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,