PHA acquired all of these properties through the eminent domain process in 2015.
The notices of condemnation for each property are provided in the full exhibits.
The exhibits also include the Declaration of Covenants that applies to each property,
which also sets forth the HUD requirements for unit count and affordability.
As the Board may also know, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency also delegates certain thresholds for price points and density.
Now, before I move on to each property, we would like to summarize the community engagement that has occurred,
which dates back to roughly 2012-2013 with the preparation of the Lower North District Plan
and continued for many years during the preparation of the Transformation Plan.
The community engagement did not cease once the implementation phase commenced. The RCO noted in
its letter the lack of community outreach, which is not consistent with the considerable community
engagement that has occurred. As it relates specifically to Penrose's involvement, over the
past three years, Penrose has met with the community a multitude of times to discuss the
three Sharswood affordable housing developments that Penrose is tasked with completing. Those
interactions have occurred during the RCO's scheduled community meetings and RCO meetings,
plus specially scheduled community meetings and PHA-hosted events. In the past year,
specifically, Penrose has attended almost every monthly Brewery Town community meeting
to update the neighborhood on the progress of the first two phases, as well as providing updates on
this third phase. Penrose has also met with individual residents to hear and address specific
concerns. In addition, Penrose has a tour scheduled with several community members on November 19th
to hear any remaining concerns and walk them through the completed Phase 1 development at
21st and Master Street. As we hope the board will see, these projects are the culmination of many
years of planning and community involvement, and the variances requested today represent unique
hardships that are minor and will contribute to the long-planned revitalization of the area.
We submit the evidence that the board will hear today, establishes that all of the requested
variances are the least minimum, and further the long-standing development goals for the area to
provide critical affordable housing by eliminating long vacant blighted lots and by adding commercial
uses along vibrant commercial corridors. The proposals will not increase congestion and will
mitigate it by providing parking. No negative impact will result to the surrounding neighborhood
and the proposed structures meet the character of the surrounding residential and commercial
neighborhoods. This project will positively impact the neighborhood and contribute to
the continued revitalization of the area. For efficiency sake, I will also note that
a full memorandum of law is included in each exhibit packet, and we will happily expand
on any particular point for which the board requires further argument.
now at this time we are prepared to move on to each individual case um unless the board
would like to call up the council president's representative okay so one of the council
president's representative um please raise your hand chair we have kareem grooms hi
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please good afternoon this is
kareem grooms uh from council president daryl clark's office kareem k-a-r-e-e-m grooms is g-r-o-o-m-e-s
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Proceed, sir. I'm here to relay that the Council President, Council President Clark
supports this project in totality. That's it for my statement. Thank you. Thank you very much for
calling it. In totality. Proceed, Meredith. Thank you. Many of these requests are quite minor and
I will do my best to move through them as efficiently as possible. Many of them do also
include lot consolidations but none of those consolidations generated any variances uh so
i will generally speaking not touch on that the consolidation plans are included in the exhibits
um now mr chairman do you are you intending to vote on each one after each presentation or do
now mr chairman do you are you intending to vote on each one
you want me to just keep moving i think what so what i would recommend for you to do is to go
right through all them right then i'm going to have planning planning i'll probably have to go
through all them and when i looked at the list i'm probably not going to be able to vote on them all
once because a couple of them have provisos okay why don't you why don't we just let you go right
through it. Then planning will come on way after we go to the virtual audience. Planning will come
on after that, and they'll go through it, and then I'll do the votes, okay? Sounds good. All right,
so starting first with 2253 Ingersoll Street. As the photograph and the aerial reflects,
2253 Ingersoll Street sits at the corner of Ingersoll Street and North 23rd Street.
This property is directly across from the Vox Junior High School.
The zoning map reflects that this property is split zoned RM1 and CMX2.
On the grand scheme, you will note that this lot is just south of a new building that previously
received a zoning permit. And when I reference the grand scheme, I'm talking here about
this building right here.
On this lot, the proposal is for a three-story, two-unit dwelling, which are set up as stacked
flats.
This application received two refusals, which we submit are de minimis dimensional requests.
The rear yard here is insufficient by three feet and the occupied area exceeds the maximum by 2.8%.
The applicant submits to a hardship because the code application of rear yard here is
incongruent with the corner location of this property. Furthermore, these projects are designed
based on specific required guidelines for the overall project goals and the proposed dimensions
are consistent with similar rear yard and open space on this block. Because this was designed
in conjunction with the development I referenced just to the north on Master Street, the dimensions
were specially tailored to accommodate both of these new projects as efficiently as possible.
next up at 2414 Nassau Street which also includes 2441 through 49 Jefferson Street
this is a large lot consolidation that spans from Nassau Street to North 25th Street to Jefferson
Street. On the screen, you will see a view of the vacant property that is facing towards North 25th
Street in the distance. On this second photograph, you can see the property from the perspective of
Jefferson Street. Additional context can be seen in the aerial view and the zoning map, which like
many of the properties before the board are predominantly zoned RM1 with a small corner
sliver of CMX2. Now in context to the larger scale project, which I will bring back up on the screen
briefly, you'll notice that this lot is the southernmost portion of this Part 2, Part 3
development, which covers nearly the entire blocks all the way from West Oxford Street to Ingersoll
street now this proposal includes one new three-story building with seven units along nassau
street a new parking area is proposed to accommodate 12 parking spaces through two
different curb cuts this project this proposal also incorporates green space for residents
The elevation here is shown from the perspective of North 25th Street and we've also included a
perspective rendering of the parking area. Now on this proposal we received two refusals.
First we we received a refusal for the parking which is prohibited unless it can be accessed
from a rear street. This refusal is going to be repeated through several other of the proposals
today as well. In this case, the hardship stems from the Comprehensive Plan for this area,
which specifically contemplates parking areas either to the rear or to the side of new buildings.
This parking meets the intent of the code and is consistent with guidelines provided
This parking meets the intent of the code and is consistent with guidelines provided
in the Lower North District plan. The applicant has limited lots to utilize and it would foreclose
the applicant's ability to provide any parking if required to comply with the code as written.
If you recall from the introduction earlier, parking was one of the community's most critical
requests to ensure that new housing developments do not overburden the crowded streets. The parking
area and the parking lighting is shielded by a six-foot-high shadow box fence and landscaping
to further mitigate any noise or light emanating from the property. This proposal also received a
refusal for the lack of commercial space because of that small sliver on the corner here that's
zoned CMX2. Now, as mentioned, this project has been designed in conjunction with 16 other project
sites, many which include commercial uses in more dominant commercial locations along Ridge Avenue,
which is consistent with both planning goals and the transformation plan for this area.
Aside from the planning that went into the Choice Neighborhood Grant, the Planning Commission's 2014 Lower North District Plan also contemplated focusing commercial uses along Ridge Avenue and transitioning commercial uses out of areas like this where the commercial viability is weak.
Small mom-and-pop type corner stores are specifically discouraged for this area.
Finally, as the photographs and aerial reflect, this lot sits within a residential area that
cannot support a small commercial use.
All right.
Okay, so the next case we're going to present concerns 2042 Ridge Avenue.
As you can see on this overall aerial, this project is in close proximity to the four other cases that you will hear that sit along and just off of Ridge Avenue.
Now, 2042 Ridge Avenue is the easternmost lot that's shown on the screen close to Sharswood Street and right across from the PHA headquarters.
As the zoning map reflects, this lot at 2042 Ridge Avenue is split zoned CMX 2 and RM 1.
You will notice that the lot extends from Ridge Avenue all the way back to Lambert Street and is
a very unusually shaped lot. For additional context, you will see a few photographs on this
on this image that shows the lot from both the Ridge Avenue frontage as well as from the rear
along North Lambert Street. Now this proposal for 2042 Ridge Avenue includes one small building
that faces Ridge Avenue that will contain first floor commercial and four dwelling units above.
To the rear will be 21 parking spaces accessed from one curb cut off of North Lambert Street.
The parking area will be surrounded by landscaping and a six foot high shadow box fence.
The elevation here shows the proposed facade which you will notice seeks to blend with the
existing brick facades of many existing structures along Ridge Avenue.
Okay, now the refusal here, which I understand there may be some confusion over and may require
a proviso, but the refusal on this lot stems from the split zoning designation.
The only refusal we received here says that the commercial space is prohibited.
However, as you can see on the zoning map, this particular lot shows the somewhat unintended
consequence and resulting hardship that stems from the code interpretation for reviewing split
districts. The commercial space here is proposed along Bridge Avenue. The entire building containing
the commercial use sits within the CMX2 commercial zoning district. However, because the RM1 makes up
significant portion of the lot, the L&I deemed that the RM1 controls. Now of course 2042 Ridge
Avenue sits along a dominant stretch of Ridge Avenue that is uniquely positioned for commercial
use, while the other phases of the project are more apt to include solely residential.
while the other phases of the project are more apt to include solely residential uses.
Accordingly, the commercial use here is critically important for the overall project goals, which contemplates a mix of uses.
Although there was no refusal issued for the parking, we did also include the rendered view of this parking area,
so that the board can see that the parking area will be adequately shielded from surrounding neighbors by both the fence as well as landscaping.
And I do understand that if the board is inclined to grant this one, that it would need to be with a proviso for commercial uses as allowed by CMX2.
And I also neglected to mention that the previous case, 2414 Nassau Street, did have a revised plan that we submitted for a very minor change, which I will point out, which was that it would be one building instead of two buildings, and it also reduced the parking by two spaces.
Those, I believe, would be the only provisos.
Now, just two properties down from 2042 Ridge Avenue is 2038 Ridge Avenue, which proposes a small infill development.
Again, for context, this property is roughly mid-block on Ridge Avenue between Master Street and Sharswood Street, and is also just across from the PHA headquarters.
On this lot, the proposal is for a three-story structure with ground floor commercial and two dwelling units.
Here again, you will note the brick facade that seeks to blend with the character of
other existing structures on this block.
Now, the refusal for this proposal is really quite novel.
As you can see on the zoning plan, and I will zoom in a little bit, there is a deck proposed
for the residential units that sits just off the second floor level.
Now, although the deck itself is permitted, the zoning code prohibits stairs that would extend from the second floor level down to the first floor.
This prohibition only applies to attached buildings like this project that is proposed.
The applicant submits to a hardship because these stairs, of course, provide critical access to the upper level residential units and ensure they have access to the rear yard open space that is separate from the ground floor commercial tenant.
All right, now the next two I'm going to present in somewhat more of a combined fashion.
for 2016 Ridge Avenue and 2000 Ridge Avenue.
For context, 2016 Ridge Avenue sits at the northwest corner of Ridge Avenue and Master Street.
2000 Ridge Avenue is at the southwest corner of Ridge Avenue and Master Street.
And as you can see here from the overview map, 2000 Ridge Avenue makes up the entire
Ridge Avenue frontage between North College Avenue and Master Street, and also includes
several lots on College and Master.
This zoning map should give you a good sense of the outline of both of these lots.
You will note that 2016 Ridge Avenue is a highly unusually shaped lot that comes to a sharp point
at the corner and is zoned CMX2. 2000 Ridge Avenue also has an irregular shape and is predominantly
zoned CMX2 with a small portion of RM1. Now if I turn back to the photographs, you'll see additional
context to the area surrounding these properties.
This first photograph here is facing 2016 Ridge Avenue at the corner.
You will notice the PHA headquarters in the distance further up Ridge Avenue, and across
Master Street, you will also see the rough outline of a previously developed building
that was included in an earlier phase of the Sharswood Lumber project.
If I move on to the next photograph, now facing 2000 Ridge Avenue, you will see that new construction at 2016 master a bit more clear.
you will see that new construction at 2016 master a bit more clearly.
Now additional photos also show the existing buildings along Ridge Avenue
that will be demolished to accommodate this new project.
The final photograph is a view roughly from North College Avenue.
The board can take note of the existing apartment complex that is on the
opposing side of Ridge Avenue. Now the proposal for 2016 Ridge Avenue is for a four-story building
containing ground floor commercial use with 17 dwelling units. This proposal received refusals
for rear yard, occupied area, height, and density. I'll address the rear yard and open area and will
then address height and density in a few moments. As the board can see, this particular lot is not
only unusually shaped, but it comes to a sharp point right at that master ridge intersection.
Because of this condition, the usable area of the lot is considerably less than a lot that has a
more traditional square or rectangular shape. It is directly because of this unusual lot shape
that the insufficient rear yard and open area exist. The building was designed to maximize
usable space as efficiently as possible in light of the challenges stemming from the shape.
I'll move on to 2000 Ridge Avenue and we'll then touch on height and density,
which applies to both proposals equally. At 2000 Ridge Avenue, the proposal is for a five-story
building with ground floor commercial use, 40 residential units, and five parking spaces in
the rear of the building. In addition to height and density, 2000 Ridge Avenue also received a
refusal for parking, which again, like 2414 Nassau Street, is prohibited because it is accessed from
a side street. Our argument is identical to the justification that we provided for 2414 Nassau
Street, which again focuses on the comprehensive plan, the intent of the code, and the overall
goals of the project. So I will refer the board directly back to my full argument given at 2414
Nassau Street, which applies equally to the proposal here. The parking area here is also
shielded by a six foot high shadow box fence and landscaping to further mitigate any noise or light.
Now to address the height and density and while I do that I will bring up some renderings
of these proposals. For 2016 Ridge Avenue the height is proposed at just over 53 feet.
For 2000 Ridge Avenue the height is proposed at 64 and a half feet. The permitted number
of dwelling units for 2016 Ridge Avenue is nine units, where 17 total are proposed,
and the permitted number of dwelling units at 2000 Ridge Avenue is 28, where 40 are proposed.
Now both of these buildings have been designed in conjunction with the goals of the Transformation
Plan and the Lower North District Plan, which encourages higher density,
taller mixed-use buildings along Ridge Avenue. There are other recent developments in close
proximity to these proposals, which have also received variances for height, such as the PHA
headquarters and the newly erected building at 2016 Master Street, that are both of comparable
or greater height to the buildings proposed. Given the orientation of these buildings,
the height will not negatively impact surrounding structures.
2016 Ridge Avenue and 2000 Ridge Avenue both sit on a dominant corridor and will act as
landmark new structures for the Sharswood redevelopment. These proposed densities are
consistent with the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Plan for this area and is further consistent with
the requirements of the relevant funding organizations that do require a certain
minimum number of units to support the desired affordability metrics for the project.
These units will also serve the broader goal of seeking to revitalize this commercial corridor
by providing sufficient density to support the new commercial uses.
And finally, 1409 North 21st Street.
Turning to the aerial briefly for context, the board will note that this lot is just west of Ridge Avenue or based on
The board will note that this lot is just west of Ridge Avenue, or based on this orientation
on the screen, it would appear north.
The rectangular lot here makes up roughly half the block and is bordered by North Lambert
Street, Master Street, and North 21st Street.
The property is mostly zoned RM1 with a small corner of CMX2 zoning.
In the photographs, the board will note that this is a vacant lot that's bordered by residential
uses. For context, you'll also notice the new development in the photograph right across Master
Street. Now this final proposal is for a four-story residential building with 24 units.
in the rear and partially covered by the building above is a parking area for 17 vehicles with
access points on both north 21st street and north lambert street the parking is surrounded by
landscaped areas and an open patio space we have several refusals here many which are identical to
earlier projects that we presented today and just for context so the board can see in this rendering
you can see kind of the orientation of the building and the access to this parking here on
North 21st Street. Now as I referenced very early on when we did not stipulate to the accuracy of
this refusal, there are two errors on this refusal. First, the examiner issued a refusal for insufficient
parking space size, claiming that the minimum width is eight and a half feet where eight foot
spaces are proposed. This is incorrect because the proposed spaces are compact spaces which are
permitted to be slightly smaller means examiner misinterpreted a section of the code that restricts
the number of compact spaces in a large parking garages but would not apply to this lot and in
fact on one of the other projects an examiner was going to issue a refusal for this and that
examiner was willing to remove the refusal after explanation. The examiner on this lot was not.
The second error concerns the rear yard refusal. The code dictates at section 14701.1.2 that for
properties bounded by three or more streets that rear yards are not required for attached buildings.
Only lot coverage and open space requirements apply.
The refusal here clearly identifies that this proposed building is an attached building and
therefore the rear yard refusal was issued in error and this project does comply with the code.
As was the case with several earlier projects, 1409 North 21st Street also received a refusal
for the parking, which is accessed from two side streets. And again, I will refer the board back
to my arguments contained within 2414 Nassau Street, as well as for 2000 Ridge Avenue for
complete argument on the hardship stemming from that particular code section. As was the case
with the other projects, the exposed parking here will be surrounded by landscaping and will be
shielded by a six-foot-high shadow box fence to mitigate any noise. Most of the parking here
is actually under the building, which further contributes to no impact stemming from this
parking. Finally, this proposal also received a refusal for the proposed height of roughly 53
feet. Now, similar to 2016 and 2000 Ridge Avenue, this building was designed in conjunction with
the overall goals of the Transformation Plan and the Lower North District Plan, which encourages
high-density tall mixed-use buildings in prominent locations. In close proximity to this is the
aforementioned PHA headquarters and the new building at 2016 Master Street just across the
street. Given the orientation of this building, this height will not pose any negative impact
to surrounding structures. I'm very pleased to report that this concludes our presentation on
this property uh and overall unless the board has any further questions and i would imagine
it would be helpful at this time to have our client adopt all of our testimony why don't we
to have our client adopt all of our testimony.
Why don't we have your client adopt your testimony?
have your client
If the administrator could look for Lindsay Samsey.
Ms. Samsey, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Ms. Sanzi, you have to unmute yourself.
Hi, this is Jacob Fisher.
I'm also from Penrose.
So, Mr. Fisher, state your name and spell for the court reporter.
It's Jacob, J-A-C-O-B, Fisher, F-I-S-H-E-R.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Hi, Jacob.
Could you identify your position with Penrose?
Sure. My name is Jacob Fisher, and I am Regional Vice President at Tenrose.
Thank you. And have you been present and have heard all of the testimony
that we offered in front of the board today for all seven cases?
I sure have.
And would you agree that all of the testimony and evidence offered was accurate,
and would you adopt it as if it were your own?
I agree and adopt.
Thank you very much.
My questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Sheriff. We have Nina, last name ending in V-R.
Hello, good afternoon.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. My name is Nina Balinski-Ristics. My last name is a doozy, so I'll spell it out.
First name is Nina N as in Nancy, I-N-A. And then my last name is Belinsky Ristics. It's hyphenated,
B as in boy, I-L-Y-N as in Nancy, S-K-Y, and then a hyphen. And then Ristics, R-I-S as in Sam,
T as in Tom
Okay. Do you swear or affirm
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you please proceed?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I've prepared a written statement
the requested zoning variances
so I'll just read from that.
This statement
is in reference to proposal
requests for zoning variances for 2042 to 46 ridge avenue and 1401 to 09 lambert street among others
in our neighborhood my name is nina balinski rustics and along with my husband i am a homeowner
and resident at 2029 west master street the back of our property connects to the tract of land on
Lambert Street and is in view of the rear of the properties on Ridge Avenue that were just
presented. The purpose of this statement is to offer a resident's perspective about the proposed
use of land and also to express strong opposition to the requested zoning variances and especially
the proposed parking lot on the Lambert Street parcel. The residents of the 200 block of West
Master Street have endured the construction of a five-story PHA housing facility directly outside
the front doors of our homes for the past two-plus years. We were dumbfounded about the elevation of
the property at five stories, while most of the existing structures are three stories tall.
We collectively wondered where the vehicles for those 50-plus units would park when the parking
facility for that new PHA construction only provided spaces for 12 vehicles. This compounds
the existing exponential increase in traffic that began when the PHA headquarters was opened on
Ridge Avenue between Master and Jefferson a couple of years prior. Our immediate neighbors at 2027
and 2033 Master Street share the sentiment that these monstrous structures overpower the residential
feel of our neighborhood. We would have been much more amenable to a series of townhomes that
resemble the existing architecture, similar to buildings that have been erected near 21st and
Oxford, near the former site of the Sharswood-Blumberg housing project.
near the former site of the Sharswood-Blumberg housing project towers.
However, we specifically were never invited to participate in any preliminary discussions pertaining to these decisions.
We are simply forced to live with the results.
In a mailing dated October 6, 2022, we were notified of the zoning variance requests for the properties that I mentioned earlier.
The request is to include commercial space in an area zoned for residential use, a rear deck and egress for one of the second floor apartment units on Ridge Avenue, as well as the construction of a 21-space parking lot on the Lambert Street parcel, despite the fact that the Lambert Street land is zoned for residential use.
my neighbors and I have yet again been excluded from the decision making process involving these
properties that are directly adjacent to our homes where we are raising our families
I want to make it known that I am firmly in opposition to granting any zoning variances
for any of these projects moreover as a taxpayer and lifelong resident of Philadelphia
I am vehemently opposed to the construction of a parking lot on the residentially zoned
Lambert Street Parcel. This opposition stems directly from our concern for the quality of
life in our community, as well as the health of its residents, including our neighbors, our families,
and us. When my husband and I purchased our home at 2029 Westmaster Street in July of 2013,
we wanted a place where we could raise our family, and we anticipated the growth of a familial
community in Sharswood based on the renewal that we had observed happening throughout the city.
We befriended our neighbors at 2033 Westmaster Street, a multi-generational household whose
members have resided in the neighborhood for 50 plus years. They welcomed us to the community and
we took to setting down roots. Our hopes were to be a part of a vibrant, diverse, and healthy
neighborhood where people of all different backgrounds could reside and grow together.
The recent projects that fall under the purview of the Sharswood-Blumberg
Neighborhood Transformation Initiative have dashed these hopes over and over.
With the overbuilt looming multi-unit properties cropping us up all around us, we are bracing
ourselves for the inevitable overcrowding and urban anonymity, the very same forces that made
the Shardswood Blumberg Towers into a blighted and neglected relic of previous housing initiatives
gone awry. It is readily apparent that PHA is setting the neighborhood up for the same issues
that plagued the previous plan for this section of the city, but is not learning any lessons from
what happened before. We've already seen an exponential rise in traffic in the area since
PHA relocated its headquarters to the corner of Ridge and Master. If a 21-spot parking lot is
built on the Lambert Street parcel, the traffic dangers will literally be in our backyards,
the area where our toddlers currently play. We'll have to contend with erratic drivers,
air and light pollution, which is already happening, car alarms going off at all hours,
vehicle break-ins, and whatever other unsavory activities may take place in a secluded parking
lot at night. All of this will be in view of our one and two-year-old's bedroom windows.
Who here would decide to purchase a property to raise your family that is directly next to
a municipal parking lot? This would never happen in Fairmount or Chestnut Hill
or another more affluent neighborhood. The City of Philadelphia feels entitled to decide the fate
of its residents for them without including them in the process and telling us that it's too late
when we try to object. This is happening in Sharswood because the City of Philadelphia
perceives residents here to be deserving of what they are given. You get what you get and you don't
get upset. How might the traffic and parking issues be alleviated? Not over building and
trying to squeeze as many units into as small a geographic area as possible would be a start.
PHA could offer its employees incentives to use greener forms of transportation
like SEPTA or Bikeshare. This could be incentivized for current and future residents, too.
The 61 and the 33 bus routes have stops on every block of Ridge Avenue in this neighborhood,
and they connect directly to the major transportation hubs in Center City.
There could be an initiative to promote Bikeshare not only as a means of transportation,
but also as a way to improve the health of workers and residents. We need to evolve our
We need to evolve our thinking and approach urban life from a healthier and more sustainable
thinking and approach urban life from a healthier
perspective. I am speaking directly to you, city officials. You need to evolve your thinking.
What if a parcel on Lambert Street became a community grain space and playground for the
young residents of Sharswood? What if they installed brand new state-of-the-art equipment
and spray grounds like Clemente Park at 18th and Wallace Street, which is where I currently have
to walk to take my kids to a clean and updated public play area. According to an article from
BMC Public Health, urban greening provides an abundance of benefits to those who have access to
it. Quoting from the article, exposure to urban green spaces improves mental health and decreases
rates of depression across levels of urbanization, socioeconomic status, and sexes. Outdoor greenery
stimulates working memory, increases attention span in children and adults, and raises serotonin
levels. Can someone here please explain to me the health benefits of a parking lot?
I'll repeat that. Can someone here please explain to me?
Listen, I think I understand your position, but we're not going to answer questions like that
right now. I appreciate you calling in. I appreciate where you stand on this, but we're
going to have to bring your statements to closure here. I'm almost finished. I only have a couple
more things to say. The City of Philadelphia does not value the health of its residents,
especially the members of marginalized communities. The construction taking place in Charlotte is a
testament to the fact that the City of Philadelphia does not provide access to the health benefits of
green space to its most vulnerable populations, and they expect nobody to say anything about it
because it's business as usual. The decisions are already made. We're just waiting for the ink to dry.
In closing, I call on the elected officials that represent the Shardswood community to answer to the systematic exclusion of the existing residents from the decision-making process.
Daryl Clark, Donna Bullock, Sharif Street, these decisions affect our lives, the lives of our children, and the quality of life in our community.
Overcrowding in parking lots do not strengthen the fabric of our community.
We need resources, green spaces, clean air, and clean streets.
We need places for our young people to play and learn and build relationships, and we need that as adults too.
Sadly, I know that my words here today will not lead to any meaningful reconsideration of the plan of action.
I know that the decisions are made and my voice does not matter.
The city of Philadelphia can take my land and my tax money and detrimentally impact my family's quality of life, but it can't take away my right to say something about it.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Thank you for your time, and thank you for we understand where you stand.
Is there any other questions or comments in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
So, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair.
Sarah Vaughn.
So, Sarah, here's what I would like to do is, as you do each one, I'm going to call for a vote.
because we can't do them all together
because there are some that have provisos.
So why don't we start with you with five?
And when you're done five, I'll call for a vote
and then we'll move on, okay?
Okay, Chair, which is your number five?
Because I don't think it's the same numbering on my report.
Okay, so number five is MI 2022-003-978-2253 Ingersoll Street.
Okay, all right.
So I'll just go in the order that you read them.
I'll tell you exactly where we are, okay?
Thank you, Chair.
Okay, starting with 2253 Ingersoll Street.
The irregular shape of the property supports hardship,
and the City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Okay, so number five, MI 2022, 003978, 2253 Ingersoll Street.
I vote yes.
Carol Tenery, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
So number six, Sarah, is MI 2022-004-692-2038 Ridge Avenue.
Okay. The proposed variance does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
MI 2022-004-692-2038, Ridge Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Jim, we have three votes. So number seven is MI2022-004-845-2000 Ridge Avenue.
Thank you.
Oh, wait, is Ishmael here?
He doesn't vote.
He's recused himself.
We're good.
We have three.
We have three.
2000 Ridge Avenue.
The proposed variance does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
Thank you.
So, number seven, MI-2022-004845, 2000 Ridge Avenue.
I vote yes.
with proviso use registration for commercial space required prior to occupancy
carol tenary my vote is yes with proviso thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso
james snell my vote is yes with proviso thank you jim so sarah number nine is mi2022 004 228
2016 Ridge Avenue.
The proposed dimensional variance for parking is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
However, the lack of a proposal of a rear yard and rear yard depth and area is not necessary to enable viable economic use of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance with a proviso to provide rear yard area as required by the zoning code.
So, number nine, MI 2022-004-228-2016 Ridge Avenue.
I vote yes with proviso.
Use registration for commercial space required prior to occupancy.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. We're for Biso.
So that's three votes.
We have three votes.
Number 11, MI 2022-004-874-2414 Nassau Street.
Okay, the proposed use variance, and I believe this is, let me just.
Okay, so the use variance, and this is for parking.
Yes, it is.
Okay, all right.
Will not cause detrimental impacts beyond what normally might be expected.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
So MI-2022-004-874-2414 Nassau Street, I vote yes, proviso.
Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA, November 9th, 2022.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
So number 10, where am I? Number 15. Is that right? Yes. Mr. Chair, I think we may have skipped
number 10 we skipped number 10 but we're going to all right guys okay all right okay so number 10
mi 2022 004 649 2042 to 44 ridge avenue
2042 to 44 ridge thank you chair
Commercial space.
Sorry, my Excel is going a little bit goofy, so let me just get back to where I can do that.
Okay, all right, I found it.
Okay, so I want to make sure I am reading this after, after Ms. Verliger explained what
the refusal was about and how that was misunderstood.
So I think I'm, so let me know if you need me to clarify.
Okay, so the City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance with the proviso that commercial space is provided as required by the code.
Okay, so the City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance with
the Reviso.
So, number 10, MI 2022-004, 649-2042-44 Ridge Avenue.
I vote yes, proviso.
Commercial space uses is permitted in the CMX2 zoning district.
Use registration required prior to occupancy.
my vote is yes with proviso thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso
okay that's three votes and i i have my which is my number 15 i believe the last one
MI-2022-004-920-1409-North 21st Street.
Okay, the proposed dimensional variance for parking is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
Thank you. So MI-2022-004-920-1409-North 21st Street, I vote yes.
Harold Teneri, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thanks, everyone. Thanks, Sarah. Thank you.
Thank you for your patience.
Thank you. Bye, Darwin.
win. Thank you. It's always a pleasure. Let's just get back to the right of the list. Number
eight. Okay, let's go. NMI 2022, 003848, 405 South 17th Street. Brandon Savron is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from Councilman Kenyatta Johnson. Letter of non-opposition
from Center City Residence Association.
Also, the applicant has 16 form letter support from neighbors.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Thank you.
State your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
Sure. 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 or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Sure. My clients are Heather and Joseph DeGranse, who are a married couple who own the property.
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Mr. Saverin, do you agree to wait 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,
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 questions.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Okay. Good afternoon, members of the board. Thank you for your time today. I am here representing Heather and Joseph DeGrange, who are the owners of 405 South 17th Street.
As you can see on the notice of refusal that's currently on your screen, we are here for a use variance to conduct the use of visitor accommodation in this existing structure.
As I'll show you in a moment, this is a very small lot and a very small building on that lot that is on the historic register, the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.
The subject lot is only 234 square feet.
I believe the structure has under 700 square feet of interior space, despite occupying most of that lot.
So essentially, as I'll tell you in a moment, when my clients purchased this property, it was already being used as sort of like a one-unit hotel or a bed and breakfast, you might call it.
But the prior owner did not have the proper permit to conduct that use.
And we're here to obtain that zoning variance from you to get that permit for visitor accommodation.
And we are in the CMX1 zoning district in Center City, near the corner of 17th and Pine.
So as the chairman mentioned, we met with the Center City Residence Association.
So as the chairman mentioned, we met with the Center City residents.
After a vote was taken by their board members, they decided to take a stance of non-opposition to the legalization of this building and its use.
Similarly, Councilman Johnson has also taken the position of non-opposition to our request for a variance.
As I mentioned, we're just below the corner of 17th and Pine.
And you'll see here this is an incredibly small lot that has sort of two neighbors of a similar size from whom we each have a letter of support, which I'll show you in a moment.
And then to the south of us is a surface parking lot that is owned by a third party.
Here's a photograph of the subject building, has a nice mural on its side.
there's the beginning of that parking lot that I mentioned that my clients did not own. So this is
what we would call in Philadelphia a historic trinity and a very, very narrow building,
almost like a slice of cake. I'll show you the interior in a moment, but right here,
starting where my cursor is and going to the edge of the building, this is the structure we're
talking about. It's three stories. While I have this image up, I'm just going to tell you a little
bit about my clients. So the DeGrands live in West Philadelphia, and they own and operate
the Knockbox Cafe, which is on 45th Street near Osage. They obtained 16 letters of support
in the process of preparing for the RCO meeting with CCRA. And they purchased this property
on March 28, 2022. Not sure they knew what they were getting into from a permitting standpoint,
but they were aware of what was going on in the building, that it was used as a bed and breakfast,
and they wanted to continue that use. And they've done so, and CCRA is aware of this,
they've continued to rent out the property while this case has been pending. Heather or Joe meet
every person that stays in this unit in person in order to sort of give them a primer on the
uniqueness of the property to make sure everybody who rents it is safe. And people tend to not
necessarily just stay for a weekend. They've had some guests stay for several weeks at a time.
It's a great place for a couple or a small family to stay. Although, as I'll explain in a moment,
they do not allow young children to stay in the home. I also mentioned it's on the historic
register. And now let me get into a few photos. And before I do that, I just want to mention that
the hardship in this case is that the CMX1 zoning district permits certain retail uses,
which are really inappropriate in this location, given that there is no retail or commercial use
on this block. It's residential. It also permits, you know, permanent single-family living,
but as I'll show you, this is a really diminutive kind of tiny space for a family to try to live in,
and in fact, there are sort of essential appliances and utilities in the basement, which
per the DeGran's understanding, in order to replace, they potentially have to remove a
portion of the first floor floor to get things into that basement it's a very challenging unique
home so let me walk you through that I'm going to skip ahead in my exhibit packet here to some
interior photographs so here's the first floor when you walk into the home this is the front
door and you'll see on the left the spiral staircase this is the only way up and down from
the basement all the way up to the third floor. Because of the difficulty, if you take a look at
this photo, a close-up of climbing these stairs, Heather and Joe do not allow children or pets to
stay in this home because it really takes a coordinated adult person without any physical
mobility issues to be able to use these historic stairs. This is the bedroom upstairs. A couple
quick photos of that. And this is a living room that is on the third of the three floors and a
bathroom. That's the entire house other than the basement. You just saw it there. As I mentioned,
Heather and Joe have been renting out the building since they purchased it earlier this year.
They have very, very good reviews. This is the first portion of their listing
on airbnb.com. It has almost the perfect score from the 26 people who had reviewed it.
As I mentioned, some of these rentals are longer, so there's only been 26 guests who have left to review as of the time we captured this image.
As I mentioned, some of these rentals are longer, so there's only been 26 guests.
I also wanted to show you, one second here, a few of the letters of support that we gathered.
That's the letter that you already saw from CCRA and the councilman.
So here are, I was going to scan through really quickly the letters of support. We have 16 letters from folks who live in the immediate vicinity, two of whom are from the two similar trinities right next to this.
This I'll highlight as an example is the next door neighbor of 43403, pardon me, South 17th Street.
So, you know, this is our evidence that she, Ms. Preeti, supports are continuing to use the building for the purpose for using it.
And again, I'll just sort of quickly go through these letters on my screen.
That is essentially our presentation.
I have Heather DeGrantz here to adopt my testimony and also to take any questions you might have about the operation of the structure.
Why don't we have her raise her hand?
Heather, could you raise your hand using the raise hand button on Zoom?
I have.
Could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter, please?
My name is Heather DeGrantz.
First name is spelled H-E-A-T-H-E-R.
Last name is D as in David, E-G-R-A-N-D-S.
Heather DeGrantz.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Heather, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony today?
I did.
And was it true and accurate?
Yes, it was.
And would you therefore be willing to adopt it as if it were your own testimony?
I do adopt this testimony.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
the proposed variance is not necessary to enable viable economic use of this property
therefore the planning commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance
thank you so mi 2022 003 848 405 south 17th street i vote yes with temporary variance to expire 12-1-24
Harold Tineri my vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you counsel. Thank you.
number i think it's number 12 12 yeah mi 2022 003 725 2301 east cambria street
ellen knockamson is the attorney there's an opposition from the south port richmond civic
Association. Mr. Chair, this is, sorry, Mr. Chair, I just want to note that we did also
receive a letter of opposition from Council Member Squilla. Okay, so this one, this was vote 18 in
opposition, 14 in support. The applicant did present support and non-opposition signed by
approximately 35 neighbors. Mr. Nockmson. Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street,
Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do. Okay. Could you identify your client in relationship to the
property please uh yes my client is still vertota and he's the owner of the property okay our vice
chair has a few questions hi mr knockamson 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
uh yes in all respects okay great you may proceed and can you begin to share your screen all right
okay great you may proceed and can you
great thank you all right so i'm here to present 2301 east cambria street uh this is an important
richmond section of philadelphia in my presentation packet you'll see the notice of refusal so this
is a CMX1 property. Correspondence from the Southport Richmond Civic Association. I heard
the chair indicate that there were 18 people in opposition and 14 people in support. We will
review that letter. It does say that it's a letter of opposition, but it was a tie of 14 of 14.
I believe of the 14 people that were in opposition, four of them were nearby neighbors.
and I was involved with the community meeting I think if that would have happened maybe we would
have had a different result at the community meeting but I just want to just make sure that
we understand it was a 14-14 tie when my client hired me you know we indicated to have outreach
because no one you know nearby four people voted only four people voted against it you know that
were nearby neighbors. So we made a concerted effort to reach the nearby neighbors and find
out if that was an anomaly. And my client got a petition of a significant amount of
seniors. I believe the trend said 35 seniors. And we also have online, I believe, at least we spoke
to them today. They said they would be online. It's been a rather long hearing schedule. But as
officer of the court I would represent that the owner of 2303 East Cambria, which is to the right
of us, which would be most directly impacted by the proposed variance project, is in support of
this project. So we did make an effort after that meeting to find out, again, why, you know, some of
those neighbors who did not show up, what their, you know, ultimate position was, and they were
overwhelmingly in support of this project uh we also as you know as part of our presentation
because we have three refusals which we'll review one of them deals with law coverage
and again you'll see that it's not out of character to have the amount of law coverage
that we're requesting by way of variance uh first of all if you go on the atlas um this this used to
have a building structure on it and if you look at what atlas has based on those measurements
it was a non-conforming lot when there was building structure on there um it's now a vacant
lot and we'll explain why um but the other three corners of tulip and east cambria all those
building structures have essentially full lot coverage they're non-conforming and we're asking
for a similar type of use and again 2303 east cambria which is next door to us which would
most be would be most directly impacted by any alleged loss of light and air has no objection
to this project and actually is in support of this project. After we review the nearby corner
properties with full log coverage, we will then review the maps of the area, photographs of the
property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, the application
for appeal that we filed with this EBA, our deeds to the property showing that deliverance
that is the owner of the property and our certificate of tax clearance, showing that
he has, he's current with his real estate tax with respect to the property. All right, so our notice
refusal. So this is a CMX1 property. We're proposing to put three dwelling units in this
property. So we're allowed as a CMX1 property to have two units, one commercial, one residential.
And we have three refusals due to the nature of our project. The first of which is roof decks
must be set back at least five feet from the extreme front building line closest to the front
lot line the proposed roof deck opposite cambria street above the first floor does not does not
provide the required setback from two of streets uh after we met with the community group you know
and i was hired by my client you know we always try to you know strive to have the least amount
of variances as possible to we try to strive to meet the zoning code when possible and so we have
a revised proviso plan form that we submitted to the zba prior to today's hearing that if the board
is inclined to grant this variance they granted with the proviso of that revised plan that would
eliminate that one refusal uh the second refusal uh has to do with the fact that we're proposing
three dwelling units on the CMX1 property which will only allow one commercial unit and one
residential units. The reason why we're asking for that is there is no economic viable use of
uh economic viable use of this property without it being three units mr tover purchased the
this property without it being a three unit.
property in july of 2021 and uh the following month and it was a building structure there
of uh you know for commercial use and for residential use and that was his intention
in august of 2021 while he was visiting family in albania after he came back he
discovered that the building was completely demolished. So he only owned the property for
one month. It was his intention to completely rehab and renovate that property after his vacation
with family. When he came back, he came back to a vacant lot where there was a demolition lien of
over $30,000 and no building structure. So first of all, again, this is not to blame the city,
but the demolition lien is way above what a reasonable demolition lien would be of
approximately $10,000 for a structure this size. But he did not anticipate spending several
hundreds of thousands of dollars putting any building structure up there. He expected to have
some work done to the building structure at the time to have a commercial and one residential.
But because now he's in a position where he has to pay the $30,000 demolition lien to the city, plus he has to erect a building structure of some sort, which, again, in this day and age of rising interest rates, construction loans, and just the cost of construction materials will be several hundreds of thousands of dollars, the only way this can be viable, this property now, is to have it as a three residential dwelling conditions.
And for that reason, we're asking for that variance to be allowed.
And then the third variance has to do with, again, the open area, where under the code, because this is CMX1, requires open area of 20%, where 6% is proposed.
And it requires a rear yard of 9 feet, where 4 feet is proposed.
again you'll see from one of um one of the well the pictures of the nearby properties but also
the map we took off of atlas the other three corner properties in you know of on east cambria
and tulip streets uh also have run afoul of these zoning requirements and the previous building
structure was that was there also ran afoul of these building requirements uh and the fact you
So that's 2303 East Cambria, which would be most directly impacted by this project, has no issue with that.
We ask that the board allow that variance to occur as well.
And then here's the Port Richmond letter.
Again, if you look at it, all meeting attendees, including affected addresses, 14 in support.
All meeting attendees, including affected address, 14 opposed, which included four affected addresses nearby.
I don't know what those addresses are. We did not get the list of addresses, but I will say that 2303 East Cambria, which is nearby or directly adjacent to us, is in support of this project.
So based on meeting with the community, my client hiring me, looking at the situation totality, we believe that eliminating that first refusal regarding the deck is a reasonable modification of this project.
And that's why we did that by way of these revised provisor plans.
So we did eliminate one of those refusals that's not necessary under the circumstances.
Would it be nice to have a deck?
but we're eliminating that aspect of the project. Now the petition. So my client, again, this has
been very devastating for him. He's not a big time developer. He's just an investor who rehabs
properties. He had, again, there's 26 addresses. One of them is ours. Green is us, right? So this
is us on cambria we looked at the addresses that would be most directly impacted that are within
the affected area and based on based on my client diligently reaching out to the community after the
community meeting he received 25 signatures of nearby properties uh and we put that on the map
so you can see that that like it wasn't just random people that were reaching out to
most if not most of them are within this close proximity there are a few down the street on
east cambria there are few on tulip it's the same 100 block but we just wanted you to see that
my client worked diligently i mean again this is pretty devastating for my client if this
variance is not granted this would be a bad rather bad day for him
this would be a rather bad day for him.
And then the petition, as you can see,
these are the signatures of the individuals
based on that map.
And then here's the nearby corner properties
with full lot coverage.
Again, this is Tulip Street.
This is East Cambria.
We just blew it up here.
So I did first, and this is our property, and according to Atlas, they're still recognizing the building structure that was there.
The rear yard has a rear yard setback as little as like five and a half feet and as large as 6.68 feet.
So, according to at least the Atlas map, based on those measurements that I took off of Atlas, this building structure that was previously there would run afoul of the open area requirements as well as the rear yard setback requirements.
Then I also looked at the other corner properties on the corner of East Cambria and Tulip Street.
And as you can see, for all these properties, they're completely shaded in.
That means there's full lot coverage for these properties.
There is a little bit of open area, like right here, for the one that's number three for 2276, but that would not have open area of 20%.
And it would definitely not meet the rear yard setback requirements of nine feet, nowhere near that.
So what we're proposing is in character to the other corner properties on the corner of East Cambria and Tulip Street.
Now, maps of the area, as you can see, we're, you know, corner of East Cambria and Tulip Street.
And again, as you can see from this depiction right here, there is full lot coverage essentially, or almost, not 100%, but almost essentially for each of these properties.
And it does show the former building structure that was there at 2301 Cambria.
And again, I did the calculation just based on doing the calculation on Atlas.
But you can see there's full lot coverage at 2,300 East Cambria, 2,276 TULIP, 2,227 TULIP as well.
And then this is just a Google Maps perspective of where we are in the neighborhood as well.
And then photographs of the property.
Mr. Alckmin, let me ask you a question.
How's the rest of the block for multifamily?
There is some.
uh there is across the street there's one of the one of the properties is multi-family in nature
so we did look at a similar property if a cmx property was across the street which is 2277
east cambria street which is the cmx one property which also is fully residential okay i will have
to say that i wanted to do some research today on atlas some and i have to ask what happened but
the L&I tab on Atlas has disappeared. So I couldn't do additional research. So I apologize
for that. But here's East Cambria to the right of the property. Here's Tuller Street to the right
of the property. Tuller Street to the left of the property. And then there are plants and drawing.
And I have the architect, Agata, in the virtual audience, and she can answer any questions.
Of particular notes, the second and third floors are accessed by one entrance on East Cambria. The lower level unit is accessed by, or the first floor unit is a bi-level, first floor and lower level.
It has two sets of staircases on the side on Tulip Street, one for the front door on the first floor, and then it actually has a separate set of staircases for the lower level.
So someone who needed to get out of that property can either go out on the front staircase here on the first floor at the ground level, but there's also steps that go down and up.
So for safety purposes, it was important to Mr. Tota to have that.
And then you can see that from this picture too. There's two sets of staircases for the first floor, lower level unit, on the first floor, and then on the lower level, and that's on the Tulip Street side, and then again on the East Cambria Street side, both the second and third floor units, both accessed from East Cambria.
and then these are the floor plans pretty basic uh if you go in on the tulip street side which
is the first floor you come in here there is an open floor plan with one bedroom you go down
you go down the steps now you can go either exterior go down the steps or you can go
the steps now you can go either exterior go down the steps or you can go
interior down the steps and there is a den area and there's two bedrooms down there
and then if you go to on the east cambria side you go up a flight of steps
and then the second floor is one unit
and you come in and there is a living room a kitchen a bed and two bedrooms and two baths
And then you go up to the third floor and you come off the landing.
And again, same thing, open floor plan of a living room, kitchen, two bedrooms, and let me just make sure it's one and a half baths.
And actually the second unit is also one and a half baths.
And this is the RCO meeting notice.
Again, our firm did not participate in it, but I'm just giving you the notice that went out.
with the notice of refusal and the proof of mailing of that notice.
Again, 28 people did attend.
14 voted in favor.
14 voted not in favor.
And then here's the detail property showing that Mr. Dillover Tota
purchased a property on July 21st for $135,000.
A month later, that property was demolished.
A $30,000 demolition lead is now on the property,
and he has a vacant lot.
The only way to, you know, to make this a functional lot, again, is to put a building structure there that would cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that's why he's asking for this variance of three residential units.
And here's our application appeal that Mr. Dover, Mr. Toto, filled out and completed.
in our certificate of tax cards.
It shows $910.80,
but that amount was paid as well.
So with that being said,
I would ask,
I'm going to unshare my screen.
I'm going to ask that Mr. Tota
virtually raise his hand
to adopt my test donate,
and then we can answer any questions
that the court will have.
Sir, could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Chair, the only hand we have up is from somebody by the name of Jose Antonio.
Jose, let's see if maybe he's using somebody else's phone.
Sir, please unmute yourself.
I'm unmuted.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Jose Antonio Chacon.
Jose Antonio is two words but one name.
Alan, does this have anything to do with your case?
he does but i'm not i'm not his client
okay so i'm looking for his client correct
uh i know he was texting me because he you know he kept asking when we're when are we and i said
i don't know so hold on one second um all right so mr knockamson you're an officer of the court
we'll accept your testimony okay and my understanding is there's a jeff there should
be a jeff reilly and their virtual audience as well for 2303 east cambria at least that's what
so what i'm going to do is i'll call when i get to the that part of it okay okay questions from
the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman no questions or comments from the virtual
audience yes chair did you want to hear from mr reilly first sure that's fine okay
Okay. Mr. Riley, please unmute yourself.
I'm here.
Hi, Mr. Riley, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Jeffrey Riley, J-E-F-F-R-E-Y, R-I-L-E-Y.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
And your neighbor?
Yes, I am the chief construction officer for Cooper Street Development, who owns 2303 East Cambria.
Counsel?
Yes, Mr. Riley.
My understanding is that your company is in support of this requested variance?
We are, in fact, yes.
Thank you.
Is there anything else you want to say, Mr. Riley?
okay is there anyone else in the virtual audience
yes chair we have mr chacon okay
hi could you state your name please
sir please unmute you sorry about that i did uh my name is jose antonio chacon
My name is Jose Antonio Chacon.
Right.
Last name is C.H.A.
The last name is C-H-A.
Spell it for you.
Thank you.
Sorry.
The last name is C-H-A-C-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Okay, proceed.
So I live at 2305 East Cambria Street.
And unlike Mr. Riva, I actually own and live there.
uh i do not own and rent out so this does actually affect me greatly um excuse me
sorry about that i'm gonna try and be calm and concise it does really affect me um i know that
this would make a bad day for mr tota but this is like i saved up a lot for this house so
it's gonna be a bad few years from here um i have no problem with him building anything
uh there was a building when he bought it it was it did collapse um while construction was
happening on it uh i do feel for him that is a big expense uh it's under my understanding that
when a cx1c when this type of residence has changed that it would be something more in
line with the rest of the neighborhood which is rs5 uh that's really what i would hope but
I understand that he can have
multiple units that is in his right.
Sorry, I'm very
emotional about that. I do have
a couple other things. The
main thing is the property line.
Going past nine
feet, that will affect my light. It will affect
my view of my backyard.
That is the most upsetting thing.
And the other issues
I have,
the zoning notices, the pictures in the
packet, I don't know when they were from,
But those zoning notices haven't been up for a while.
I've never seen them.
So there's that.
And this petition, if you read, it doesn't really say anything about the exceptions.
And when I was presented with this, it was by a neighbor who was with Mr. Chota.
And she just was asking people to sign up so that she could live there.
When I asked if there were any drawings or anything, he didn't have anything.
so in my opinion this is not a good petition okay all right thank you for calling in we
appreciate your opinion is there anyone else in the virtual audience i'll give you a chance in a
minute yes chair we have eva d okay hi how are you can you hear me could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter eva last name d-o-m-i right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor yes i live on tulip street
where do you where do you live at 2930 tulip okay proceed um so i'm in favor i just wanted to call
in and say that i was okay all right thank you thank you for the call and we appreciate it
is there anyone else in the virtual audience
yes chair we have anwar turner okay
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
mr turner please unmute yourself
mr turner
hello hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
A-N-W-A-R-T-U-R-N-E-R.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I'm going to like for it to happen.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I live on 2853 Tulo Street.
We appreciate your call and thank you for taking the time.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair.
Sarah Bond, City Planning Commission.
So although this lot is zoned CMX1, it is adjacent to an RSA5 lot.
RSA5 is the more restrictive zoning, so this lot must conform to its regulations.
The appellant's hardship claim is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstance or conditions of the property.
The Philadelphia City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variance.
Thank you, Sarah.
So MI 2022-003-725-2301 East Cambria Street, I vote yes with proviso.
Revised Plan 1 page stamped by ZBA November 9, 2022.
Carol Tenneri, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell my vote is yes with proviso thank you thank you what was that again is my vote
James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
is no okay thank you so you have your three votes thank you let's see here okay so let's
Number 14, MI-2022-003-752-306-REED-STREET.
Sean Whalen, letter of non-opposition from the Penn Sports Civic Association.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
We also have a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Thank you.
good afternoon chair hi mr whalen how are you could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter please certainly sean w-h-a-l-e-n right do you swear for him to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client and relationship
to the property? Of course. 306-10 Reed Street with two E's. LLC is the owner of the property
and my client. Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions. Good afternoon. Do you agree to wait
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet consisting of 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. Okay great you may proceed and start with sharing
your screen. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I know our day is getting long here for you
guys so I'll go quickly and offer to up front to just interrupt me as you have any questions.
um so we're talking about 306 reed street you can see reed street this is just some quick context
uh south third kind of going north and south here this is where it goes right into moya mensing
um just uh we're actually purchasing and talking about property that was purchased
directly from the sacred heart church right there at the corner
so again you can see here's that intersection i was talking about you can see some several
of large developments right around us this is the church the church rectory uh the property we're
talking about actually was the former parking lot of the church so here's the church we're talking
about this section up here uh kind of an oddly shaped trapezoidal property uh so to make it clear
again this is the this is the church property going all along the whole frontage of south third
Street, and my client purchased what was the parking lot for the church and has gotten it
approved for four townhomes. One townhome is already pre-approved fronting on Garrett Street.
One townhome is pre-approved fronting on Reed Street. Another townhome over on this side is
fronting on Reed Street. And then in the middle is actually a carriage house that was already
previously approved to allow for off-street parking accessed by a shared driveway for all
four of the houses. Jumping ahead to the conclusion, the RCO was wonderful to meet with.
They were very pleased with our offering of off-street parking. Parking concerns are the
major concern down here, and they had no issues and no opposition to our proposal, which is
basically just to take the carriage house in the middle of the two townhomes and turn it into
that carriage house into two one-story condos so that'll all become clear quickly so again here's
the property all part on the zoning map here it's all rsa5 so what you have here you can see
this frontage right here will all be you'll have a townhome on the right a townhome on the left
a dry vial underneath at the existing curb cut for the parking lot so it's no change in condition
or loss of on-street parking for the neighborhood and then you would have one
carriage house here that would be subdivided into two condos again just a little more context of
what we'd be going up to, the overall height of some of the buildings surrounding us.
The overall height of some of the buildings surrounding us.
Church and its rectory.
This is looking west down Reed Street.
You can see it's single-family row home nature.
There are multifamily units throughout, but generally the size and scope of the buildings.
Again, here's now looking towards 3rd Street.
You have the very large developments at both corners.
And then this church takes up the entire frontage along Reed Street.
So this is what would be directly, this development, which is two huge rows of multifamily housing townhomes, is directly across from where our homes would be on, fronting on Reed Street.
This is the rear access.
This is Garrett Street.
So this property, there would be a townhome right in this location.
and then just a little bit more context to show you what we'd be up against actually attaching
to this wall in here. And this is Garrett Street, one of the kind of beautiful small streets in
Philadelphia. So again, we have one refusal. That refusal is that a two-family household is
not permitted in the RSA 5 district. As I described, this can kind of show at best
I'll zoom in quickly for you.
This is what is already approved.
You have Garrett Street down here, Reed Street at the top.
You have a very strangely large, oddly shaped property here.
So in working with the community, we tried to minimize the overall use and density allowed.
given the size of the project we'd actually be allowed to do six or seven homes by right if we
actually subdivided it that way with no parking but again parking is the major consideration for
the town for the neighborhood and we wanted to work in that consideration and so what we did is
there's one townhouse fronting on Garrett Street which will be a single family house there's one
townhouse on this trapezoidal lot that is fronting on Reed Street. There's one townhouse
fronting on Reed Street right here, and the project in front of us today encapsulates just
this center building, which is actually about 25 feet wide, so it could essentially be almost
subdivided itself into two lots, given the RSA 5 requirements. It's an exceptionally large lot,
uh again awkwardly shaped right behind the church and all we're seeking to do is in order to keep
this uh carriage house we have a dry vial underneath um which i can show quickly
so it's a little tough to read but here's the dry vial that goes underneath the carriage house
And what we're seeking to do is turn the second story into one condo and the third story into a second condo.
So that's the two units that we're requesting that are the basis of the refusal.
As I described, here's the letter from Pennsport Civic Association.
This is describing that they have no opposition to the project.
it further describes and i'm happy to go into it in more detail if
the chair hasn't had the opportunity to review it essentially that with no impact and no net
impact to the on-street parking they have no opposition to this project because we're providing
all that off-street parking and again just to be clear what we're doing here
sorry as you come in off of Reed Street it's a two-way
drive aisle and then there will be parking for each of the
five properties in the rear off the shared driveway. Now again this property is overly
wide and not well suited for single family living without a basement or a first floor
and that design was done in order to work in coordination with the RCO and the community
to be able to provide parking because what we would have done if this were by right
and we still wanted only four units so by right we can do six or seven units
and by right what we're proposing today is actually only five units so that we are
seeking to jump you know put the cart before the horse the least minimum variance here
to jump, you know, put the cart before the horse, the least minimum variance here.
We're seeking to very limit the number of units that we would be putting on here to well below
what's by right. And this is, well, they mentioned that in their letter too, don't they?
Yes, they do. They mentioned that in their letter. And so that is why this carriage house central
unit is uh overly wide for a single family house to have this double accessed uh bi-directional
i should say uh drive aisle why don't you have your client come on yep so you should see a robert
volpe i'm going to stop sharing my screen so i can see him
mr volpe please unmute yourself yes i'm here hi mr volpe could you state your name is
spell for the court reporter, please? Yes, sir. Robert, R-O-B-E-R-T, Volpe, V as in Victor, O-L-P as
in Peter, E. All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes, sir. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Volpe, you are here on behalf of 306-10
Reed Street, LLC, the owner of the property, correct? Yes, sir. And have you heard all the
testimony i presented today yes i have and do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of
your knowledge information and belief yes i do and would you adopt it as your own yes i would
thank you very much uh mr chair i have no further questions from mr volte questions from the board
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair hi planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends a zoning map change to rm1 at this location and the variance conforms to that
recommendation therefore the city planning commission recommends that the zoning board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-003-752-306 Reed Street, I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much, chair. So we have
one more on the two o'clock list, and then we'll take a
five-minute break. So let's just do this
last one on the list, and then
we'll take a break.
003-724-
850-56
Moyer Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Letter of support from
Fishtown Neighbors.
mr knockamson oh yes i was way i didn't know you had anything else oh yeah we're we're here
just state your name for the record please yeah alan a-l-a-n last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n
right you've already been sworn could you identify your client in relationship to this property
Yes, my client is Groudon Management LLC, and in the virtual audience, I have its member, Matthew Shaxson.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Alan. 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?
Have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Thank you.
You may proceed and begin sharing your screen.
Thank you.
It's like a tape in my head saying those words.
And the same response as well.
I know.
850-56 Moyer Street. You know, this is a, you know, there are projects, you know, that we do
that we're very proud of. And I think that will be very good for the community. And this is one of
them. We're taking a very unique lot here. They go street to street from Moyer to Aramingo. And
on one side of it, we're on the Aramingo side, which has CMX to use. We're putting a five unit
apartment building. And as you can see here from the rendering, there will be a common curve cut
there for the apartment building and for the single families, the three single family units
on Moyer Street. And there'll be also parking for the lot as for the apartment building as well.
So Nome Architecture, which is a very good architecture firm in town,
A very good architecture from a town is the architects for this project, and I think they perfectly illustrated what this project is going to look like, and it's going to have a really positive impact for this community and be a great addition to the Fishtown neighborhood.
is the architects for this project. And I think
We'll be right back.
So in my table of contents, you have a notice of refusal. We did alter our drawing somewhat. We moved one of the roof deck access structures away from one of the pre-existing single family homes as an accommodation.
So if this board is inclined to grant our variance requests, we would ask that they grant it with revised plans.
We do have a letter of support from the Fishtown Neighbors Association, overwhelmingly in support.
Their zoning committee, which is a rather sophisticated zoning committee, actually unanimously supported this project.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, or plans and documents, or meeting notice with proof of mailing as well.
Application for appeal that we filed to the CBA, our agreement of sale, which shows that, you know, we are under agreement to purchase this property so long as we receive support from, you know, for this project.
And our certificate of tax clearance showing that the property owner is in good standing with respect to this property.
Again, in the virtual audience is Matthew Shapson, the owner's representative for Browning Management LLC, the buyer of the property.
and also in the virtual audience, I believe it's Derek Spencer of New York Architecture.
So our notice of refusal, it seems like a lot, but it's not. We're taking a lot that's like
around 4,700 square feet that goes street to street from Moyer to Aramingo. We're essentially
cutting it in half. On the Moyer Street side, there are going to be three single-family homes.
On the Aramingo side, there is going to be a five-unit apartment building.
There is currently a curb cut on Aramanga where there's no public parking allowed.
We're actually narrowing that curb cut, and we're going to have a drive aisle for the apartment building where there'll be parking in the rear for the apartment building, and then there'll be a garage in the rear for each of the Moyer Street residences, single-family residences.
One more thing, there is a curb cut currently on Warrior Street because this property is being used as an auto repair shop.
So we are eliminating that curb cut and providing another parking space on the street for the benefit of the neighborhood.
So we have four refusals.
So the first refusal is whereas a proposed use multifamily household living five dwelling units for parcel D, which is the apartment building, is expressly prohibited in RSA 5 zoning.
And you'll see from the maps that that side of the Aramingo side is more multifamily in nature, and what we're providing almost a 2,500-square-foot lot would meet the requirements under the code if it had a multifamily zoning classification.
The second refusal has to do with the minimum required area for parcel A, B, and C.
Those are the single-family structures.
1440 is required.
741.30 is proposed for each of these properties.
So what I would say as to that is that if you look up the city records on the 800 block of Moyer Street,
um the lots go as low as 600 uh 628 square feet so what we're asking for is not allowed character
and i looked on the 800 block of moore street and there was only one block there's only one
property a 16 excuse me 830 moore street that would meet the requirements of the philadelphia
zoning code of 1440 meaning that every other property on the 800 block of moore street
is non-conforming in nature. So what we're asking for is not out of character.
The third refusal has to do with the minimum rear yard depth where seven feet is required while zero
is proposed. Again, you'll see from the drawings that is a technicality. We are providing rear
yard space by way of this common area that's going to have a dry vial, but because we have
an easement for this drive aisle for the benefit of both the uh five unit apartment building as
well as the single family homes that easement is considered can't be used as part of the minimum
rear yard depth and even though we do provide the seven feet in actuality technically we're not under
the codes and then the fourth refusal the roof deck access structure setback from the extreme
rear building line for parcels A, B, and C. There should be a setback of five feet and zero feet
is proposed. Again, just because of the width of these properties and this there
again just because of the width of these properties in the staircases it would be
hard to have a roof deck access structure uh other than in the rear you know how it is
and we were very mindful and respectful of having you know no shadow effect uh with respect to those
roof deck access structures that's why we have revised requirements where we're removing the
roof deck access structure further away from any neighboring property owner. So 848 and 858 to
roof deck access structures are away from their property lines of respect for that. And I think
that's why we ultimately received overwhelming support from the community. And here are our
revised plans. Again, you know, in the revised plans, the pilot house of the proposed parcel
way has been shifted to the east park wall formerly on the west party wall uh to be further
away from the neighboring property as not to cast any additional shadow on the neighbor's home
and then you'll see that as part of our plan and it's actually two pages our plans and revised
plans so we would ask that you know the two pages be stamped and the letter of support from uh the
uh Fishtown Neighbors Association again as you can see uh 24 people uh attended that meeting
excuse me 24 29 people attended that meeting uh and the in the RCO board unanimously supported it
and also the nearby neighbors that you know overwhelmingly supported this project and then
here is just you know 850 Morris Street from a map perspective you can see we're on Aramingo we're
not far off of 95 it's a unique property just given the configuration of where it's located and
and just in general it's a it's not a square block or rectangular block but here's Morris Street
and here is our property in the rear on Aramingo and then you can see here as well
uh where we are from the 95 as well and then photographs of the property again this was
previously an auto mechanic shop so even though this is an rsa 5 zoning classification it's not
been used rsa 5 for some time and having residential use is closer in conformance to
the philadelphia zoning code than what its current and previous uses have been and then this is it
that was it from Aramingo. I mean, it's from Moyer. This is the rear of the property from
Aramingo as well. And then you'll just see the zoning notice posters as well as proof of posting
from both sides of the property. And then this is Moyer Street to the right of the property,
Moyer Street to the left of the property, Aramingo to the right of the property,
Aramingo to the left of the property. We had an aerial view created just so you can see
where we are in a neighborhood and how close we are to 95, where it would be more appropriate to
have some type of multifamily use here, rather than on the deader streets of Aramingo. But you
can also see there's a significant apartment building that's built further down the block
on Aramingo, which is kind of in closer conformance to what we're requesting in five units.
And then you can just see, again, that we're not taking, by way of this curb cut, we're not
taking away any parking because there's no parking allowed, public parking, because there's no parking
allowed on the cyber streets. And then my client is an experienced developer and, you know, it's
Vicara in collaboration with Point Builders Development Company, PBDC, and they pride
themselves on the high quality materials and work product. So I always try to give some, you know,
Let the board see what the work product should look like if this property is built.
And then our plans and drawings.
I know we're the last one on the area list, so I'm not going to belabor the point.
But again, you know, No More Architecture did a great job in illustrating what the property is going to look like.
It's a three-story structure, a lot of light and air, have a common lobby area, responsible trash plan.
where the trash will be stored outside in the common area that's designated for trash.
Each of the units will have its own – each of the single-family homes will also have its own little mini-trash room near the garage,
and there's a common driveway, one curb cut, not taking away any public parking,
for the benefit of three single-family homes, which would typically not have the benefit of parking.
plus we're providing one curb cut back on Moyer Street
where there will be an additional public parking spot now on the streets.
And the units would have the ability to have parking in the rear as well.
And the units would have the ability to have parking in the rear as well.
And then this is just from the Moira Street side, single-family homes.
Again, brick facade, not lots of light in there.
And then this is just the revised plans again, just to show how we move the roof deck access structure.
And then you can see from here, oops.
Trying to get the technical difficulties here.
If I zoomed in, I tried, but like you can see here, there is over seven feet on both sides.
I don't want to zoom in because I'm having technical difficulties, but there's over seven feet between, you know, between the property lines of the apartment building and on the other side of the apartment building,
this seven foot setback for the single family use. I will note that, you know, there is a little bit
of, you know, there's another technical, like, reason why we wouldn't have the open area of the
seven foot setback. We do have, like, this rear, these rear decks back here, which would also run
afoul of that requirement, that seven foot setback requirement as well. And then again, here's just
zoning maps, site maps, and aerial views that we've seen previously. And then I just figured
maybe you can just like quickly go through the floor plans. So here's here's the apartment
building. Again there's a common lobby. Trash is stored in this little area right here in the rear
for each of the apartment units. Unit number one is on the ground floor. Then units two and three
are on the second floor. Unit four and five are on the third floor. And then there's a roof deck
for those upper level units as well. And then for the single family units, again, every unit
can come through Moyer Street in the front, and there's an open area and an office. Or you can go
in the rear where you park your car and as you can see there's a debt in the garage there's area
dedicated for trash cans. You go up a flight of steps there's a there's a open floor plan of a
living room and a kitchen and a half bath. You go to the third floor there's two bedrooms uh two
baths washer and dryer. You go to fourth floor you have the quintessential master suite and then
there's a roof deck that's hugged in the rear but the door is you know obviously nowhere near the
rear it's over here in the middle of the roof down rco meeting notice uh we met with the community
october 4th 82 uh properties were notified this meeting again we had almost an attendance of 30
people so it was a well-attended meeting overwhelming support proof of mailing of that
notice or application for appeal
and our agreement of sale.
And this morning, I also emailed
an amendment to the agreement of sale showing that it's
still in full force, in fact, and closing scheduled for
January of this year. With that being said, I would ask that
Mr. Chapson virtually raise his hand so he can adopt my testimony.
Mr. Shapson, please unmute yourself.
I'm unmuted.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Sure, it's Matthew Shapson, M-A-T-T-H-E-W, Shapson, S-H-A-P-S-O-N.
Right, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Shapson, excuse me, Mr. Shapson, you heard everything I had to say tonight.
I did.
And is it true and correct?
It is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
All right, 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 answer, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Sarah Bond,
Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The zoning map was amended from RM1 to RSA5
in 2015 the proposed variance is not necessary to enable viable economic use of this property
additionally the dimensional requirements of the zoning code do not create an economic detriment
for the appellant the city planning commission recommends that the zoning board deny both the
use and dimensional variances oh thank you uh mi2022
Oh, thank you. MI 2022-003-724-850-56 Moyer Street. I vote yes with revised plans. Two pages,
stand by ZBA, November 9th, 2022. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
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 counsel. Thank you have a great night.
Is there anyone on the 2 p.m list whose case has not been closed?
I see no hands chair. Okay so we're going to take a five minute break and then we'll come
back and we'll move right through. Okay thanks everybody. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the 3.30 p.m. ZBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Ishmael Shaheed, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board attorney is Hillary Emerson.
She's here.
And also, Lakeisha Dandy, our ZBA hearing supervisor, is also with us.
Before we begin, here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge the agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are 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. Lastly, the question answer box on
the screen is not for comments or testimony. Any comments should be directed to our executive
director, Tanya Sumpkin. So let's look at this afternoon's list. Is there anyone with a
continuous request on the 330 list? I see no hands, Chair. Okay, I'm going to go to number one.
sorry chair excuse me okay we have steven last name ending enough okay
all right could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
yes mr chairman uh steve steven uh fabiani f like frank a b i a n i i don't know if as an
interesting party and um all right do you first let me get do you swear a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do what case are you involved with uh i'm involved
with 1401 south 13th street and i am a protestant i'm uh asking if this is the moment to ask for a
continuance or if we should wait until the public comment period so why don't why don't we why don't
we do this you you want to continue have the case continued i i do i want the case either
outright denied or continued. Okay, so why don't we get, when we get to that,
that's case seven. We're going to move through the list pretty quickly and we'll be into that
maybe 20 minutes, okay? Thank you. All right. Is there any requests for continuance?
I see no handshare. Okay, so case number one, I have no exhibits, so that's MI 2022-003-404-100
East Tioga Street. Yvette Carasquillo is the owner. There's no exhibits. First listing.
I see no handshare. Okay, so that case is continued. So that's MI 2022-003-404-100
East Tioga Street. Case number two. MI 2022-003-403-7978 Michener Avenue. Pasquale
Calavito is the attorney. Hold on one minute. I'll be right with you.
We have... I lost my screen. One minute here.
Okay, a letter of support from the 50th Ward.
A letter of support from the 50th Ward Democratic Executive Committee, Mr. Calavita.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. Pasquale Colavita, P-A-S-Q-U-A-L-E, C-O-L-A-V-I-T-A.
Great. Do you swear our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Before we start, was the property posted?
It was.
Okay. And do we have pictures that you're filed?
Okay, great. Okay. Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Kim Garrison.
All right.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Colavita.
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, with the exception of the tax compliance. It was compliant at the date of
appeal, and there is a 2021 net profit and BIR that is outstanding, no tax due. My client was
at the building this morning attempting to resolve that and just waiting for her accountant to
submit a zero um tax form so i guess my question would be is would you permit us to present
and hold the uh the matter uh for a vote since we're here and we have a letter of support we
have um everything but that and that's up to mr chair well mr sorry we'll hold it hold on hold on
mr translate that so um mr colavita so those are business taxes they're not real estate taxes okay
the real estate taxes right so i didn't get a clearance for that but i just checked them and
i saw that there was a zero balance so we can proceed on that um i would ask can you um after
this hearing please send me um photos of the posting um for our record so we have we have
that on record that the property was posted great thank you and i will present them during our i'll
can we vote hillary yes absolutely well we don't taxes are paid right okay it's only real estate
taxes yep so we look at okay may i proceed yes okay uh
let's share screen green button on the bottom yes getting to it trying to figure out there
are quite a few windows here
okay and
okay uh and i believe mcgarrison is available so what i'm doing here right now is i'm sharing
This is 7978 Mitchner Avenue, and the documents that we have submitted to the ZBA are the deed, the zoning application confirmation with the site plan, the notice of refusal, which is an RSA 5 zone with a present existing use, legalized use with two units.
what we're asking for and the notice of refusal will reflect that is that we're asking for a third
unit attached to exhibit e is the application for the appeal with the project information form
after the architectural plans which i will show in a few seconds then notice to the neighbors
proof of mailing all all sent in proof of posting at the date that this was sent to you
What I can do is I'll start with the proof of posting and then move on to surrounding multifamily dwellings, photos of 7978 Michener at Exhibit J, and the 50th Ward sent in a letter of support.
So I will start with...
Start with.
I know that I have them here somewhere, but again, bear with me.
Do you need to see copies of the deed, the permit application, notice of refusal, or am I okay with being on with those?
Okay, so here's the architectural plan.
So basically what it is is a...
We need to see that on the screen.
You have photos of the building.
So here's photos of the building.
So this is the initial, the front view of the property.
and you scroll to this and this is the side view of the property which
you'll you'll see in the next photograph it actually looks like a three-story property
um because of the way that it's located in the interior here are some interior photos
but um excuse me council yes anything oh you weren't able to see oh i'm sorry it's not shared
I apologize.
So, if you're having a hard time
finding it they're here and okay so here are one
we start with with the posting right showing you photos that it was posted
are you able to see we see that yep okay all right so i will
So what you're saying, currently this is a two-unit building?
It's a two-unit building.
And they want to turn it into three?
And bear with me.
so i i think what we're going to let me just say what i think and here is and here is the
this is what i was referring to earlier is the actual it it's this is the corner of
mitchner and mount vernon it it is a in reality a three-story property um right and what it uh
the architectural plans uh reflect one unit uh first floor referred to as the basement
is a um one bedroom second and third floor are two bedrooms
as you can see the it's listed as the basement but i mean you can almost refer to it as the first
floor the second floor and then the third floor the second and third of floor units are accessible
from the front the uh the ground level unit is except it has two it has a side entrance
and a rear entrance to it the there is a carport back there and as you can see
what is what is this cmx what this is rsa this is rsa five
is that what you're referring to as what you're referring to as the first floor is generally like
we're a doctor's offices a little grocery store that's not where you would enter to go into the
first floor i i don't understand your question i know i mean what she said is a lot of these
properties are built like that they put it like a a professional office on the first floor where
you now have an apartment you want to put an apartment right correct right okay correct so
let me ask you this there's three apartments there now yes all right and you're trying to legalize it
all right and you're trying to legalize it we're yes so two are legal the third one which is the
We're, yes.
ground floor uh and and they're they're separate unit they're separate uh utilities for each of
them electric and gas uh for for each of the units the two that that were there there that
that even though it was an rsa-5 there was a duplex there it pre-existed so i can share i'll
share the uh the zoning on that one with you and i don't know are you able to to see this so back
from 1967 it's listed as a two-family dwelling okay there are other uh properties in the area
area that are um most of them are two property two two unit buildings there are there are quite
a few that are actually three units so what i'm trying to get to is to share that one
these are surrounding properties that are right down the block
one of them is 1459 vernon road which is a three unit property
and indicates i mean it's a legalized three unit property similarly situated as you can see three
three separate meters different entrances for each of them and again this one's similar to
uh the uh mitchener street property and that is also three units
so if it's not a corner unit it is a corner unit well if it's not a corner unit where do the people
enter you're saying they are up the street do they enter through the back these the other
this property both of the properties i'm showing you uh and one of them is again bear with me let
let me try to the corner units i know enter on the side i'm just asking about other units on the
block they would enter well there are only two that i i am aware of that are legalized three
unit properties illegal three unit you and those are these two that that are attached as exhibit i
and then again we we did meet with with the 50th ward you have the letter of support it was well
attended it was 24 people in attendance uh and as you can see the the vote went pretty well in
their favor uh also my client did go around um and i'll i'll submit this which was not submitted
i just received it i'll give you a better copy i got photographed copies that i had scanned
not scanned i uh downloaded from the phone uh for tonight's purpose so you have i think there
were 30 additional individuals and and the petition as you can see uh indicated exactly
what the refusal was for and what the intended use is for and there were three more there and
here's a full uh page so we have approximately 30 additional uh petitions signed in favor of this
project mr calavito is is the property currently rented the third their base they are all three of
them are rented uh okay who were over 10-year leases the third one was a renewal and my client
can uh share more on the information regarding that they are uh one of them is done by trying
to remember the name of the actual um turn which is similar to pha so the all three units are
federally um reviewed on a yearly basis everything is up to compliance with the exception obviously
of uh the the zoning on this one with the variance is getting a three-unit property
uh so what what she has presently is a a rental license for two units she did not receive any
violations we came forward uh well in advance of i probably no one even knew that it was listed as
that that it was there as three she has a she's involved in the federal rental program
correct she has to make the third unit legal they haven't asked for it we're just we're just
we're just we're just doing it in the event that there are any issues
doing it in the event that there are any issues why do you bring your client on it
why don't you bring your client on and have your testimony adopted okay
what's your client's name kim garrison she should be on
are there rental licenses for these properties there are there's a there's a two unit it's
listed for two units and she's had them for years this is kim garrison can you hear me all right
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please yes sir kim garrison k-i-m-g-a-r-r-i-s-o-n
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do okay miss garrison did you hear my testimony i did okay uh would you uh stipulate to the and
and adopted as your own for the purposes of this hearing? I do. Was it accurate? It was just to
mention that the two units that you presented on that are three units are corner units and they
do have side entrances. And this property at 79-78 has two units that are PHA, one that is
under the term program and the unit that i am requesting variance for it has been rented for
eight years otherwise all other statements are true okay questions from the board
no mr chairman mr chair no mr chairman questions or comments in the virtual audience
i see no hands here all right planning commission uh ron bednar city planning
first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r do you swear a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth is nothing but the truth i do so these properties this property is indicated
for residential use on the city plan given the physical circumstances of the site
and its documented use history, we recommend that a request for variance be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-003-403-7978, Michener Avenue, I vote yes.
Carl Tannery, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahini, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
May be excused.
You can.
Thank you.
Number three on my list, MI-2022-003-402-1015-17 North American Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of support from Northern Liberty Neighbors Association.
good evening mr chair hi um just state your name because you've already been sworn
yep uh verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o right could you identify your client the relationship
to the property yeah i represent uh michael uh i'm sorry uh uh david killian who is the uh
principal of Blackburn LLC.
And our vice chair has a few questions for him.
Hi, Mr. Anastasio.
Do you agree to wait 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?
okay great you may proceed and begin you have with sharing your screen thank you uh 1015-17
north american it's for the erection of a one-story addition uh not only on the top but
on the rear as well i want to show you that this is our property here it's a sort of a dwarf
surrounded by lots of larger you know buildings uh so what we're asking for is an additional
floor and some rear coverage because what happens here where my cursor is is nothing more than
just trash and this is not a commercial corridor so what we're asking for is a variance to
cover that. Here's the property in question
And here's proof of posting.
and here's proof of posting.
And here is a letter from Northern Liberties letting us know that they support the project, the appeal.
So this particular appeal was already approved by the Zoning Board three years ago.
The architect on the project did not extend the permit, and that's why we're here today.
So with that, I would like to bring on my client, David Killian, who's here.
David, if you could raise your hand, please.
Okay, I'm here.
Mr. Kilkin, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
David Kilian, D-A-V-I-D-K-I-L-L-I-A-N.
Do you swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Killian is a well-known advocate for the neighborhood, also a well-known developer in Northern Liberties.
There are no, as you can see, no commercial spaces along this block.
And all he wants to do, he's the little tiny, you know, dinosaur in a sea of elephants that are much bigger.
All he wants to do is put another floor on and have a rear addition, which will cut down on the rear issues with trash and blowing back there and spring it back to where everything else is with respect to the property.
So with that, I have no other issues.
Mr. Killian, do you hear what I said to the board today?
Yes, I do.
And do you believe it's true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, I do.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, David.
And so, Vern, so the current building has five units, and this addition gives you two more.
yeah but we're we're not refused for that you know of course i'm just saying i'm just saying so
what it says you're going to put two more units yeah we're we would like uh you know seven dwelling
units you know in addition uh but we're only refused for the commercial space and this again
has not been a commercial area for quite some time and uh already previously approved right and the
rear depth of the yard
and the open space has already been
approved by the board. Okay, 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 handshare.
Planning Commission?
Ryan Bednar, City Planning.
This property is indicated for commercial
mixed use on the city plan given the physical circumstances of the site and its documented
use, we recommend your request for variance to be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-003-402-1015-17 North American Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tineri, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
thank you all number four mi 2021 001 675 614 north 64th street
leo mulvihill is the attorney there is a letter of opposition from the neighbors
of overbrook association
sorry chair members of the board when i was logging in i didn't hear what you said chair
okay i said that my my notes for the show there's a letter of opposition
from the neighbors of the overbrook association uh that is correct that is what we do have in our
file all right so first of all you've already been sworn today could you identify your client
in relationship to the property yes my client is the owner of the property and just to confirm
it is city block acquisition x i or 11 llc okay owner of that
X, I, or 11, L-L-C.
Owner of that book, Alan Borovich, that's B-O-R-O-V-I-C-H.
Our voice chair has a few questions.
Mr. Mollford, do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you humiled the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
Voters 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 those things.
Okay, you may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
Okay, let's give me one moment, members of the board, as I try to get this working.
All right.
Okay, so members of the board, you should be seeing my screen right now with my presentation packet from 614 North 64th Street.
This is CityBlock Acquisition 11 LLC, owned by Alan Borovitch, the principal of the company.
At page one, I have the refusal appeal and project information form.
At page seven, we have zoning maps.
Page nine, we have the deed.
Commercial activity at 15.
Tax clearance at 16.
Zoning notification at 18.
RCO letter at 21.
Photos at 23.
Plans at 69.
I believe this property has been reposted three or four times at this point, members of the board, but it's pretty straightforward.
This is an RSA 3 property. It's currently a vacant lot in the middle of a block of gigantic
twins. What we're looking to do because of the overall size of the lot and because constructing
a home that is single family of a similar size and dimension, style, any of that, is
simply financially impossible from a realism perspective. That's the hardship we're facing,
so we're seeking to be able to allow multifamily on the property for three dwelling units, which
would be in line with this lot size. And you'll see as well, members of the board, that although
this property is zoned RSA 3, we're located pretty closely to other properties that are zoned
multifamily. So there's our application for appeal. One moment, please. There we are.
what's going on
so whatever reason that's not working but we have our
area zoning map here and this is exactly what i was talking about members of the board so
this is our property directly behind us is rm1 and then lots are something like
half the size of what we're looking at here on our rsa3
lots currently. And then we have a mix of CMX in the area as well. Haverford Ave is the main drag.
North 63rd Street runs this way, which is pretty large. 64th is still a pretty well-traveled street.
There's traffic in each direction, but it's smaller than the main thoroughfares.
What we have next is an overhead shot, so we can kind of see exactly what we're looking at again.
Haverford main thoroughfare. This is the size of the lot that we're talking about, members of the
board. It's huge compared with the houses that are directly behind, which are about
half the width and not quite as deep, which is on multifamily. So there is precedent in
the area for that. This is my client's deed. Commercial activity license, page 15. That's
our zoning notification that went out, oh, wow, a year and a half ago. We've been trying
with trying to work with the RCO since then to come up to some sort of agreement that neighbors
and the RCO and we could all work with and it simply wasn't possible. We weren't able to make
that happen after so many months. Certificate of mailing, the letter that was sent back in May of
21 in opposition. This is the lot itself. These are pictures that were taken quite some time ago.
I do have the reposting photos as well. The grass is cut. But this is what we're talking about,
members of the board. These are large lots. The homes on them are set back from the street,
like some of the huge houses you would see in University City that have long since become
multifamily. I believe this house next door is single family. And to the best of my recollection,
most of the homes have maintained single family status on this block at least. There are some
across the street and some further up the block that are multifamily. You'll see the
property next to us is unique as well and that it's three stories versus the two
on the remainder of the block. This is doing a 360. You see more large twins
across the street. And that's back to our lot. These are the immediate adjacent
properties. This one, this was one of the properties a couple doors down that did
have two mailboxes already 615 see there are more photographs of the overall area and this is just
Let's see, these are more photographs of the overall area, and this is just from the
across the street looking into our subject property, which is here.
This is multifamily around the corner, and I think it was three units, newly renovated
for rent, multifamily just up the street, three units, more multifamily up the street,
three units in a similar size property as one directly next to us. Multi-family. There are
zoning signs. Again, more photographs of the area, which we've all seen. And this was our plan,
members of the board. So we're taking some design cues while staying a little bit more modern,
taking some design cues from the properties next door. So you see we have a covered porch
at the property next door. We go up three stories to kind of honor that height. And we even set
back the third story a bit to take some of the massing away from the street because it's in the
work building. We have a side yard which we received a refusal for under the code as well
because our side yard is less than what's required in this zoning district. I submit that it is about
the same size as the neighboring side yard to the property directly to the left of us.
This is our overhead site plan and you can see exactly what I'm talking about. So here's our
side yard this is the neighboring side yard which is significantly smaller we have the same front
yard as the neighboring property we're fitting uh the height and the depth of our building to be
nearly identical to the adjacent property it isn't even going to be as wide so significant
outdoor backspace condensing units to the rear egress exit from the basement another egress well
and the Juliet balcony for use of the third-story tenant.
All right, so just going to the floor plan starting at the basement.
We have the area below the porch and then just open basement for storage and mechanicals.
That's part of unit A. This is also part of unit A in the pink. One bedroom to the rear,
bath, kitchen, living and dining, common area in the front off the porch. You go up the stairs,
you get to the second unit, unit B, which is about the same size and layout as the first
story of unit A. Bedroom's a little bit bigger. The layout's a little tweaked, but not by
much. Then you go up the stairs to get into unit C, and that setback, because of that
third story setback, there's a Juliet balcony. And then again, similar layout to the second
story unit, but it's a little bit smaller because it's pushed back. So ultimately, we
have one, two, three bedrooms in here that wouldn't be any more than if this were a
single-family home, because if this were a single-family home built of the same size
and scales and neighboring property, it's at least a five, six-bedroom house.
By requesting this variance, we are meeting the goals of all of Philadelphia by allowing
somebody who can't afford a brand new $600,000 house, especially with current interest rates,
especially with a recession, to get into something smaller and more affordable to get them living
in the neighborhood.
That's ultimately it, members of the board.
This is the elevation from the side, just showing we're using a mix of brick, cement
board, and other materials.
But there's sufficient exterior space in the front via front porch, significant exterior
space in the rear and sides due to the significant open space, and we request that this become
a three-family dwelling versus a single-family home simply because this lot is so large that
frankly, it is a hardship financially, which is usually not an issue, but this is something that's
going to run with the land. This lot can't be bigger, and it can't be subdivided in any way
because it wouldn't be wide enough to build anything at that point. So we're left with a
large piece of land. This is our suggestion to the community to get new construction in.
Mr. Borovic has done a number of properties in the area. They held a coat drive in the area
last year, and he's done a ton of development here, so it's not as if we are a stranger
to the neighborhood and we've made ourselves available at all points, including continuing
communication with the RCL and with the council's office, with me and with Mr. Borovitz to try
to come to some sort of resolution that works for everybody. We're not there, so we come
to you again with this triplex and ask for your support.
Mr. Mulvihill, is there any other new multifamily buildings built in that area?
area on that block on that block there aren't a new anything it's all old houses other than this
all right and to the best of my recollection if we uh why don't we adopt your testimony
sure mr boravich if you're on the line would you please unmute yourself and raise your hand
i'm sorry what's your client's name last name is borowich b-o-r-o-v-i-c-h
there's no one um in the audience with that last name okay he may have had to drop just
okay he may have had to drop just because it's already 5 30 versus the 3 30. i suggest that
because it's already 5 30 versus the 3 30.
everything i said is true as an officer you're an officer of the court we'll take your testimony
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 hands share planning commission ron bednar city planning this property is indicated
for residential use on a city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to the
existing rsa3 single-family zoning at this location zoning district matches the existing
semi-detached single-family form of the block face the applicant's hardship claim is not
supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property,
the size of the vacant lot is not a hardship. The building on either side of the subject
property are legally single-family dwellings, and we believe the majority of the buildings on the
block face to be single-family dwellings as well. Therefore, we recommend the request of variance
not be granted. Thank you. MI 2021, 001675 614 North 64th Street. I vote no.
Carol? Again, Carol Tineheri, my vote is no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell. My vote is no.
Ishmael Shahid. My vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, members of the board.
So, number five, MI 2022-004-488-301-REx Avenue.
Jody Greenblatt is the owner-applicant.
letter of support from the chestnut hill community association with proviso
councilwoman cindy bass is in non-opposition of this application
yep good afternoon everyone sorry i was just coming off of mute
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter sure my name is jody greenblatt
J-O-D-Y
G-R-E-E-N
B-L-A-T-T
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Hello?
Jody, can you hear me?
Can you hear me?
I think your computer's
a little wry there.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Yeah, okay, I'm here.
Jody, 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 those.
okay i was i kept hearing a buzzing i didn't know what that was this is an application for
the erection of an addition to the existing detached accessory structure for use of single
family household living one zoning refusal this proposed zoning is refused for a maximum
allowed area. For accessory structures, 130 square feet is allowed. 266.65 square feet
is proposed. So you may proceed and share your screen.
Sure. Thank you very much for having me today. Ms. Tanara, yes, you are correct that it was
allowable is 130 square feet and what proposed is 266.65 square feet. I'll just note that's a
little misleading because the existing structure is already over the 130 square feet. So the
request for variance, and I'm hoping you can see this, the presentation now. Okay. The request for
variance is actually it's only another 30 square feet beyond what is already existing there. And
I think this presentation is best shown just through the photos. This is the front of our
property at 301 Rex Avenue. To the left, you will see the existing auxiliary building that's in our
backyard. The next photos, this is, again, the front of the house that you can only
The next photos, this is again the front of the house that you can only see the auxiliary
building from certain angles.
Here the right, that is the building in question.
It's a kind of a neat old building that happens to be in our backyard and in discussing what
we wanted to do with it because it is falling down, my husband and I agreed to consult with
our architects and see what can be done to preserve the building and use it for our personal
the this is just from the back our backyard the back of the house you can see where it is in
relation again side view you could see the old wood the old doors the rear view
and the plans here basically what's an issue is that when looking at how best to rehab this
structure there's an interior staircase that is almost that is it's not to code it's almost
like a ladder staircase on the inside. In order to have a staircase to code,
because it is a two-story structure, we would lose a lot of usable space on that first floor
area if we were to have that staircase be entirely inside the structure. Therefore,
what our architects came up with is cantilevering the staircase starting from the interior and
bumping out, for lack of a better word, the staircase as you can see in the side elevation
here so that we're able to reach the second floor without using up a lot of the first
floor, preserving the structure of the building, preserving the look of the building, and allowing
us more usable space.
So that bump out is what's at issue here and put us over the already non-conforming structure
by about 30 to 35 square feet.
And really, that's all I have.
These are the plans.
um questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions from the virtual audience
i see no handshare um planning commission this is ron bednar city planning property is indicated
for residential use under city plan variance is minimal and does not conflict with the
purpose and spirit of the zoning code we recommend the request for parents be rented
so one question before we vote the community association has a proviso
no limited lodging use in the accessory structure is that okay that's totally fine all right so
mi 2022 004 488 301 rex avenue i vote yes
Carol Tenere my vote is yes
Thomas Holloman
my vote is yes
Mr. Chair were you going to add the proviso or not
oh I'm
it's okay
it's late in the day
301 Brexit Avenue
I vote yes with proviso
no limited lodging use in the accessory structure
Carol Tenere
my vote is yes with proviso
Thomas Holloman
my vote is yes with proviso
James Snell, my vote is yes for Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes for Proviso.
Congratulations.
That's a great project, by the way.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate all of your time.
Enjoy the rest of your evening.
Number six, MI2022-003-398-2900 to 14 Common Avenue,
John Griffin is the attorney.
a recommendation of non-opposition
with provisos from the Mayfair Civic Association.
Mr. Griffin is coming back in as a
panelist.
Mr. Bergman, can you hear me? I can.
I can. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Sure. My name is John Griffin, G-R-I-F-F-I-N, and I am counsel to Dr. Daniel Lynn, who would be a tenant at 2900-2914 Cotman Avenue.
thank you do you swear firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do sir before we start was the property posted it sure was uh that was that in your
presentation uh i believe that uh is all part of what was submitted uh last week
i'm relatively certain that it was hillary yeah yeah mr mr griffin um when i reviewed the packet
Hillary? Yeah, Mr. Griffin, when I reviewed the packet, I did not see the posting photos,
so if you're able to show them now and also just resubmit those, that would be appreciated.
Thank you. All right, so our Vice Chair has a few questions for you, sir. Sure.
Hi, good evening. 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, 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?
Ms. Tenere, yes to all of that. Thank you.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
I am having some difficulty with that.
Okay, somebody can help you here.
I was going to say, is there, can someone see what I have up on the screen?
No, it's not there yet.
Do you see the bottom button that says share screen, the green button?
It's blue for me.
Does it say share screen?
It does.
uh and i can then i have send links and copy
so if you have your documents open um after you hit that share screen button it
it will ask you to click on your document and then you will hit that share um button
um yeah i i i did a dry run this morning i'm not so sure why i'm having some issues here but it's
the it's the very same packet that was sent uh to everyone uh let me just hit that share content
so mr griffin what i want you to do is oh we're good you're up you're up
am i am i good now i thought so
okay it says sharing screen getting closer
sir. I also have to apologize in advance. I'm halfway through a flu and lost the voice last
night. Okay. Well, Keisha, do you have any idea where we are with this now?
No. Are you on your, like, iPhone? I'm on my iPad.
Yeah we've never seen this. Okay and do you have your documents on your screen?
I have them in a Dropbox folder and they are sort of right there that I'm seeing.
Yep so we can basically see everything you're doing. We're starting to see it now. Yep. Okay.
we see that can i uh proceed sir go ahead all right this is um request for variance again the
property is 2900-2914 cotman avenue uh this was um most recently a 7-11 the uh tenant and the
The owner-operator will be Dr. Daniel Lin.
This is going to be an urgent care facility.
On September the 19th, we met with the RCO.
We received unanimous approval with provisos.
Their request was fourfold, which we had immediately agreed upon.
But in essence, one of them was they had asked for dumpster bins or waste management bins.
um i will get through my screen but uh you will see a contract that we already have
with a waste management company for that uh the second would be the planning of additional
landscaping shrubbery to the exterior of the property uh we will be accomplishing that just a
quick note we anticipate completion and opening if this
Quick note, we anticipate completion and opening if this board grants approval probably mid to late spring.
So prior to that will be the landscaping that had been requested.
Three, that there was a request that the parking spaces that are there now be dedicated to customers and not so much employees.
We have dedicated ourselves to that.
There will be no employees parking right then and there.
And then four would be the non-installation, for lack of a better way of putting it,
of any outdoor signage that might be just sort of hanging.
So, Mr. Griffin, our attorney has what they're requesting.
We'll pick what we can make that works as a proviso.
What I want you to do now, show us some pictures of the property.
I am moving forward.
There is a cover letter that is in-depth that I had sent to the board.
Um, we will now get down to the RCO letter, which I think the board has already received.
I provided a courtesy copy.
Our meeting on the 19th.
Uh, that occurred, uh, there is the refusal, uh, exhibit one, uh, exhibit two being the
RCO notice, uh, that we had, uh, exhibit three is the site plan.
and the floor plan. As you can see there, it is a property, it used to be, as I said, a 7-Eleven.
So what we are looking to do is obviously redesign the inside of the property to turn it into
an urgent care facility. We're not looking to really do anything else.
uh we're not looking to accomplish sort of anything else we're not adding to a building
we're uh we're simply just moving on uh from there um are you still able to see me no you
you went out but we said we did see we did okay so here i am back right there you are just show
you got a better picture of the property that's all i need i sure i sure do um just keep scrolling
to get to the picture that's a copy of the lease uh now we get into the exterior photos
you you will see that that's a former uh 7-eleven that's the outside okay of the property uh that
also is another aspect of the property. Adjoining it is a senior center of note.
Those seniors that attend that facility- Sorry, do we get to your property yet?
Excuse me.
Yeah, you're looking at it sideways, Carol.
Oh, okay.
Yeah. This is, in fact, the property. Those seniors are transported
it via a transport device, which we show you right there. So there are not seniors that will
be taking up available parking spaces. Okay. That's essentially it. You're converting the
old 7-Eleven to an urgent care center, right? Urgent care center. Yeah. And by way of some
background just briefly uh this property is located in a cmx2 zone yeah we have that we have
we have all that we're fine we're fine and just do this just on the street is another one okay do
you have a representative from we do doctor my client dr daniel lynn should be present okay good
Good. Let's get Mr. Lynn in to adopt your testimony, okay?
Yes, sir.
Dr. Lynn?
Chair, the only one that has their hand up is someone named, I want to say D-L-I-N-M.
That's him.
That should be him.
That should be him.
Perfect.
Sir, please unmute yourself.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
sir could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
Sir, could you state
so mr griffin yeah you're an officer of the court uh this is daniel ring right okay spell
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please yes my last name is ring first
name is Daniel, D-A-N-I-E-L. Last name is Lin, L-I-N. Right. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Okay. Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Lin, good afternoon. Thank you for attending. Were you able to hear my presentation that we
made to the board? I do. And when you were listening to that presentation,
was it accurate and complete to the best of your knowledge? Yes. Would you adopt my presentation
and my testimony as if it was your own as accurate and truthful? Yes. I have no further
questions thank you questions from the board no no mr chairman all right questions or comments
from the virtual audience i see no handshare planning commission this is ron bednar city
planning the property is indicated for commercial on the city plan given the circumstances of the
site we recommend the quest for various be granted thank you hillary what what do we want to do what
what did you decide for uh proviso um i think the only um proviso that we can really do is
commercial trash pickup okay thank you so so mi 2022 003 398 2900 to 14 cottman avenue
i vote yes with proviso commercial trash pickup harold sanary my vote is yes with proviso
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 counsel mr bergman my pleasure thank you so
much. May I be excused? Right. Absolutely. Thank you, sir. So, number seven, MI 2022-004-466-1401
South 13th Street. Patrick Duffy and Camille Bussiglou are the owners. Leo Movahill represents
them letter of no position from passion square letter of non-opposition from mark squilla
mr movahill i'm in okay mr movahill you've been sworn uh i see your owner is patrick
duffy and camille basaglou is that right correct okay so our um vice chair um has a few questions
hi leo 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?
You may proceed, and please share your screen, which is already up.
Great. So good evening, everyone. My name is Leo Mulvihill. Today I have the pleasure to
represent Patrick Duffy again. He was here several years ago. He owns a property around
the corner from here where Reanimator Coffee is located, right off of Broad Street, and he
actually lives right across the street from that property, so he's right around the corner from
here as well this is a application to essentially fix up what has been a long-standing commercial
property with uh apartments above located on the southwest corner of 13th and reed streets
so if you're thinking about the park that's right there we're just south of the park
it's the old vet's office if you guys know what i'm talking about if you've been in that area before
so we have the refusal appeal and project information form at page one area zoning
maps at 7. Deed at 9. Tax clearance at 14. Zoning notification letter at 15. I didn't have the RCO
letter, so it's not included, but I think it's been sent in the meantime. Photos of the property
at 42. Plans at 70. So I'll get to the refusal. First, so members of the board, here we are at
page 3 of my presentation. This is the refusal. The property in question is an existing structure
that's zoned RSA5 located right on the corner. There was a proposal to more or less have the
commercial use be commercial again. My clients actually already found a tenant and we'll testify
to that in a second. And in addition to that, have the two apartments above because this ought to be
And in addition to that, have the two apartments above, because this ought to be a commercial mixed-use two property.
And my suggestion is this is just simply missed during rezoning, because every other corner property on this block,
specifically this intersection, is commercial.
And my understanding is most of the other immediate intersections are also commercial.
So I think this one might have just been skipped over by accident.
So we're not allowed to have commercial. We're not allowed to have two family.
Project information form. Here's our area zoning map. This is our property.
We're across the street from CMX2. This is CMX2. This is the park with the dog park located over
here. And otherwise, it's mostly RSA5. Just to give you a set from the overhead view from Google,
just south of Columbus Park. Mighty Bread Company is right here. Theater exiles across the street.
We're right behind the Acme. Green Eggs Cafe is down the street.
there are multiple corner businesses as you can see all throughout the
neighborhood. The reanimator coffee I was discussing is actually located right
here. That's my client's deed. Oh, pardon me.
Commercial activity license, pardon me, tax clearance certificate rather at page
14. The letter that went out on page 15 from our architect and the proof of
mailing. We have many pages of that. This is the building. If it didn't ring a bell before,
if you've ever been in the area, it probably does now because this was definitely in my memory.
So this is the structure. Our zoning sign is posted here. There are some minor permits for
alterations that were getting cleared on the inside, but those permits are also posted on the
door. This is the store frontage that we're talking about. Members of the board, you can see
this property is not intended to be a RSA property. It has never been a residential single family
property. That's the zoning sign as well as the new permit. This is taken from across the street
just south of the park. That's directly across 13th street on the corner.
That's directly across the street on the other corner from us, Caddy Corner.
This is a photograph of the rear of the property. So originally this building had
a garage at some point and my client sought to more or less rebuild it because it was in terrible
condition falling down. That's kind of where we are with this right now. During the deconstruction of
this garage, the builder of the adjacent home, I guess because there was an adjacent party wall
here, just stopped insulating the house. So the adjacent neighbor doesn't have any insulation
that's what this shows um my client's been trying to speak with this neighbor about a
fair resolution in this matter but that's outside the scope of zoning i expect the neighbor is going
to be here irrespective so i wanted to ensure the zoning board was aware that that might be
some testimony coming later that's the block as you can see this property's been here quite some
time these are all newer construction homes and then newer construction home then older homes
of the south of the park. That's the park itself. Again, more photos of the property, this time just
showing the side of the property itself. You can see the windows have been removed because of the
interior minor alterations that are occurring in advance of getting the permits that are required
for us to complete the renovations. This is the garage again. This is what it looks like from the
inside of the garage this is this was the party wall prior members of the board so when my client
took this down because it was in poor shape this is all we saw um again we're trying to work with
but my understanding is lni has been called out with respect to this issue and it is the
it is unfortunately the responsibility of the homeowner here to remedy this as it was an issue
that was caused by the builder of their home that said we're still trying to talk with the adjacent
neighbor about figuring out a solution to this these are photos of the interior there's not a
lot left in there we still have the staircase that leads up to the upstairs second story
these are just additional photos of the exterior site plan making no real changes to the property
oh that's upside down here's our proposed floor plan basement is going to be totally open for
storage the commercial spot is going to be here to the rear and to the front this entryway will
allow people to get into their units unit one is here two bedrooms about 645 square feet unit two
Unit two is two bedrooms, probably one bedroom, 530 square feet. So if this were an RSA five
is two bedrooms probably one bedroom 530 square feet so if this
home members of the board, in case there are any arguments about potential overcrowding,
there's only three bedrooms here, whereas a new single family would have something like four
or five for a comparably sized property. That's ultimately it, members of the board. From what I
understand, a tenant has been secured who already has a very successful restaurant just a few blocks
away there was a different concept that they wanted to have here at this location
there was initially an application to have off street parking we're not pursuing that any longer
uh at the recommendation of the rco um and i believe well why don't you have your client
yep so doctor's testimony patrick if you're on the line would you please raise your hand
it has to be unmuted
I know he was responsible to get his kids earlier
so he may not be here any longer members of the board
so you're an officer of the court
we'll take your testimony
questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman
no Mr. Chairman
no Mr. Chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
Mr. Chair this is Hillary
I just wanted to note
um the the refusal has has a general commercial use listed um the zoning board um the the zoning
board cannot approve a general commercial use i didn't know um until today getting more information
from the community um that there was a take actually a takeout restaurant being proposed
because originally my i was going to say that the board could just um if they were inclined to
approve this application, only approve the residential component of it. But if there
is a specific commercial use that your client would like to be included in the application,
the refusal is going to need to be amended with that specific use. We cannot, the general,
a general use is not going to allow them to set up a commercial space.
leo you're you you're muted you're muted i i realize that i'm sorry so my suggestion that
members of the board is this might we hold the vote i seek to obtain that amended refusal come
back and then we would vote on it because otherwise we'd be back in front of the board
for the same thing more or less um in about a year from now and that's not that that doesn't
seem efficient from my perspective and that's yeah that's that's fine mr chair i think because
we do have people here today that um want to testify we should take the testimony um from them
and um from the planning commission as well and i i just wanted to clarify too with with mr mulvihill
it was discussed at the community meeting what the commercial use would be already oh yes okay
okay so they are aware that a takeout restaurant is what is being proposed okay that's that's what
i i gathered from the correspondence i received but i wanted to confirm yes so okay so they can
testify as to to that today but we'll need to amend the refusal to formalize that so the board
can actually consider that all right so questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have excuse me we have someone with the first name beginning an s and the last name
beginning an h okay mute yourself hello hi could you state your name please and spell it for the
court reporter yes my name is sanaz hodra s-a-n as in nancy a z as in zebra last name is h-o-j-r-e-h
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do are you a neighbor yes i am okay proceed um myself and several others at our board zoning
meeting that's the testimony of anybody other than herself she doesn't have personal knowledge
all right so can i speak go ahead there are several neighbors who are unhappy including
Okay, so what I want you to do, Sanaz, Sanaz, listen to me. What I want you to do is tell me
why you're opposed to it. This building has been abandoned for several years. And this redeveloper
had initially come in saying that they were going to make it into a one-family home.
And from my understanding, that this vet clinic was given a grant of allowing a variance of being
a space where it's going to be a commercial property. And since then, it has been over
eight years, I believe, that it has been abandoned as such. And therefore, that variance is no longer
valid. And now to bring in and have a commercial property, I do not agree with it. And while
And while there's a bakery across the street and a child care center across the street, a takeout venue is far different from those two things.
there's a bakery across the street, and a childcare center across the street,
We understand it.
And thank you for taking the time, the calls.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience that has a comment?
Yes, Chair.
We have Dina, last name, ending in F and D.
Can you hear me?
Hi, Kai.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Dena Driscoll, D-E-N-A, last name Driscoll, D-R-I-S-C-O-L-L.
All right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Okay, proceed.
I own a home on the 1200 block of Garrett Street.
And as a near neighbor, we support and welcome multifamily housing and a new thriving takeout business in our neighborhood, my husband and I.
That's all.
Thank you so much for calling.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have Stephen, last name ending in F.
Could you state your name for us?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
yep steven fabiani uh that's like frank a b i a n i right do you swear affirm tell the truth
whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed okay um before i begin i should uh let the board
know that we that i submitted to the board earlier today a petition with at this point about 18
signatures in opposition okay in addition there are several exhibits um that go to one of our
arguments um this is a group of 12 uh households all within why don't you sir why don't you do
this why don't you tell us why you you're against it i'm i'm headed right there um the uh the
The grounds that the premise is – the premise of the property should be commercials incorrect, as is the assertion that the property had never been single-family.
As was stated earlier, the property had been a single-family dwelling and was granted a one-time exemption for a live-in business, meaning the owner was the operator of the business, the veterinary clinic.
And that exemption expired, as was previously stated. Our concerns also include due process, safety, excessive existing and planned commercial and multifamily spaces in the area, traffic congestion, parking, and unresolved design and ventilation.
less than 48 hours ago the community first learned that the intended use for the space
included a takeout restaurant and a loading zone less than 48 hours ago okay in the subsequent two
days several neighbors have written letters of opposition to councilman school's office and to
the board to which he has not yet had a chance to respond but has assured us that he would
we've managed to put together the petition which has been submitted and requests either an outright
denial at this time for the variance or continuance that allows the board time to consider
our concerns. 18 signatures so far. Okay, so thank you for your call, and I appreciate you've been
waiting a long time. You called earlier today. We hear your comments. We understand it, and I'm
going to move on to see if there's anyone else in the audience wants to say something. Is there any
other persons in the virtual audience yes chair we have about six hands up now how many hands
six thanks and the next person is laurie last name beginning in m okay state your name and
spell for the court reporter hi my name is laurie mazer m-a-z-e-r first name l-a-u-r-i-e do you
swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor
Yes, I am.
Are you for or against the property?
For the property.
And I'm in a 1400 block of 13th Street.
And I have lived here since 2015.
And I have two kids.
And my husband and our family is deeply supportive of multifamily housing, takeout, restaurants.
We live in a thriving area.
And this would fit in perfectly with our neighborhood.
Thank you so much for your call and taking the time.
Thank you.
Who else is in the audience?
Chair, next we have Peter, last name beginning with a V as in Victor.
Hi Peter, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, Peter, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Peter?
Peter?
Peter, please unmute yourself.
He's allowed to speak.
Do you want me to move on to the next person?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hey there.
Hey there.
I'm sorry.
Can you hear me now?
We can.
Sorry about that.
I was trying to read from a letter of support that I had written.
No, no.
Start.
First, could you state your name and spell it, please?
Yeah, I will.
I will do that.
It is Peter Varecchia, V as in Victor, E-R-R-E-C-C-H-I-A.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do swear that.
So, Peter, we've heard both sides of this.
We'd like to know, are you for the project or against the project?
I am enthusiastically for the project.
And you're a neighbor?
I am a neighbor.
I live at 1415 South Earth, 13th Street, less than 80 feet away from the project.
I've lived here for 26 years.
I know the developer.
I know the spot.
I've been looking at that very ugly situation for a long time.
I believe, as Laurie Mazur stated earlier, that a mixed-use situation for the spot is
perfect.
It will add to life and a really nice quality of life here in Patrick.
Peter, we appreciate your call.
We understand where you are, but I want to get on to get to anyone else that wants to
say something.
Who else in the virtual audience?
Thank you, Peter.
chair we have michael last name beginning with h
hi michael could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
michael hallowell last name spelled h-a-l-l-o-w-e-l-l right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do mr michael you're a neighbor i am a neighbor
Michael, we've heard both sides of this.
Are you for or against the project?
I am vehemently against the project.
We appreciate your call.
And we want to get on to let other people put their name in here, too.
So thank you very much.
Who else in the virtual audience?
Here we have Lois, last name beginning with J.
Lois, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Lois Janky, J-A-N-K-E.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Lois, we've heard from both sides of this.
Are you for or against the project?
I'm strongly against the project.
And you're a neighbor, Lois?
Yes, I am.
I live at 1202 Reed Street.
Lois, thank you so much for your comments.
Who else in the virtual audience?
chair next we have camille last name beginning with b as a boy how many more do we have there
chair we have one we have four there just for just for the record i object the last um
witnesses testimony ms jenky i believe she testified her address is 1202
i hear you leo i hear you leo thank you all right who's next
chair camille begin last name beginning with b as in boy you're on hi could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter um hello um chairman bergman uh this is camille basholey
and patrick duffy we are the owners of the property so so we we understand where you are
we we we know what i want to do is get the rest of the people who have something to say
My apology is out.
No, no, no.
Don't worry about it.
We just want to make sure that you're aware that we are here.
Thank you.
We know you're here.
We know you're here.
Who else is next?
Next year, we have Jonathan McDonald.
All right.
Mr. McDonald, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. McDonald, you are muted.
mr mcdonald i'm back i'm here could you state your name is spelled for a court reporter
jonathan mcdonald j-o-n-a-t-h-a-n-m-c-d-o-n-a-l-d right do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do mr mcdonald are you a neighbor i am 12 26 read
Okay. Mr. McDonough, we've heard both sides of this. Please tell us, are you for this or against
it? For. Okay. Thank you very much for your time and effort calling.
Okay, thank you very much for your time and effort calling.
Just for the purpose of the rest, Mr. McDonald, are you still on the line?
One moment, I'll try to get him back.
If not, I think we have his reasons.
No, there's something else, Chair.
Go ahead, get him back online.
He is online.
Yeah, Mr. McDonald, please unmute yourself, you're free to speak.
go ahead leo mr mcdonald i'm counsel for the applicant in this matter mr mcdonald do you
know me yes sir okay you're also an attorney correct that's correct have we worked together
before yes the fact that we have worked together that you know me in any way influence uh your
vote in this matter no i didn't know that you were involved in this until i logged on thank you all
All right. Thank you. Thank you, Leo. Thank you, Mr. McDonald.
No problem. Who's next?
Okay, Chair, we have Clara, last name ending in R.
Hi. State your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
My name is Clara Rottalk. It's spelled C-L-A-R-A-R-O-T-T-S-O-L-K.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
We've heard both sides of this. Are you for or against this?
I'm against passing it this time. I would support a continuance to more thoroughly consider the impact of traffic and noise and trash on the street.
Thank you so much for calling. How many people do we have left in the audience?
Two more hands, Sheriff.
Next is Daniel, last name beginning with D, as in dog.
Hi, could you state your name, please, as a call for court reporter?
My name is Daniel Driscoll, last name D-R-I-S-C-O-L-L, unrelated to the previous Driscoll.
I was going to ask that question.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
We've heard both sides of this, Mr. Driscoll.
Where do you stand on this?
I am definitely against, and I was hoping that Mr. Mulvihill would explain why he says
the property has always been commercial in his sworn testimony.
Well, we're not going to ask Mr. Mogahill questions. You're against it. Are you a neighbor, sir?
I am a neighbor.
Okay. Thank you very much for calling. One more.
Chair, we have Michael, last name beginning with H as in Henry.
Okay. Michael, state your name and spell for the court reporter.
Hello?
hi yes it's lisa state your name and spell for court reporter please it's actually lisa hallowell
h-a-l-l-o-w-e-l-l right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do we've heard both sides of this are you for this or against it completely against it
and you were neighbor i am okay thank you very much for your calls we're going to go to the
planning commission planning commission this is ron bednar city planning property is indicated for
residential and the city plan our adopted district plan recommends no changes to the existing zoning
at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being
using conformity with the code therefore we recommend quest for vanity it's not regret
thank you we're going to hold the vote on this uh chair of the mobile mr all the hill you're
going to reapply or i'm going to do what's necessary yes chair there's one thing thank
you the only thing i wanted to add to the record is this there was testimony in the chat from
somebody who left who stated that they lived at 1420 south 13th street our subject property was
occupied up until a couple of years ago when the owner passed away his son lives in the building
until it was for sale and it was not vacant for eight years okay thank you very much thank you
much mr mobile thank you for your time we're going to move on to the next case mr chair mr
chair i just want to note um for um for the record that that this case is closed other than the
receipt of the amended refusal.
They should close
other than the receipt of the amended
refusal.
Case number
8, MI 2021
3245 North
27th Street.
Brandy Talley is the owner.
Letter of support from the Community
from the Community Action Group. Brandy Talley. Ms. Kelly is coming back in as a panelist.
Action Group.
Brandy Talley.
Hello. Hi Ms. Talley, how are you? Fine, how are you? Could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter, please. Brandy Talley, B-R-A-N-D-I-T-A-L-L-E-Y. Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Our vice chair has a few questions
for you. Good evening. Good evening. The exhibit packet was 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 this is an application
for use as a child care center as part of an existing single family dwelling in an existing
structure. There are no signs on this application. There are two use refusals. The proposed use
child care center is expressly prohibited in RSA 5 residential zoning district. The second refusal
is this creates a condition of multiple principal uses, and this is not permitted.
You may proceed and begin sharing your screen.
Okay. I have support letters from both the...
Can you begin to share your screen?
Please.
can you see my screen yeah no
and mr chair we do have a letter of support from community action group yeah yeah
ma'am are you on a computer okay yep
okay we see it now yeah yep okay this is just a little is it possible to make it just a little
bit bigger that's good that's good thank you okay i have a letter from the rco and the affected
RCOs, the Community Action Group
and the Swampoodle
RCO. Okay.
This is my refusal letter.
The first refusal is
the multiple
principle.
I have since
putting the pill in,
I have moved from the property, so it's
now all used as a child
This is my
do you guys need to see my lease
stating that I'm moving?
okay let me see
you have a picture of the outside of the property?
yes I have the picture of the outside
this is one way
then I have the picture of the other way
this is the backyard of the property
this is the inside of the property everything is already um set up as a child care center
we are now in a group this is the upstairs area
this is the downstairs this is the second level
is this on the corner property no it's not a corner property it's um it's like four doors
from the corner how long have you operated this this is this is my fifth year december
fourth will be my fifth year in operation okay all right um
okay questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman uh questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hand shared and you say swampy i'm sorry a calling user just put their hand up
okay phone number ending in three five five two please i think that's one
phone number ending in 3552 you're free to speak in your
Phone number ending in 3552.
You're free to speak and you're unmuted.
I don't know.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
Oh, there she is.
Okay, sorry.
I had my mute on.
I'm sorry.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, this is Adrienne Fernandez.
That's my last name, spelled F-E-R-N-E-N-D-E-Z.
You've already been sworn.
Our support letter was already in the file because this case was continued.
So we had a letter dated for May 31st, and we have been working with Brandy for a while,
both RCOs, because she did actually present in person before COVID.
So both RCOs in Toronto support her project.
thank you for taking the time of the calls
thank you very much
Mr. Chair
Ms. Fernandez had just
forwarded me the support letter back
from May and there was a request
for a proviso for
internal trash and recycling
storage
yes thank you
yes we had one proviso request
okay thank you
is there anyone else
in the virtual audience
I see no hands chair
Planning Commission this is Ron Bednar city planning the property is indicated for residential
use on a city planner adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at
this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical
circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity
with the code inappropriate use and not consistent with our with the surrounding residential
neighborhood. More appropriate location would be on nearby Allegheny Avenue commercial corridor.
Therefore, we recommend the request of variance not be granted. Thank you. So MI 2021, 002-930-3345
North 27th Street. I'm going to hold this vote and talk about it next week in our executive session
and we'll reschedule this for 3 30 next week for a vote. Mr. Chair, we'll vote it at 2 p.m. next
Wednesday. 2 p.m.? Okay, fine. Yeah. 2 p.m., fine. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone, and thank you for
your presentation, ma'am. Well, you'll hear next week. Is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose case has not been called? I see no hands, Chair. Okay, thanks, everybody. A little later,
but you know we got a lot of good work done and you know i think we got to remember that
that case we heard around the uh pha headquarters is really just redoing a whole complete neighborhood
so i think we did a lot of great work that i didn't thank everybody thanks bill thanks have
a good night great job good night everyone thank you good night all
Good night.