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,