Tanya, Fatina, do we need any time?
Yes, if we could take two minutes.
They're coming into the room as we speak.
Let us know.
To the court reporter, I don't know if you've ever been with us before.
Maybe you have.
I apologize.
I have not.
Well, sometimes if we get to be long and you need a break, just let us know.
Don't be embarrassed to let us know.
Thank you.
So Carol.
To your point, Frank is here and visible if you do need to take your, what you asked for.
Thanks.
I was just curious.
Court reporter, what is your name?
Samantha.
Samantha?
Thank you.
Chair, I apologize, but if I could just make an announcement, please do not raise your
hand unless requested to.
If you have questions, please put them in the Q&A, but please do not raise your hand
at this time. Chair, we are ready to go forward. About 40 attendees. We're ready when you are.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board
of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol
Tenere, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell,
Board Administrator Ms. Fatina L. and our Board Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through
some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual
participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding
is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that
the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise. Third, for anyone
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone participating by phone,
If you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
Finally, to make an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat that also.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and address of the property at issue.
I would also like to remind everyone, please do not attempt to testify in the chat.
Any questions or comments, please direct them to our board administrator.
With that, I will read off a list of cases that have been requested to be continued.
Number seven on our morning list, MI 2020-001-533.
3-1-1-2 West York Street is being withdrawn.
MI 2021-001169, 723-27, South 17th Street is being continued.
Excuse me, Chair, that one was a request by the RCO. If you could call the applicant and
the representative of the RCO forward before continuing it. Thank you.
Mr. Mulvihill, and whoever's representing Sosnit, please raise your hand.
Mr. Mulvihill, and whoever's representing Sosnit, please raise your hand.
Mr. Mulvihill is coming in as a panelist.
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.
Leo Mulvihill for the applicant.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Leo, would you please spell your last name for the reporter?
Yes, M as in Michael, UL, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
We have Nicole.
Nicole, you can unmute yourself and be sworn in by the chair.
Hi, this is Nicole Kodanker.
Last name is K-O-E as in Edward, D as in David, Y-K-E-R.
We're here to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Sir Sassana is making a request for continuance.
Mr. Mulvihill, are you in disagreement with that?
Members of the board, we would be asking that this be a hear and hold for this project.
There were some requests made by SOSNA for some aesthetic changes which we have made.
We've now gone back to their architectural review committee and are scheduled to appear in front of them in August for their community meeting to present this project for a second time.
would this be a resumption or would it be um well let me ask the rco representative would
you be willing to have this held only for a hearing at which the um your new letter of
your recommendation letter would be read into the record before the board votes in other words there
would be no testimony um sure okay in that case then it would be sort of a modified resumption
hearing you will hold it for the letter to be read into the record and the record would otherwise
be closed okay so that will we'll hear that and uh we'll do exactly what you just uh suggested
sharon thank you so so to clarify sorry the we currently have this project on our august 18th
zoning agenda for a community vote because no vote was taken at our previous meeting so we
weren't able to write an actual letter of recommendation other than a continuance
we will be going we'll go forward with the hearing today okay and then we will only hear correct me
from wrong Sharon will only deal with the issue of the letter yes we will schedule a specific date
after August 18th for the board to resume the hearing strictly for reading your new letter
into the record and then they will vote okay great hey Nicole does that work for you yes
Okay, thank you. All right. And the other request for continuance was for MI 2020-002812, 830 East Thayer, T-H-A-Y-E-R Street.
Actually, Chair, that was not a request for a continuance. It's one where we did not receive each.
i'm sorry it was originally requested to be continued by councilwoman sanchez
right and that was in march and then you continued it to today
we had no we didn't get exhibits until monday right so that case will be continued
was not the exhibits were not submitted in a timely manner that case will be continued
Is there anyone who objects to any of the continuances or withdrawal that have just been read into the record?
If so, please raise your hand.
Only if you object to those cases that we just read into the record as being continued or withdrawn.
Chair, we have Franz Pierre that I'm muting.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Can everyone hear me?
Yes, sir.
Wonderful.
And good morning, fellow board members.
My name is Franz Pierre, legislative aide,
Councilmember Johnson's office.
First name, that's F-R-A-N-T-Z.
Last name, Pierre.
That's P-I-E-R-R-E.
Where is for him to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
I certainly do.
May I proceed?
Wonderful.
So this is in regards to the Sazna continuance. If that's okay with Nicole and Sazna's board to go ahead and do the hear and hold, then we'll go ahead and support that. But I do urge that the continuance stand simply because
um that uh the continuance stand simply because uh there may be uh just uh a lack of notice for
near neighbors um who may not be expecting uh to testify today or weren't at the meeting today
um so uh i just want to put that out there um and and just simply state that we do support
uh sasna for the hearing hold however i do think that there may be community members that aren't
aware that it will be a hearing hold and to close that record i just have um some reservations in
regards to uh the community giving output uh for the appeal understood uh but notification will
still be required correct Sharon um well actually the neighbors had notification today there was
nothing official that went out from the board saying that the hearing would be continued
so if there are neighbors present they'll be able to testify today yes that'll be part of the record
and just to um piggyback on that chair there will be no notifications for resumption hearing
Thank you. All right, Mr. Pierre, so testimony will be taken today by those who from Sassen who
wish to testify. Mr. Pierre, would you like the record, though, to be open for a letter from your
office as well? Yes, that would be lovely. Thank you. Okay, I'm good. Thank you. Thank you for
all right any any other anyone else chair we have michael michael you've been unmuted
please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
yes good morning everyone can everyone hear me okay yes please identify yourself spell your
spell your name for the record name is michael zachroff last name zulu alpha kilo romeo oscar
foxtrot foxtrot we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do
yes so i am a neighbor actually since everyone was just talking about this i am a neighbor
in relation to um the 723 and 727 chadwick street and we and i am also
So 723 what?
723 to 727 Chadwick Street for the property.
South 17th, do you mean?
You said Chadwick.
Well, the home, what we were just talking about were the homes on Chadwick, I presume.
South 17th Street.
Correct.
There's a difference between Chadwick and South 17th.
There's a difference on Chadwick that Leo was just addressing and that everyone was just talking about.
down 17th street okay then i apologize i'm i'm just talking about chadwick street we don't have
anything on our schedule for chadwick today at least not on the morning list let's correct me
if i'm wrong someone sure to chico uh sorry to interrupt the uh appeal is for through lots that
face both 17th and chadwick so i think this figure is referring to the same case okay okay all right
Thank you. Thank you for clearing that up. Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. Zakra.
No, I'm sorry too. This is my first time attending this. So I am, I myself and many neighbors around
these surrounding properties. We are in the process of acquiring, acquiring legal and
another council. So we just received this letter from the builder's attorney five days ago,
and it really wasn't enough ample time for anything so I'm also just requesting it to be
extended as well. Okay so noted thank you. Thank you. Anyone else disagree with any of the
continuances that have just been read into the record? Please raise your hand. Chair we have
Kush Petaway. Oh they just lowered their hand there's no more handshare. Okay at this time I
will ask does anyone would anyone like to request a continuance or withdrawal for the 930 list
if so please raise your hand only if you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal
okay we have brandon brandon you've been unmuted please wait for the
brandon saverin yes hello mr chair good morning please identify yourself for the record
Hi, my name is Brandon Saverin. Last name is spelled S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N.
I'm an attorney with Pritzker Law Group. I'm essentially subbing in here for Rachel Pritzker to request.
I'm an attorney with Pritzker Law Group. I'm essentially subbing in here for Rachel.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Sorry.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
We're just here to request a continuance for 2442 North 20th Street.
Our client is the applicant and is still in the process of trying to work on things with the community.
He has spent the last couple months meeting with near neighbors directly, as they did not turn out to the scheduled RCO meeting.
He is an out-of-town gentleman who is coming in next week and is hoping to meet with the RCO board in person.
So this would allow him time to do that and then hopefully come back for a continued hearing.
Thank you. Is there any objection to the continuance of MI 2020-002-957-2442 North 20th Street?
Chair, can I add one comment that Mr. Saverin, you submitted revised plans at a proviso plans
form this morning. If this is continued, I would ask that you be in touch with me
in order for us to determine whether this requires an amended application.
Oh, absolutely, Ms. Saleta. I'll follow up with an email to you.
Thank you.
Okay, anyone else? Anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
Chair, we have Sloan. I'm sorry.
We have Sloan Folks. Mr. Folks, you may unmute yourself and wait for the chair, please.
Good morning, Mr. Folks. Please identify yourself and I swear you in.
good morning chairman chico and zba board my name is sloan folks s-l-o-a-n-e-f-s and fire
o-l-k-f-s representing the office of councilman maria quinones sanchez room 508 city hall
we're firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir i do thank you
sir please proceed i am speaking in regards to meeting number mi2020-0015685039 birth street
um we do not have a record of a uh rco meeting and we reached out to the rco i'm sorry that's
not true we have an rco letter that's requesting a continuance on this particular uh project and
I wanted to know if the applicant was available and agree with this continuance.
Mr. Ward, I believe Mr. Sean Ward is representing the clients for 5039 Worth Street.
That is correct, Mr. Chairman. Good morning.
Good morning. Please identify yourself. I'll swear you in.
Dawn Ward, on behalf of the applicant, is a request from the Councilwoman's office that this case be continued?
Mr. Chairman, we met originally with the Frankfurt Neighbor Advisory Committee on March 4th of 2021,
where we gave a full presentation to the Zoning Committee regarding this project.
At the conclusion of that meeting, they raised an issue because the applicant's true intention was personal storage in a garage to be built on the property.
Unfortunately, the expediter put storage of equipment and materials on the application.
So at their request, we continued this case at the last listing in order to amend the application.
So we were able to amend the application with leave to amend to reflect personal storage accessory to a residential dwelling.
That revised refusal was presented to Frankfurt neighbors over a month, maybe a month and a half ago.
Last week, when I contacted them for an updated RCO letter, they indicated that we would need to meet again,
which I see no reason to meet again because nothing has changed other than the wording
of the refusal. The presentation was the same. So they indicated to me last week that they would
get back to me by Friday with regard to a follow-up meeting, and I never heard from them.
We are ready to go. The original refusal was issued last August, almost a year ago,
and we we don't think that uh frankfurt neighbors is really acting in good faith here i don't i
don't understand why they mr folks are you of it were you aware was your office aware of the uh
chain of events that mr ward just spelled out the letter that we have uh is simply requesting um a
The letter that we have is simply requesting a continuance until the refusal was updated.
a continuance.
If Mr. Ward has updated the refusal, we'd simply request a hearing hold for a letter
from the RCO then if he supported that. I'd also ask Mr. Ward if he could email me
that updated refusal so I could forward that also to the RCO so that they have a number of
methods of receiving that updated refusal. For the record, Sloan, you were copied on
all the email transactions. Okay, Sean, I'll check it, but if you could just send me another one,
please. I'd be more than happy to. Okay. We'll hear the case and then we'll make that decision.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal
for the 930 list. Chair, we have Hillary Emerson. Ms. Emerson, please unmute yourself and wait for
the chair. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Hillary Emerson on behalf of
Councilwoman Sherelle Parker. Please identify yourself for the record. Sure. Hillary Emerson,
e-m-e-r-s-o-n we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed um yes i'm here about number nine on the list 534-42 west olney
avenue um i i had recent contact with the applicant there was an rco meeting the community
was not in support of the proposal and the applicant has since pulled um permits for other
uses at the property um i advised him how to um withdraw his appeal um but i'm not aware that
that's been done unless he's here today to do that in person um i i'll interrupt you if i don't mind
we as of now we had no listing and no exhibits and i'm going to ask if there is there anyone
representing 534-42 West Olney Avenue on? If so, please raise your hand.
This is the second listing and no exhibits.
Chair, we have a Cush Petaway with the hand up. Are you for this case? If not, please lower your hand.
534-42 West Olney.
Chair, I would also mention that the property owner is a corporation, so they would require an attorney.
Anyone here for 534-42 West Alony?
Mr. Padaway, you've been unmuted. Please unmute yourself to speak.
Please identify yourself. Spell your full name.
Oh, C-U-S-H-P-E-T-T-I-W-A-Y.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yeah, I was trying to withdraw from my application for 1813 North Natrona.
Yeah, 1813 North Natrona Street.
Is that for 930 this morning?
1813 you said latona yeah natrona n-a-t-r we don't have that it's not on our list could
tanya yeah i believe that it's on the afternoon list oh i'm sorry no i'm my my my mistake it's
number one number two on our list so you're asking to withdraw correct yes all right mi 2020-002
994 1813 north natrona street is withdrawn thank you um chair can we go back one moment you are
we got to go back to the other case i'm sorry to the person who just spoke can he confirm that he
is the property owner. Mr. Petaway? Mr. Petaway, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Petaway, are you the owner? Yes, I'm the owner. Okay, thank you. Thank you. All right,
Getting back to 534-42, Alany, anyone representing that application?
I see no hands, Chair.
I see no handshare.
Okay, so MI-2020.
Okay, so MI 2020-002955-534-42 West Olney.
My vote is to dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
For the 930 list, please raise your hand.
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you.
We'll go to the first case is the add-on list.
MI 2021-001-000, 4204 Parkside Avenue,
and MI 2021-000-999-4206 Parkside Avenue.
My vote is yes with the proviso.
Maximum six units in each property.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
My vote is no.
you carol you have to do the next one i recuse myself okay calendar mi-2021-000
994 1201 west gerard avenue my vote is yes for reconsideration and rehearing
the original vote is now vacated and the parties will receive notice
Madam Chair, it won't be vacated unless a majority vote for request and reconsideration to grant.
Okay, so I'll start again. My vote is yes for reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
So the original vote is now vacated and the parties will receive notice as to a new hearing.
Is that correct, Ms. Saleta?
Yes, it is.
Thank you.
Okay, we can now proceed with the regular list.
MI 2021-001-244. 1201-07 West Somerset Street. Mr. Jinn. And there's a letter of support from the 37th Ward RCO.
Mr. Jinn is coming back in as a panelist.
Hi, Mr. Jin. Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Yes, Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the Advocate.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
You also 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 to all questions.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you.
Good morning.
I'm going to share with the board the information related to this case.
we have submitted to the board ahead of time the refusal rco support letter photo plans tax
clearance deed and related documentation the refusal in this matter uh reads as follow it is
a cmx2 commercial mixed use property i will get into more details about the history of the property
as we proceed with the presentation however based on the size of the lot what is being
permitted by right as 11 dwelling units, whereas my client is asking for 21 dwelling units.
While this sounds like a lot of a variance change in the total units, taking into perspective of
the area and what is needed in the area, you'll see that this is actually a very sensible proposal.
The RCO and the community met with us, and we had overwhelming support from the community
and the RCO. In essence, this is a corner that used to be a commercial lot, but has been unused
for some time. I'm going to show the board the photograph of the property. This is the building
in question that is going to be demolished and a new structure placed in its place.
demolished and a new structure placed in its place. By doing the new property structure,
what we're doing is we're proposing to build the following. The best shown is through a rendering.
My client proposes a new building that has commercial space on the ground level
with residential units above. Because of the economics of the area, larger residential units
would have difficulty getting tenancy from people in the area.
And the community is aware of that.
And that was one of the feedbacks that was given to us when we did our presentation.
By changing the total number of units, my client can actually lower the cost and size
of the units.
What I'm going to do is I'll zoom into the floor plans so it's easier to see exactly
how we're trying to lay this out.
So as you can see, we have a basement plan that will go with the commercial units.
So this will be building maintenance room, garbage compactors, elevator, along with commercial office space for the commercial tenants.
The first floor, again, is also commercial.
We're actually putting in offices and smaller tenancies for commercial as well, because, again, that is what's needed in the neighborhood over large commercial units,
which are not as useful to people that are looking for that type of service in the area.
Once we go above that to the upper floors, from second to fourth floor,
we have what is essentially smaller apartment units that are still set up with one and two bedroom setups.
They're more closer to smaller efficiency-sized units, which contains bedrooms, separate bedrooms,
living space, and kitchen, but the overall cost will be a lot more acceptable to the
community and more easily met by the people that might be interested in leasing.
In this situation, we also have a roof deck, which is accessible, so open space is still
maintained. And dimensionally, the building does not trigger any refusals as well. When we met with
the community, the community supported this overwhelmingly because of the need for one,
office space type commercial spaces, and two, smaller, more accessible, and more affordable
overall residential units. The negative impacts that normally comes with high density
would not be attached to this particular area as parking on the street. While neighbors and
residents certainly park on the street, there is enough space left that these additional units and
even associated parking would not necessarily affect the overall parking situation. The
additional ice on the street, corner activity, and lighting in a new building in that position
would increase the safety and would actually help the community in developing into a better
and more active corner. So as a result, my client received full support from the community.
I believe there may even be a few neighbors here in support today in attendance. So we would ask
the board favorable consideration in this request. If the board has any questions or require me to
re-present any of the attached documents, I'll be happy to do so. Thank you, Mr. Chin. Do you
have, is your client available to adopt your testimony? Yes, I believe Mr. Sean Thomas should
be here, or his brother might be the one that's attending. So, Sean, can you raise your hand if
you're present? We also have the architect present if the board has any specific architectural
questions. Thank you.
Oh, Keith Sheed. Yes, Keith is Sean's brother, who's also a partner in the project.
Good morning, sir. Please identify yourself with a record spell, your first and last name,
I'll swear you in.
My name is Keith Sheed, K-E-I-T-H-S-H-E-E-D.
Where from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Jim.
Thank you.
Keith, you heard my presentation to the zoning board.
Can you verify that what I represented is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, it is.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
i see no handshare thank you planning commission good morning thank you mr chair members of the
Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. That's H-E-G-A-R-T-Y.
board ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning committee
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing about the truth?
Please proceed. Thank you.
Thank you.
Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to CMX1 at this location.
The applicant's hardship claim is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property.
This is a nice square corner lot, and I want to just draw attention to the board that this is an instance in which the appellant has neglected to pursue an available buy right density bonus for green roof and mixed income housing, and is instead asking for additional density without requiring the required benefits.
so we're therefore arguing that no hardship exists the variance is not the minimum variance
necessary and instead this is a request to circumvent an established process to achieve
similar density but without having to provide the necessary community benefits city planning
commission recommends that the board deny the variance thank you mr jen uh the commercial
it was 21 units does that include the commercial or is that the commercial was separate from the
residential? How many residential units? I believe 21 units is the residential units,
the commercial units. Then you have the commercial. Correct. We have the commercial units on the first
floor. I do want to point out that while green roofs and other bonuses do exist, I believe part
of the reason it's designed this way is, again, when my client talked to the community with the
resulting costs involved with how the building has to be built. This is probably the best way
to achieve the pricing the community is looking for for what the units would go for without
exceeding the budget that my client would be able to shoulder in this case. Again, this is a project
that is really to the benefit of that particular community because of the area's need for that
type of development. Again, that is why the community gave us overwhelming support when we
met with them, despite the substantial increase in the unit count. And again, even with the increase
in the unit count, with the layout, I don't believe that the overall bedroom density is
really substantially higher than what 11 units with bigger apartments would necessarily come
out to be i mean we can easily do 11 units with three three bedroom setups uh in the same spot
because of the overall size of the lot and uh height permissions that you know you can obtain
for the uh for the building so i i do want to have the board take that into consideration that
these are smaller units one and two bedrooms only that actually has its own elevator trash room
bike space so everything is contained internally and managed and is a very good project for the
community and meets their needs if i'm not mistaken there were about 14 commercial spaces
because you have commercial in the basement um no the keith uh if you can shed light on that i
believe uh the commercial in the basement is part of the uh commercial on the first floor that's
basement portion? Yes. Part of the first floor in the basement shares it. So it'll be, I believe,
a trash compactor down there for the trash for the building as well. So the first floor basement
portion would be the same. How many, in total, how many commercial spaces? I believe it was five.
I don't have it exactly in front of me. I can put the plans back up. I believe it is five.
just bear with me one minute
sorry the uh zooming actually affects it yeah so it's five commercial spaces
didn't i see something on the front in the basement though i thought i saw
the basement portion of the commercial space would be part of the tenant space number four
number five and the utility in the utility rooms and you're showing one two three four five
five commercial spaces right so this is tenant number one's commercial storage area this is
their commercial space above and this is storage area for tenant tenant number two uh tenant
tenant number two just you're you're showing just a storage space correct in the basement yeah for
the first floor units correct that is correct all right again i'll ask any questions from the board
no oh no
no am i 2021
I really believe he should go back and try to work this out my vote is no I'm thinking
out. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no. Thank you. Calendar number
2957, 2442 North 20th Street. The attorney is Rachel Pritzker. What happened to three?
oh sorry i should have announced it the calendar number mi 2021-001234 1808-10
benton avenue mi 2021-001235 1812-14 benton avenue and mi-2021-001233 1800-02 benton avenue
these cases are all continued or are we hearing them together i thought we were hearing them
okay that correct we're hearing these cases correct cheryl that's correct there was no
continuance request right and the attorney's carrie percus
mr percus is coming back in as a panelist
good morning mr percus please identify yourself for the record and i'll swear you in
someone muted yet
there's also three letters of opposition from the ron horse ronhurst civic association
uh this is mr preface to hear me now i was i was on on yes yes we can please uh spell your
full name to the record? Yes, Gary, G-A-R-Y, Perkis, P-E-R-K-I-S-S. Do you swear if I'm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, sir. Please proceed. Yes, I represent
Benton Garden Associates Limited Partnership, who are the owner of the Benton Garden Apartments. My
client purchased the apartments on April 30, 2007, and have managed and operated the apartments
at that property since that time. There are six buildings with 72 apartments, all one bedroom.
There are 10 units in building 1800 to 02, 10 units in 1804 to 1806, 10 units in 1808 to 1810,
10 units in 1812 to 1814, and there's two buildings with 16 units each, 7833-41 Frontenac Street.
The properties are on the corner of Benton and Frontenac.
Excuse me, Mr. Perkis, when you were reading off the addresses, you said, I think I heard you say 1804-06, is that correct?
Oh, yes. The properties that are subject to these appeals are 1800-02, 1808-10, 1812-14, but also as part of the complex is 1804-06.
Okay. All right. But those three, okay, because I didn't see them on that list and I haven't made a notation.
Right. So those are, 1804-06 is not subject to this appeal.
Okay. Thank you.
So those four properties or those four buildings have 10 units each, four on the second floor, four on the first floor, and two on the lower level.
Do you have any exhibits you can share with us?
And, sir, may I interrupt? Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
So I have, these are the exhibits that were submitted, the application, the refusal letter,
the refusal letter. We don't have it yet. We only have your index. We don't have the actual
your index. We don't have the actual documents you're speaking to.
All right you have the list.
This is the list of exhibits. Do you have this?
Not yet. We have the list. Yeah, I'm sorry. We do have the list, but we're not seeing anything beside the list.
So we still see your files. So if you want to unshare and then open up your exhibit package and then share again, we may be able to see them more readily.
Do you see it now?
Yes, I read it.
If you can make it a little bit larger, that would be helpful.
All right.
That's good.
That's good.
Thank you.
First exhibit is the application, which was actually submitted electronically.
please. The next exhibit is the refusal, and the refusal was back in 1960. This property was
granted a permit to construct these apartment buildings. The area where the property is
located is RSA 3, which does not permit multifamily housing. However, these buildings
were approved for construction in 1960 with 10 units. And what we're proposing is in three of
the units to add one additional unit in vacant space in the lower level of three of the buildings,
1800, 1808, and 1812. Right now, the space that's there is unused, and I'll show pictures of it
so you can see exactly what we're talking about.
But the refusal, again, was based on the fact that it was approved for 10 units.
It was built for 10 units.
However, there are basically 12 units in each of these buildings
with two of the units being used for either storage or utilities.
And so in three of the buildings, my client wants to take the vacant utility room
and convert that into a one-bedroom apartment.
The next exhibit, Exhibit A3, is the application for appeal, which included the tax compliance certificate and the notice of refusal.
Exhibit A4 is the project information form.
Exhibit A5 are the deeds or the deed and the original deed and the deed of correction, which was corrected to correct the legal description.
Exhibit A6 is a separate exhibit for the tax clearance.
Now, Exhibit A7 is the drawings that were prepared by my client's architect, and the architect is here if you have questions for later on.
I want to address with it a couple of points here to show the board.
Wait, that got a little bit big.
If you see the picture in the top center of the page, I don't know if you can read that, but you can see that the location of the buildings where the units will be added are along Benton Avenue, and there is no other residential area along Benton Avenue.
across the street it's all um uh there's no there's nothing there other than trees and and
and greenery uh the um the only residential properties uh near um near the buildings are
on front neck street and that's not where these these these units face um if you go to down to
The next page, this is basically a layout of what the units will look like once the – no, I'm sorry, I take that back.
This is the drawing of the units as they exist today, which is basically empty.
There's a storage area here.
There's a sink with a drain.
in one of them there's a washer dryer but it's unused all of that is unused
In one of them, there's a washer-dryer, but it's unused.
All of that is unused.
The next drawing is a drawing of the units themselves to be constructed.
And then on this page is basically a view of the lower level, which is this here is for 1814.
this is for 1808 this is for 1800 but there's four essentially four spaces on the on the lower level
this one that i'm pointing to for 1814 is the unit that's going that's proposed to be added
as an apartment there's a storage area and then on the on the excuse me counselor excuse me
Counselor, can you go back to the proposed plan for the lower level?
This is the proposed drawings for the units themselves.
Let me ask you, is there sleeping?
Is there anything sleeping in the basement?
Is there sleeping?
Is there a bedroom?
There's a bed. This is an apartment. Yes, this is an apartment that will have a bedroom, a one bedroom.
Right now, there's already two apartments in the basement or the lower level.
How many feet is the living space out of the ground?
That I can't answer, but the architect should be one of the participants and can answer that question.
Thank you.
but again there's already two existing units on that level if you see there's two existing units
in the basement currently yes you see where are they legal oh yeah there's 10 10 10 units in the
building thank you there's 10 approved units in the building if you see the lower part of this
where it says existing corridor and then below that it says adjacent unit there's a there's two
there's a unit there and then there's a second unit but it but it's but it says propose
basement plan so where is it currently plans for existing in the basement well look can i can i go
down a little bit to the next plan that i started the show and that'll explain that
all right let me make this larger
So this is, if we look at the one to the left, which is 1814, on the left is the proposed unit, on the right is the storage area that currently exists, and then below that you'll see there's two adjacent units, which are also on that level.
But the adjacent units
doesn't show me the design.
Excuse me?
The adjacent units do not show me
what's in there.
I don't know
if that's part of the plans that the architect
did. I'll have to look further.
Here's what
I'm asking.
Tom, maybe we can get the
architect on.
He's available.
All right.
I think he might be able to answer better.
Mr. Perkis, is the architect available?
Yeah, Kurt Jensen.
He should be...
Mr. Jensen, if you're available, please raise your hand.
I'll swear you in.
Yes, can you hear me?
You're a little faint.
Sorry about that.
Kurt, excuse me, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
I'm sorry.
Kurt Jensen, A-U-R-T, A-E-N-S-E-N.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Holloman has a question.
In your proposed plan, is there sleeping in the basement?
If Gary's in a little more, there is an existing stair on the top ends of each of those plans, and there was a door from the outside into each space of the basement.
The door is going to be replaced with a window in each of the proposed units, but the window is going to be sized large enough for egress.
What is the distance of the building out of the ground?
What is the height of the building out of the ground?
Um, Gary, if you can go through, um, later on your exhibits, you have photographs from Google Street View, I believe, which shows the, uh, the units and how they, how they relate to the ground. Yeah, there you go. I think you just went over it.
Gary, if you can go through later on your exhibits, you have photographs.
Yeah, if you can pull that up. So the buildings are half sunken on the, on the back of the property, but they appear to be three quarters of seven eighths of the way out of the grade on the front.
there's six feet out of the ground the wind is
uh well on the front yes on the on the rear there is a um there's a walkway that's at the
same floor level as the apartment on the outside but the rear doesn't seem to be six feet out of
the ground no but the rear has a walkway so it's dug out on the rear for the walkway
Do you have a picture of that?
I don't know if we have a photo in there or not of it.
I know it shows that on the plan.
No, that's the only picture we have of that type of view.
From that picture, I saw that the window is near gray.
In the existing apartment, yes.
so so the intent my understanding of what you're saying is the existing basement had apartments
the building is set up in a two by two fashion for three levels so currently the two units
towards the front on the lower part of the plans as we were looking at before those are existing
apartments. There was two storage rooms and utility rooms on the back, and one of those
storage utility rooms is going to be converted into an apartment in each of the three buildings.
I understand, but the slope of the grade is causing the back apartments to be too much below
grade. They're going to be below grade on the sides, but on the rear, there's a walkway that's
at the same floor level as the proposed apartment or the same floor level as the existing utility
storage rooms. From what I'm looking at, the windows on the side is not six feet out of the
grade. The window on the side? No, that's an existing apartment. The locations of the proposed
apartments is on the back side of the buildings in the photograph. And there's a walkway for
ingress and egress? Is that what you're saying? Yes. For the proposed units? Yes. Currently,
there's a door into the space but since it's going to become a bedroom the door is going to
be replaced with the window but with a window that meets egress requirements
but the building is still not six feet out of the grade
not on the back no so that's not legal
i i can't i'm not sure what you're saying legal in terms of philadelphia code building code or
ibc it has a it has an egress window though
can you show me your your proposed plan again in the basement
excuse me this is sharon can i interrupt for one minute i'm looking at the refusal
and um though the application that was submitted this is for one of the three properties was to
add one unit to existing 10 units the refusal only notes that it's being refused overall as
multi-family in a district that does not permit that use. There's no reference to the other 10
units being legal. I just wanted to bring that to the board's attention.
Well, one of the exhibits, the last exhibit that we have here,
the last two exhibits, are the approvals from 1960.
I understand, but however the board is going to decide, we might want some
clarification from LNI as to whether they consider those prior approvals, whether those uses were
abandoned or how they exactly what their refusal was based on. Was it based on all 11 units or
simply the addition of one unit? And it might just be a matter of clarification, but I suggest
that get that before voting.
Thank you, so noted.
All right, okay, Mr. Perkis,
does the board have any more questions?
Yes, I would like to see a section
Yes, I would like to see a section through the unit that they're proposing
through the unit that they're proposing.
so we can establish the distance departments out of the basement.
Okay, we don't have that at the moment.
However, Gary, can you zoom in on the top of that drawing right there?
So if you look at the, and this is typical for all three units,
there's stairs that are coming down on the left,
and then at the bottom of those stairs, that sidewalk grade level
is the same as the apartment on the inside.
But if you count the rises on the stairs,
your architect would know is well below the legal limits
for the height of the room
to be out of the green.
I'm not sure what code section
you're referring to exactly.
In my experience,
the code is primarily concerned
with egress,
which is what we're providing
with the window.
So I'd have to look at the code.
If you check with IBC,
Chapter 10, Section 2,
it'll tell you that.
okay but chapter 10 is egress and as i stated the code is in my experience and i'm not saying
you're wrong i'm just saying i don't know the specific code section you're referring to
but the impetus is for people being able to get out of a sleeping space and that that requirement
is being met as the window is on the back of the side back of the wall and it has easy access to
be able to get out of that space i see a chapter five of ibc
i i don't have access to the code right now i'd have to look it up so okay
uh any other questions from the board
no no anyone else anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
yeah we have senator john sabatina jr please unmute yourself senator and please wait for the chair
good morning senator please spell your full name for the record and i'll square you in
good morning chairman uh state senator john sabatina j-o-h-n-s-a-b-a-t-i-n-a
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Just based on several complaints about the apartment buildings and given their questionable legality and safety, I would join in opposing this application.
just and there's certainly no hardship to the property that I've seen and you know I
I think it's unnecessary so thank you. Thank you Senator. Anyone else would like to testify in this
case? Please raise your hand. Chair we have Lane Horn. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning. Please identify yourself. Spell your full name for the record.
Good morning. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
My name is Lee, L-E-E, Horn, H-O-R-N-E.
Where are you from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
I am the zoning chairman for the Rawhurst Civic Association.
We generally stand in opposition to any addition of multifamily properties in Rawhurst.
and we did hear from many community people
who stood in opposition to this
and we did send the letter of opposition
from our meeting.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Anyone else?
Yes, I would like to address if I can.
Just one second, Mr. Perkis.
Anyone else to testify?
I see no more hands-share. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Perkis. Yes. I hadn't finished my
presentation, although I didn't really have much more to show other than go through the
rest of the exhibits. However, I have been given no. I have not received any complaints
at all whatsoever from any of the neighbors uh neither has my client um in all of the and and
my client is is here to testify will testify that that they have not received any complaints in in
the uh 14 years that they've uh owned the property um from any of the neighbors
14 years that they've owned the property from any of the neighbors. At the RCO meeting that Mr. Horn
testified to, there were only two attendees other than seven board members. They did not raise any
objections during the meeting. There was no discussion of any issue because they didn't
bring it up. And I was told afterwards by Mr. Horn that two of the neighbors were concerned about
parking and and because two of the neighbors that attended were concerned about parking
the board the seven member board who was not from this area it just takes the position that
they're going to follow what what what whatever the whatever the attendees position is that are
in the neighborhood as far as parking goes there are 58 parking spaces at these properties and if
it would be possible for me to go back to the screen share, I can show you that pictures in
the evening and in the morning that show that the lot's not full. My client can testify that
they have not received any complaints about parking whatsoever in the 14 years they've
own the property. And so we are at a loss to understand what these complaints are and
to be able to address them. We'd be happy to address any complaints that anybody had.
If the board needs more information concerning the IBC code, we're happy to address that. If the
board thinks that would be helpful in rendering a decision. And if that's the case, we wouldn't
have any objection to continuing the hearing to a later date so we can resolve these issues.
All right, with that, I will ask the Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair DiCicco. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to RM1 at this location to reflect
the longstanding multifamily use on the site. And the proposed variance conforms to the
proposed RM1 zoning district. Assuming that the issues with building code can be sorted out and
that this property can be deemed compliant with all relevant building codes for the City of
Philadelphia, the City Planning Commission would recommend that the Board grant this variance.
I'm going to suggest that the record be closed and the Board discuss this at next Wednesday's
executive session. Chair, this is Sharon. I would also like to request clarification from L&I in
that time because, again, the refusal lists this as an application for 11 dwelling units, not for
the addition of one dwelling unit. I think it would be to the applicant's benefit to have that
clarified in advance of the vote. Thank you. Okay. As I said, this, the record will close,
the board will discuss this, but you'll, Sharon, you'll, you'll follow up on the L&I issue.
I will. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Thank you. I think the next case is Sean. Number eight, MI 2020-001-568-5039 Worth Street.
Mr. Ward is coming back in as a panelist okay Mr. Ward has been sworn in okay thanks Mr. Chair
please put your name and address on the record and spell your last name Mr. Ward
Good morning, Madam Vice Chair, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board.
Good morning.
Sean Ward on behalf of the applicant, that's S-H-A-W-N-W-A-R-D-331 East Street Road,
Trivos, Pennsylvania, 19053, on behalf of the applicant.
Thank you. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, 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 all.
Okay, thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you very much.
okay can we see my screen
yes but can you make it larger yep thanks uh this is my typical exhibit packet uh in this matter
yes but can you make it larger
i represent peter mirabelli he is the owner of 5039 worth street uh for today's hearing uh a1.1
is the original notice of refusal and a1.2 is the amended uh notice of refusal the expediter
I prepared an application. However, an expediter filed the application in my stead, and he incorrectly listed it as equipment and material storage as part of the construction of a new garage at the rear of this home.
So that resulted in a refusal for equipment and material storage. Buildings are not permitted in the zoning district.
pursuant to leave to amend and a request by the RCO to do so, we obtained an amended notice of
refusal for construction of the garage for use as accessory personal storage and which would include
personal items and a personal vehicle. That refusal resulted in the two-dimensional refusal
stayed the same 144 square feet for the rear yard and a nine foot rear yard depth whereas according
to the plan zero is proposed but i can address those issues additionally accessory structures
cannot exceed 130 square feet nor 15 feet in height that's very typical shed this isn't actually a
garage and obviously you couldn't fit a vehicle in 130 square foot structure so in any event we're
here to seek four-dimensional variances today. A2 is the ZBA application. A3, project information
form. A4, proof of ownership. A5, tax clearance. A6 are the site plans and elevation plans. A7
are photographs. A8 is the original RCO letter from the last hearing at which time they requested
that the matter be continued pending the correction to the refusal. A9 is my request for leave to
amend and an email thread to Ms. Sunket which she graciously granted and we obtained that
amended refusal as previously indicated. A10 is correspondence to and from the RCO regarding
the amended refusal. A11 if it was there would be the district council letter but
so if if Sloan does submit a letter I would ask that that be marked A11.
As always I look for relevant zoning history but none was found on this property.
A13 is the zoning map and A14 is the aerial photograph. So quickly you'll see the original
refusal was dated 813 of 2020 followed by Mr. Higgins and it was for equipment and material
storage. So that resulted in equipment and material storage refusal in addition to the
aforementioned dimensional variances for rear yard and rear yard depth. The revised refusal
dated March 17th of 2021, corrected the refusal for the accessory structure for use as personal
storage. That resulted in another dimensional variance, as previously mentioned, 130 square
foot and 15 feet height. The 144 square foot rear yard and nine foot rear yard depth
remain the same. So quickly, the application of appeal, project information form, copy of the deed.
Many pages to that. We also have the proof of tax plans. All taxes are paid through 2021.
With regard to the site plan, let me switch to this one.
Can I rest at this one?
This is the existing single-family dwelling which fronts on Worth Street.
The existing garage sits all the way to the rear of the property.
The property is shaped like a flag.
The house and most of the yard being the flagpole.
And in the rear yard where the existing garage is located would be the flag.
The applicant calls for the demolition of the existing small garage and for the erection of a
newer larger garage in which he could store his personal items and his vehicle.
It's accessed by a garage door at the back. Along the back of the property there is an access
way I would call it. It doesn't appear to be a paved or city street. I believe it's part of the
Amtrak railroad right away but it is used by all of the neighbors on Worth Street.
so there would be a garage door and a man door at the rear of the property another man door
into the rear yard and so again you would have the garage door with a man door and then
So, again, you would have the garage door with a man door and then the door into the rear yard leading up to that home.
So, going back to my packet, with regard to the rear yard dimension, although the rear yard is technically here,
there is ample room in between the garage and the house open area that could be used as rear yard space.
As a matter of fact, on the plane, you'll see there's 1,134 square feet of open area
between the garage and the home.
So I believe it meets the intent and spirit of the code by providing ample yard space.
However, it is not at the very rear of the yard.
So we're going to ask that the board consider that.
So again, we have the elevation plans.
Photographs, this is a picture of the front of the structure, the zoning poster.
The front of the house here is the one with the red copula or cornice.
Here's an aerial view from the rear.
This is the existing garage right here.
This is the yard leading up to the house.
As you can see, other lots on the block have substantial sized rear garages.
Here's another one. You can see here there's a garage, there's a garage. Here's our existing
garage and this gentleman down here also has a larger garage at the very rear. You can see the
alleyway or path for vehicular access to the rears. The property would be accessed through
Howarth Street off of Worth, and it would go around to the back of the properties.
At the last listing, the Frankfurt Neighbor Advisory Committee raised the issue with regard
to the use for personal storage and park the vehicle as opposed to what was stated in the
refusal. And then they asked that this case be continued until the refusal letter was corrected.
So that we did. Thereafter, I asked Ms. Sanket as moving party, I would relist the matter once the
refusal was amended, which was done. And then with regard to the correspondence between us and
um frankfurt uh we we answered all their questions regarding the use of the property
um my responses are in red then thereafter i confirmed that the use was for personal stores
that mr mirabelli confirmed that there be no commercial use thereafter we obtained a revised
refusal. I provided that to Frankfurt on May 13th asking for a revised letter. I then again
contacted them on June 30th where they said that they would get back to me by Friday the second
and I've heard nothing from them. So the property is zoned RM1. Here is a lot shaded. You can see
the flag look it's upside down but it's got that distinct flag shape look to it and again here's
another aerial photograph i highlighted in yellow the existing garage and given the fact that it's
accessory personal storage there's similar structures on the block there's no opposition
stated from anybody i would ask that the board grant the requested relief and permit
Mr. Mirabelli to erect a new garage at the rear of his property.
Mr. Mirabelli, I don't believe is with us today.
I was trying to get a hold of him yesterday, but I was unsuccessful.
But if he were here, I would ask the board to stipulate that he would verify and adopt
my representations as true and accurate.
Noted.
Thank you.
All right.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Sloan Folks. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yes, Sloan folks, S-L-O-A-N-E, F-S-A-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, Office of Counsel in Norea
of Sanchez, Rule 508 City Hall.
Went in earlier today.
Yes, sir.
Again, we are just simply,
we have reviewed the records
And we were aware of the letter that was forwarded to the ZBA on July 9th of, I believe it was last week.
and we knew we were aware of the letter
that was forwarded to the ZB.
We understand the applicant's position.
We are glad that you were able to present today.
We're simply asking for two weeks' hold so that the RCO can forward a letter to be put on the record for this various request.
Thank you. I know we discussed this earlier. Sharon, what is the technical language we need?
You are going to hold this until, I'm sorry, I think the RCO meeting is August 18th, is that right? Or am I confusing that with another case?
I did not receive any correspondence from the RCO with regard to this request.
I'm going to object.
They should have provided me a copy so I could address their concerns.
And there's just been no communication.
We did what they asked.
We met with them in accordance with the code, provided written notice to all the neighbors within 250 feet.
we amended the refusal as they requested to correct it to reflect the actual use
and to give them assurance that it was not going to be used for a commercial purpose so I would
Mr. Ward I am confusing this was another case on this morning's list I apologize
this one was going to be held for one week I believe for any letter submitted by the RCO
and by the council office to be read into the record.
The record will otherwise be closed.
And again, I would submit that the RCO is waived any right to submit anything at this time.
It should have been within 48 hours prior to the hearing.
We have to submit our exhibits five days before the hearing.
You're absolutely right.
But in deference to the councilwoman's office, we'll just wait one week and vote on it.
right thank one week thank you chairman thank you mr chairman members of the board thank you very
much that concludes my business may i be excused yes you may thank you thanks have a great day
all right mi mi 2020-002817 6948 keystone street this is a second listing and we still have not
received any exhibits. Is there anyone here to testify in this case? 6948 Keystone Street.
I see no handshare. Thank you MI 2020-002817. 6948 Keystone Street. My vote is to dismiss.
My vote is to dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Thank you.
MI 2020-0012168104 Caster Avenue.
John Sabatina, I believe this is John Sabatina Sr.
He's representing the applicant.
There's a letter of support from Longhurst Civic and also from Councilman O'Neill.
Mr. Sabatina is coming in as a panelist.
Good morning, Mr. Sabatina.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
And you have to unmute yourself.
John, before you begin, could I interrupt for a minute? I made a mistake on that last case of Worth Street. I failed to ask the Planning Commission its opinion. So if we could go back to Mr. Haggerty on 5039 Worth Street.
thank you chair to chico ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential zoning at this location the proposed
dimensions of the accessory building are substantially similar to nearby accessory
buildings and do not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code city planning
commission recommends that the board grant the variance thank you okay sorry mr sabatino you can
proceed now and I'll swear you in. Please identify yourself. John P. Sabatina. That's S-A-B-A-T-I-N-A.
Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Please proceed.
Yes, this is an applicant. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance
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 your co and do you have a letter yes to all the above thank you
you may proceed uh yeah this is an application uh for a use uh for uh a the portuguese american
Rosary Society of Our Lady of Fatima. We have met with the community and we have all, in addition
to our meeting, after the meeting, we provided them with copies of contracts for parking on the
facility, diagonally located across the street from the building itself, which I believe provides
20 parking spaces
in addition to any
of the on-street parking.
Let me go through
my application.
Let's roll it.
Here's the application.
We'll start with the application.
The refusal
proposed use.
Project information form
The form was filled out and sent in the deed.
Hang on, I'm sorry. Interruption.
Existing exterior photographs.
This clearly shows the posting with the zoning notice and the copy of the refusal.
That is obviously a picture of the building. It's a building that's shared with another entity.
This particular half of the building is what is going to be used for the Portuguese American
Rosary Society. This is the rear. We are suggesting an addition in the rear,
which is basically going to be a kitchen facility
that they will use for any get-togethers.
Here's the architectural site plan.
Okay, this is showing the proposed edition, one story edition, which I mentioned before.
Here's a zoning map.
Although this is in the middle of a residential area,
that building, any adjacent building,
has been used for commercial purposes for many, many years.
Previously in this space, there was a beauty parlor.
Many of the buildings of
Lancaster Avenue are zoned as residential,
but have been converted to commercial uses.
Just for the fact that I guess they can be
never changed the code and just basically allowed
everything by virtue of a variance. There's a community meeting letter.
Here's the mailings and the certificate from the post office showing
that we mailed all the letters. This is a tax compliance letter.
And this is the agreement for parking spaces, which I mentioned.
We have a couple of different agreements where the people who have commercial spaces in a parking lot that's located diagonally have agreed to allow people to park there whenever they have an event.
Here again is the RCO letter of support.
Mr. Sabatino, do you have your client available?
Yeah, he's supposed to be. Let me make sure, hang on for a second.
can you hold for a second i i if he's if he's not available we'll stipulate that
he would adopt your testimony
of you being an officer of the court if he's not
available.
For some reason
they don't have you signed in.
Did you sign
You registered?
Are you on the Zoom right now?
Yes, I am.
My client claims he's in.
What's his name?
Ferraro. Mario Ferraro.
We have a Maro with their hand up. Could it be underneath that user?
Yeah, I think that's him. Mario Ferreira, his name is.
All right. Mr. Ferreira, you can unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Good morning, Mr. Ferreira. Please spell your full name for the record and I'll swear you in.
F-E-R-R-E-I-R-A
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Mr. Sabatina?
Yes, Mr. Ferreira, you have been listening to the testimony that I have given before the board?
Mr. Ferreira?
Have you been listening to the testimony that I have given before the board on the mailings?
And what I have testified before the board, will you adopt that as your own testimony would be?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
I see no hands Chair. Thank you. Planning Commission. Thank you Chair Otiko Ian Hegarty
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map
changed to CMX2 at this location given the long-standing commercial use. The variance
conforms to the proposed zoning district. City Planning Commission recommends that the board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2020-0012168104 Caster Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you. I made a mistake as usual.
I passed over case number 11.
I scratched it out earlier this morning.
It is MI 2021-001-169-723-27 South 13th Street.
Again, my apologies.
17th Street.
South 17th Street.
and Mr. Mulvihill was sworn in earlier this morning
Mr. Mulvihill is coming in as a panelist chair
Mr. Mulvihill do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
that was a yes
okay name and address for the record and spell your last name
certainly leo movahill that's m-u-l b as in victor i h-i-l-l address 315 green street first floor
philadelphia 19123 have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
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 you may proceed all right good
morning chairman members of the board leo mobile today for the property at 723 to 27 south 17th
street i should be sharing my screen at this point so you can see all of my exhibit packing
um we have the refusal appeal and project information form of page one
area zoning maps of page six the condo declaration of page eight
there we go the client's commercial activity license at 38 tax clearance information at 39
zoning notification letter at 40 a letter of from south to south neighbors association at 44
zoning history of the properties at 45 and continues through to 124
Zoning history of the property is at 45 and continues through to 124.
I have photos of the property at 125 and revised plans at 163.
So members of the board proceeding first, let me do this.
So we're here today for what is essentially building three new single family homes within a condo association.
This subject lot was originally brought together as part of a lot consolidation back in the late 80s, early 90s.
Originally, this is a number of houses, buildings facing South 17th Street, which is where we have the 723 to 27 South 17th Street address.
And then three structures also on the narrower Chadwick Street to the east.
And those are the structures we'll be talking about specifically today.
It'll make more sense as soon as we get into the actual drawings and the site plans.
This is a mixed RM1 and RSA A5 zoning district.
But as I stated, this has been a number of condo units, eight in particular, for a number of years.
We received refusals because we're looking to, like I said, take those properties on Chadwick Street,
demo them, and create what is essentially three new single-family dwellings.
We do have my architect, Logan Dry on the line, and I believe the principals of Courtyard Condo Associates and Regis LP, my clients, are on the line as well.
So we receive refusals from multiple principal buildings on one lot.
As I stated before, this has always been multiple principal buildings on one lot, at least since the early 90s.
And multiple principal uses because we have single family and multifamily essentially on one lot.
um the hardship in this instance is this is already one lot one condo association um the
banks that own each the different notes um have made it almost impossible for us to try to re-subdivide
everything and re-assess each of these properties as single family dwellings the way that it's set
up right now would also be a detriment to the current condo association condo owners as they're
only responsible for everything inside the structures from drywall in rather than everything
on the outside. And I'll get into all of that in a moment as well. So members of the board,
here's our area zoning map. Let me zoom in on this and get a little bit clearer. So this is
South 17th Street. We're talking about these three lots here. They're split zone RM1 and RSA5. But
as I said, there was a lot of consolidation that was done back in the 90s. So here's the actual
parcel we're talking about. So this is 723 South 17th, which is two condo units, not part of this
application necessarily. 725 and 727, each of these two condo units, part of this whole condo
association, but not subject to this particular application. These three buildings here on Chadwick
Street are actually two different units. So this first unit is on the first and second story of
this two-story building and then goes into the second story of this unit. And then this unit of
Chadwick is first and second story and then also uses a garage. We're proposing the demolition of
all of those and building new structures of essentially the same floor plan. This is the
condominium declaration beginning on page eight. I'm just going to scroll through that.
this is my client's commercial activity license at page 38 tax clearance at page 39 our zoning
notification letter that went out for south south neighbors association
this is our proof of mailing oh maybe there's our proof of mailing at page 43
and this is a letter that we received from sasta sosna on july 8th 2021
sorry to interrupt could you enlarge that please yes
thank you so initially we had proposed a slightly different plan that did not have
a mansard style roof and also had some days based on feedback from the neighbors we changed
some things around. And at the initial community meeting, SOSNA asked us to come back for a second
meeting. We just attended a meeting of their architectural review committee the other day
and received additional feedback. We have now been slated to appear on their agenda for I believe
August 18th's RCO meeting. We've already sent out notices for that as well for a final vote.
What I'm showing now is page 46. This is an application that was submitted back in 1990 with respect to
That was submitted back in 1990 with respect to this current layout of the structure.
So it's an eight-family dwelling.
So there's, like I said, there's eight condo units.
There's two-car off-street parking on Chadwick Street.
Six families altogether on 723 to 27 South 17.
Two families altogether on 722 to 26 South Chadwick.
I'm going to scroll through that as well.
That's just for purposes of edification for the board.
And everything's going to be a little bit clearer now that we get to the phone number.
So looking to page 125 of our zoning packet, this is actually looking northbound on Chadwick Street.
You'll see 720 right here.
This is not part of the application.
We see new development, new additions going on to some houses north or on the block.
So 722, this is part of our application.
724, 726. These are all part of our application. So this, members of the board, as I discussed
before, 722 and into the top of 724, this is one condominium unit. Scroll into the next page,
128. This is also one condominium unit for the use of the two-car all-street parking.
These three will all be demolished.
and that's just a 360 view going through to page 136 these are the structures that currently exist
on south 17th we're not touching any of these these are either being rented out or are owned
by individual owners there's two units per structure and this is just a quick 360 view
of what we have going on here and then this is across the street
these are just some other existing structures in the area
showing there's significant multifamily in this area
and new construction
these are pictures of the zoning signs that were posted
and on Chadwick Street as well
all right Logan would you mind raising your hand
so you can be unmuted and testify for the record
well what you're showing us now is that chadwick street this is chadwick street yes
you're three single family well they are essentially three single family homes but
they're all part of one lot because it's just all part of one time association but
the demolish and create three single families correct yes correct
uh logan dry are you still on the line
oh my apologies my computer decided to go a little haywire on us
yep i'm here here we go
dr please identify yourself spell your first and last name i'll swear you
sure uh logan dry l-o-g-a-n last name d-r-y uh kca design associates 6525 tulip street
philadelphia pa 19135 architect of record you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth I do thank you okay Logan so we're looking at page 163 of the zoning packet
that I submitted these are the revised plans uh that we submitted for review of the architecture
committee can you please explain to the board what considerations you took into effect when you made
this design sure so one of the things we did because it was a condo association um we had the
overall site plan back from the association's formation um so as a result we basically had
the footprints of the existing homes on Chadwick Street, you know, sort of in our possession.
Okay, so Logan, I'm going to go to the next page that's going to show that site plan.
For the record, this is page 164.
Yep, so what we did is, yep, so what we did to your right of the screen, you'll see the
existing homes on 17th Street that aren't being touched. And then to your left side,
you'll see the three proposed homes that you just saw the renderings for. And what we did when we
went through and did these is we kept the the footprints of the new homes identical to the
footprints of the existing structures on the site a just because contextually it lined up with
the other homes on the block and also because we wanted to keep the different elements of the
condo association intact so we didn't want to affect you know anybody's yard space anybody's
fence lines and things like that within the association so we took the approach of keeping
you know keeping the existing footprints as they were and building new construction there which
also worked out with with the zoning that you kind of see towards the top there of the screen
which is actually reversed but we felt building single families on the RSA 5 portion of these
We felt building single families on the RSA 5 portion of these split zone bots made sense.
split zone bots.
And then we left the, you know, structures on 17th Street, which happened to be an RM1 alone.
So, you know, we kind of came to this design based upon the context of the existing houses on either side of us,
the existing houses that we're demolishing and hope to replace the new construction.
And then really when it came to, you know, meeting with the RCO and things like that,
There was some concerns with, you know, the three-story massing, which we can get into and talk about, you know, why we changed the mansard and things like that.
But, you know, that's sort of how we arrived at this design, you know, initially with the massing on our end.
And then, you know, the renderings, you see we work closely with SOSNA to sort of form those, you know, to be a little bit more respectful of the massing and some of the other new development on the block with the design of our mansards and our overall massing.
So, Logan, originally, these did not have a Mansart-style roof, correct?
Yeah, originally, they were three stories, and they also had a typical, you know, like you see in a lot of new construction, the two-story window bay on the front.
That's sort of where we started at, and then through, you know, two or three iterations, we removed the window bay, added a little bit more brick, did, you know, more contextual window openings on the second floor.
And then a third floor, like you can see in some of your previous photos, we wanted to mimic the additions that a lot of the other homes were putting on that had a mansard-style roof, a true mansard with a true dormer window.
And then we also, you know, matched things like cornice lines, you know, and window lines and sizes and proportions.
So, you know, we worked through a lot of that with SOSNA as well as their architectural committee to kind of make these fit in as contextually as possible.
all right so let's just go to the elevation so logan we see the elevation here the height of
these buildings is not to exceed 32 feet nine inches correct correct that's the height from
grade to the top of the roof structure and then you know obviously your pilot house which is set
back towards the middle of the building you know has the additional 10 foot there again we didn't
have any sort of dimensional variances for this project and we just got two variances as they
relate to use and multiple principal structures which again partially because of the condo
association formation and partially because of the split zoning nature of the lot.
Okay. Now, Logan, I want to direct your attention to this white space off to the right at 7,
what would be 722 South Chadwick. What is that?
So what we did there is there's currently a breezeway type alley that exists on the homes.
So, you know, we maintained that in the new construction just because, A, we felt it was a
better detail. That way everybody in the back has, you know, egress out to the front. Everybody will
have access to that easement in terms of condo association. And secondly, you know, we've done
ones where we've stricken those alleys and built over, but it ends up being a complicated process
that takes much too much time to survey district. And it's just not a good detail to have landlocked
buildings. So, you know, we've maintained it in the new construction that way. These three homes,
as well as the ones on 17th Street all have legal access and emergency access out of everybody's
rear yard. So it's just a better, safer detail. Okay. So overall, let's just get to the floor
plan quickly. I'm going to rotate these just so they're easier to see. So in the cellar,
we just have mechanicals and a bath, correct? Yep. So you got your mechanicals, bath and a den
in the front. So again, we didn't want to do any sort of egress. Well, in the front,
We have the egress in the back to keep the sidewalk, you know, which is kind of small, as clutterless as possible.
Your first floor plan, you'll see there, the building there, Leo, if you want to point to the home of the breezeway,
that's corresponding to that breezer that we talked about.
Otherwise, the three ground floors of these homes are all identical, you know, main living, kitchen, and dining space.
You take a set of stairs up to the front, in the middle there.
We should take you to the second floor.
Rotate this for the purpose of the record.
Pardon me.
Yep, so here over to your right-hand side, you've got, you know, your floor plans.
You've got two modestly sized bedrooms.
You've got a shared bathroom and your shared laundry.
Bedroom in the front and back.
Take that same set of stairs up to the third floor.
And there you can see the mansard in the front there.
towards the bottom of the screen and this floor has your master suite so you've got your dormer
window there you've got your bedroom that's size for a master suite you've got you know walk-in
closets by the stairs and then you've got your master bath in the back and then continuing that
same set of stairs up this takes you to the roof deck and pilot house level where again
you can see the the uh yeah you can see the denotation there of the mansard roof and the
uh yeah you can see the denotation there of the mansard roof and the dormer um and then again our
pilot house is kind of located as centrally as possible to minimize the overall massing from
you know front and rear building facades um let's go to the next page it's just the final elevation
showing the front and back page 169 of our zoning packet what kind of materials are we using for
the front logan yep so so you know we we you know revised our our plans from before that had you know
window bays and things like that on it to something that's a little bit more traditional
looking uh brick brick for the first two floors of the building um you've got your your double
hung windows with your grates um in them you've got your staircases for each of the buildings that
um you know take you in that are all masonry and then when you get up to the third floor there
you'll see a standing seam metal roof to be used for the dormer window as well as the
the mansard the other thing i would say leo too if you kind of go there contextually
over to the left you can kind of see some of the other heights of the building for instance on the
corner as well as then the heights of the buildings next to us that we you know match that cornice
line to and then for the and then for the rear facade we're just proposing a hardy panel
in the back. And then again, you can kind of see reference to that, you know, egress breezeway that
again, all of the homes will have access to. Okay. Do you have anything else you'd like to add at
this point, Logan? Nope. So members of the board, in this instance, the hardship is that we already
have an existing condo association and a, what is essentially one lot with principal structures on
it we're seeking to take away oh i'm sorry my camera's turned off there we go we're seeking
to demo what are essentially three existing structures and then build three existing
structures the hardship is that we have split zoning we have one lot um we can't really
subdivide the lots as they exist right now due to the nature of the condo association having
been in existence for quite some time um due to the fact it would adversely affect people
who are already in the association um and that's essentially it members of the board we're happy
to take any other questions at this time and if gary or eric if you guys are on the line would
you please raise your hand we can get you sworn in eric you can unmute yourself and please wait
for the board hi this is eric eric please uh identify yourself your full name my name is eric
Reisner, E-R-I-K-R-E-I-S-N-E-R.
You swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Mulvihill.
Hey, and good morning, Eric.
Eric, what's your association with the applicant in this case?
So I'm representing the ownership of this condo association, and it's Matt.
And Eric, you've heard my testimony today?
How long have you been involved in the condo association and the management?
Well, our family originally bought it, I'd say, 30 years ago.
And I recently came into the business less than four years ago.
Okay. You've heard my testimony today with respect to this application?
And you've heard Logan's testimony as well with respect to the application, community meetings, and design?
Is there anything that you would like to add at this time, Eric?
All right.
Would you allow someone to adopt my testimony as your own?
Great.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Nicole.
Nicole has been unmuted.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
good morning again ma'am you've already been sworn in but but identify yourself with the
record now please sure uh my name is nicole koniker k-o-e as in edward d as in david y-k-e-r
i'm the executive director for south of south neighborhood association or sosno
thank you and please proceed uh so this project was presented to sosno's community and zoning
committee on july 14th there was no community vote taken at the july 14th meeting because it
It was determined that neighbors and our zoning members would like to see the applicant revise plans and represent at a later date.
SOSNA's Architecture Review Committee met with the applicant last week to review their second iteration of plans
and provided final feedback on materials used, the location of utility meters, the reduction of the bulk stoops,
reduction of the overhang of the roof, consideration for the rear yard egress, addition of mansard roofs, and more.
While this feedback is considered aesthetic by the applicant, our zoning meetings are the only opportunity for near-
while this feedback is considered aesthetic by the applicant our zoning meetings are the only
opportunity for near neighbors and our zoning committee to provide recommendations on the
aesthetic of the proposal and provide context to the block it's expected that the applicant
will incorporate architecture review committee and community feedback and present final plans
to the community for a vote the meeting is currently scheduled for august 18th 2021 sasna
will submit a letter of recommendation following that meeting's community vote to fulfill the zba's
hear and hold request. Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
I see no hands here. Okay. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair DeChico. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RM1 and RSA5 zoning on this lot.
the proposed buildings facing Chadwick Street are substantially consistent with what would be
permitted for individual lots and are also consistent with adjacent development in terms
of use in bulk. City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variances.
Thank you. I believe we all agreed that we would hold a vote on this until we received
a letter from the RCO, Sassana.
Is that accurate, Mr. Mulvihill?
Yes, Chair.
Chair, if I could, that was also from
Councilman Johnson's office
who were going to read the letters into the record.
If you could announce the date,
if Ms. Sunkett agrees,
since it is just the reading of the letters,
the next hearing following the 18th
is August 25th, I believe.
So if it could be, the letters could be read and it could be voted after the executive session on August 25th.
Again, if Ms. Sunkit agrees.
Yes, Ms. Saleta, no problem.
So what has just been read into the record by Ms. Saleta is what will take place.
So we'll hold the vote until August, what was that, the 25th?
we'll wait yes yes yes chair i'll be 25th at 9 30. okay thank you okay i believe this concludes
unless i missed another case somewhere concludes the 9 30 list thank you members of the board thank
you any other chair um sharon did you mention to the chair about number 10 is it
I may have just missed it I heard that number nine was dismissed was number 10 also read into
the record as dismissed yes okay thank you okay we're all done I'm sorry we did read that into
the record yeah I'll do it again but I remember Latrice's name but I'll read it in again
And MI 2020, that's 002-817-6948 Keystone Street.
My vote is to dismiss.
My vote is to dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Dismiss.
Any other unfinished business for the 930 list?
um if chair if you don't mind could you just read the um s if anybody has been waiting for
something that has been presented there anyone out there who has not yet been heard
chair we have latrice burrell would you like for me to unmute her so she can speak
yes miss burrell please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
Ms. Burrell, please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Hello. Good morning, everyone in attendance.
My name is Latrice Burrell, and I am the property owner at 6948 Keystone Street.
Ms. Burrell, you have not sent us any exhibits. This was your second listing.
um um i'm a little confused as to how this process goes sir because i had a community
meeting on march the 10th 2021 i'm sorry so we pause a moment please cheer if you don't mind
uh could you swear her in and can she please uh spell her name for the court reporter thank you
ma'am please please spell your full name full name latrice l-a-t-r-i-c-e last name burrell
b-u-r-r-e-l-l wherever from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do
Where we're from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I'm just a little confused as how this process goes, sir.
I had a community meeting on March the 10th, 2021.
And during that meeting, I was told by the neighborhood associations that once I, well, I had put in a request for my application.
to be changed to the proper verbiage
because I was told that the verbiage
was placed incorrectly on the application
and I wouldn't have to go through
all of these meetings for changes and variances
for what I was trying to, for my project.
And I also had full community support
for my project.
Any reason why you did not submit exhibits?
to to the board and that's what i'm saying i didn't know what exhibits to it to um to submit
sir i don't i don't i'm not making any changes or anything to the property or anything like that
i'm trying to open up a group home and there will be no changes to the property but we don't know
what that property looks like because we don't have exhibits okay so can i have a continuance
then i don't i don't who do i talk to about what am i supposed to put submit and everything like
that i'm sorry chair can i interject yes i'm just gonna ask you um so miss burrell did you receive
um the posters to post on the property along with that instructions about hearings where would i
have received them from an email from the uh rcozba phillip.gov and it was sent by jason hand
did you post the property with the orange posters i mean okay just the poster
no can i have any can may i request the continuance today so i can look further into this
because like as i was told previous prior to this hearing today i didn't have to go through all of
that because the verbiage for the project was incomplete incorrectly put into the computer
for what I requested originally.
Chair, if I could also mention to Ms. Burrell,
please be mindful that the Zoning Board of Adjustment
is the only one who can give you guidance and directions
on how to proceed with a hearing
and as far as instructions
to what should be submitted before the hearing.
So unfortunately, you were giving misinformation
from whomever you spoke with.
So it's the call of the board as to whether they wish to continue the case, but all your instructions or questions, inquiries, should only come to the zoning board staff so we may give you accurate information.
Thank you.
Yeah, I understand.
But Ms. Burrell, the only concern I have is this was the second listing.
Apparently, you did not attend for the first listing.
Wait a minute.
The first listing?
it was continued it was no it was continued I had my I had a community
we we we continued the first hearing and this is the second hearing and you've not yet submitted
any exhibits I'm gonna what I'll suggest in all fairness uh if it's all right with you Tanya
maybe you can have an offline conversation and then advise us before we begin the two o'clock
hearing you think that will that work um sure it's totally your call my recommendation because
of the misinformation would be a continuance okay we'll do a straight out continuance then okay
thank you very kindly chair thank you thank you i could i mentioned uh could you please reach out to
rcozba.gov with any questions and we'll assist okay thank you okay so we're going to make a
correction MI 2020-002817-6948 Keystone Street is continued. Thank you. Any other business before
on the 930 list? Thank you Chair. I believe that completes everything. Thank you. See
everyone back at two o'clock. Thank you all. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. Thank you.
Okay, and Tanya and Fatina will give you a few minutes, you'll let us know when we're
ready to roll.
No, everyone is here, sir.
We're all ready.
All good?
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearings, along with our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tineri,
I'll be participating in today's hearings, along with our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere.
Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James
Snell, Board Administrator, Ms. Fatina L., and our Board Attorney, Rebecca Cole, are
also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through
some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to the hearing.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded, and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded, and that the recording will
be made available to the public on the web or otherwise.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your
hand by hitting star 9, and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat that.
to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548
and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I would also like to remind everyone at this time,
please do not attempt to testify in the chat.
Any questions you have should be directed to our administrator, Ms. Fatina El.
and having said that I will now read off the two o'clock list the cases that have been
requested to be continued. Number two on our list MI 2021-000 551-1618 North 54th Street
MI 2021-001430, 1905 Orthodox Street, and number 11 on our list, MI 2021-001569, 760 South 18th Street.
If anyone objects to the cases that I've just been read into the record as being continued, please raise your hand at this time.
If you object to any of the continuances I read into the record, please raise your hand.
Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the Board.
Rachel Pritzker, R-A-C-H-A-E-L-P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA 19103.
you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed
thank you chairman so um i represent the owners of 760 south 18th street similar to a matter that
the board heard this morning with mr movahill uh this matter um is asked to be continued not based
on anything related to the refusal um based on some aesthetic changes that we've actually already
made and uh that we've asked uh sasna if they would uh allow us to do a hear and hold and we
would ask the board if we could do a hear and hold. There's no issues or with support related
to the actual refusals. However, it was just in order to have the community see revised plans
that we've actually already provided to the SOSNA's R Committee. They made an updated
recommendation and we've actually delivered to near neighbors. So we're asking for a hear and
hold and we hope that that would be granted similar to Mr. Mobihill's case. It's exactly
the same situation. We'll handle it the same way unless there's an objection from the SOSNA
If there's anyone from SOSNA, please raise your hand.
I think it was Nicole was on earlier this morning.
Hi, this is Nicole.
Hi, Nicole.
You're still on the oath from this morning, but please identify yourself.
Spell your name.
Nicole Kodeiku, K-O-E, as in Edward, D as in David, Y-K-E-R.
I'm the Executive Director for South and South Native American Association,
and we're amenable to proceeding the same way we did earlier
for the Logan Hill project,
but we would like to hear testimony today.
Thank you very much.
Okay, anyone else object to any of the requests
for continuances that have been read into the record
for the two o'clock list?
Chair, we have Lionel Ginsberg.
Please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Ginsberg.
Please identify yourself with the record, spell your full name, and I'll square you in.
Good morning, Chairman.
Good morning, Chairman.
Lionel Artem Ginsberg, L-I-O-N-E-L, last name A-R-T-O-M, hyphen G-I-N-Z-B-U-R-G.
Lionel Artem Ginsberg, LION.
My work address is 834 Chestnut Street, Suite 206, Philadelphia, PA, 19107.
I'm an attorney for interested parties on the 760 South 18th Street, and we wish to bring to the board's attention...
Excuse me, one minute, sir. I need to swear. You swear a firm to tell the truth.
Whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do. I would ask that the testimony not be taken today.
It has been thoroughly documented in the zoning board that the requirements of 14-303 regarding posting of notice signs has been thoroughly violated.
developer. I would argue that there is no notice, no jurisdiction, and I would ask that the ZBA
continue it. I'm sorry, sir. You're fading it out. I would argue that the notice was not posted.
It has been thoroughly documented, and I would request that the ZBA continue it on that basis.
This is for 760 South 18th Street? Yes. We are going to hear testimony.
we will be hearing testimony but the board will not make we will not vote
on this matter until we receive uh correspondence from the rco and and your client as well i i would
ask that that it'd be that it'd be uh held open in that there was no there were no there was no
notice posted again you faded you would ask i'm sorry i would ask i would ask that the record be
held open in that there was no notice posted the orange signs never went up all right let's wait
till we get to that case when we'll discuss it further thank you anyone else is there anyone at
this time who would like to request a continuance or withdrawal chair we have richard please unmute
yourself and wait for the chair good afternoon sir please identify yourself for the records
I'll spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Hi, my name is Richard Glaniak.
I'm on the Sassana Zoning Committee.
Also, I'm a Democratic Committee person.
And I'm not in agreement.
Richard, spell your last name.
My apologies.
It's G-L-I-N-I-A-K.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Okay, please proceed.
um i'm not uh totally certain about the uh hold and uh have a hearing today i don't necessarily
agree with that i don't believe the community is uh would agree to that as well there were some
issues uh with regard to tearing down the front facade and cornice line and i know the majority
of the neighbors that spoke at the sasna zoning committee had concerns with that as well so
So I can't, I don't think the, how the lawyer depicted the case, as far as everybody agreeing to the refusals, I don't believe that's the case at all.
Did you say you were a member of the Sassner board?
The Sassner zoning committee. I'm also a Democratic committee person.
I understand that, but you're a member of the committee.
Yes, I am.
And the committee, at least unless I'm mistaken, correct me, Nicole, could you set some light on this?
I mean, I'm getting conflicting comments from the board, SOS and the board.
Yeah, so to clarify, Richard, the hearing hold means it would be heard today, but they would need to come back at a later date to present to the community for a final vote.
and then we'll write a letter of recommendation based on that and they'll have to provide more
notification for that meeting. So that's what the Hear and Hold means for today.
So in the future there won't be any hearing or testimony given? It'll just be whatever
the letter from SOSMA will be? Yeah, testimony will be heard today.
And no time in the future? Correct.
well well let me just to the record i don't believe in in the how the situation was depicted
by the lawyer that that's the case i don't believe the community was an agreement to the variance
i agree um yeah and that would be i mean that would come out in the vote that we have later on
with which is a public vote um of the project it's a okay a redo of the zoning meeting
All right. Excuse me, Chair. I wasn't aware of the here and hold and what that entails. So my apologies.
All right. Excuse me, chair. I wasn't aware of the here and hold and what.
Sorry, we talked about it. We talked about it earlier this morning with another project.
No worries. No worries, Richard. No problem.
All right. Thank you so much.
Thank you. All right. Anyone else who would like to request a continuance or withdrawal, please raise your hand.
I see no hands, Chair.
Okay, with that, we can begin with number one on our list, MI 2021-001-563-1443 North 8th Street, Mr. Notkinson.
there's a letter of non-opposition from the association I'm not sure how to pronounce that
Puerto Rico Puerto Rican association of I'm not sure. Can you put your name and address on the
record please and spell your last name Mr. Nockamson. Yes good afternoon Madam Vice Chair
good afternoon Mr. Chair members of the board my name is Alan Nockamson A-L-A-N last name
N.O.C.H.U.M.S.O.N. Address 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
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, refusal 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 in all respects. Okay you may proceed. May I share my screen? Sure
we love screens. I know one day we'll hopefully be in person hopefully 2022. Good afternoon again
Alan Occamson I'm here to present 1443 North 8th Street. I think I heard the chairman state while
I was transitioning over as a participant of this matter that it was indicated that the coordinating
RCO issued a letter of non-opposition which is correct so you'll see this is a project of 1443
North H Street we are between Jefferson and Master and it goes street this property goes street to
Street from 8th Street to Perth and you'll see my table of contents you'll see the deed to the
property the certificate of tax clearance showing where good standing with the City of Philadelphia
notice of refusal application for appeal zoning maps and other maps of the area photographs of
the property in the surrounding area architectural plans and drawings and most importantly the letter
of non-opposition from the coordinating RCO. This property is owned by NHA Development LLC.
They develop throughout the city of Philadelphia. They're well-regarded and well-known within the
city of Philadelphia for their quality of workmanship and product. They do a mix between
selling of houses as well as holding. This one is probably hold. They do self-manage their
properties as well. On the line, I have Tony Chabon, the owner of NHA Development. They've
been in existence for over 10 years. I also have on the line Logan Dreyer's architect who can
answer any questions. Certificate of tax clearance showing that we are good in good standing in terms
of our real estate taxes, our notice of refusal. So this is an RM1 property. All we're asking for
Harold, could you enlarge some of those documents, please?
Is that better?
Yeah, so this is an RM1 property.
We're not, you know, we're just, we're at like almost four and a half units out of five.
And, of course, the city with the zoning code rounds down.
And, you know, here it wouldn't be an opportunity to round up, but we're closer to four and a half than four here.
And we're allowed us to write four units.
We're asking for five units.
Given the configuration of the property, it makes sense.
We are a property that goes street to street, as you will see, and just the way it's laid out, it makes sense for this property to have five units rather than four units.
Here's our application for appeal to the ZBA, as well as our notice of refusal and our project information form.
And then maps of the area. I'm just going to scale back just a little so you can have a little more perspective.
But again, we're between Jefferson and Master. We are on 8th Street, and here's Perth in the rear. Again, RM1. We're just trying to add a half an extra unit, essentially, to this project.
And here's a Google map showing where we are in the neighborhood as well. And then photographs
of the property. It's a vacant lot, well-maintained, NHA, that's what they do. When they purchase a
property, they make sure that they properly fence it and maintain it until development.
This is the property from the perspective of North Perth Street.
This is the property from the perspective of North Perth Street. And then here's just, you know,
for perspective purposes, North 8th Street to the right of the property, North 8th Street to the left
of the property, North Perth Street to the right of the property, North Perth Street to the left
of the property. There are no dimensional variances here, just a use variance. And then here are plans
and drawings. If you don't mind, I'll just make it a little smaller so you can see a little better.
But this is a brick facade. You know, we're trying to keep within the architecture of the city of Philadelphia, but with a modern twist.
Again, no height variances, no dimensional variances at all.
You'll see this large open area in the back, you know, which faces Perch Street. That's where the garbage would be stored for all the residents.
and then just i'm just gonna just and if you need um it to be bigger that i'll obviously do it uh
but you know the if is there an elevator in this building no there is not how do the people on the
third floor get the trash down i guess down the steps down the steps there's two sets of staircases
So this is the second set of staircases going out of Perth.
That's how they would store the trash back here.
So there's, you're welcome.
There's two units on the first floor, and then the second, third, and fourth floors each have a unit each.
Is there a unit in a basement?
Yes, there's bi-level units in the first floor.
Each of the first four units, unit A, unit B, have bi-levels, are bi-level.
And sleep at the basement?
So we do anticipate, I want to, let's see, I just want to make sure, there are bedrooms in the basement, but again, the first floor unit and the second floor unit have, so the rear unit, because it goes street to street, has a second form of staircases as well.
So it's not like the rear unit has to go through the whole building to get there.
So they would have their secondary entrance or exit from Perth Street.
Same thing with the first floor units.
They would have like 8th Street, and they obviously both have egress wells as well with steps leading up from the lower level.
So we met with the APM organization.
and they were in, you know, the organization we met
and, you know, the attendees were in non-opposition
to this project.
You have your client to adopt your questions?
Yes, yes, I do.
Mr. Chabon, can you virtually raise your hand?
Mr. Chabon has been unmuted.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good afternoon, sir. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
You need to unmute yourself, sir.
Tony Shaban, S-H-A-B-A-N.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Mott.
Yeah, Mr. Shaban, you heard everything I stated today.
Correct.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt as your own testimony?
yes thank you questions from the board no no anyone else like to testify please raise your hand
i see no hands here thank you planning commission good afternoon david fecto f e c t e a u with the
City Planning Commission.
You sweat more for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential
single-family use.
However, during the zoning map changes in 2017, we left this block zoned multifamily
because most of the buildings on the block have been built as multi-unit buildings.
We recommend the board grant the requested variance.
Thank you.
MI 2021-001-563-1443 North 8th Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is no.
Thank you.
I think we go to number four because two and three were continued.
All right MI 2021-001-564-1938 Tesker Street. There's a letter of
All right.
MI 2021-001-564.
opposition from Point Free CDC but it looks like the vote was two to two. Two in favor and two
opposed I think. Mr. Nockam, do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. Do you have 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 if you met with the RCO and do you have a letter yes in all respects thank you you may
proceed all right thank you all right can I share my screen sure all right so I'm here to present
1938 Tasker Street this is a property between 19th and 20th in Fernand and Dickinson in the
Point Breeze section of Philadelphia. You'll see from this rendering as well as the architectural
drawings, plans and drawings, we try to match from the scale point of view what the building
structures in that area are. And from a use point of view, it's not uncommon for a property
that's RSA 5 to have multifamily use in the vicinity. My typical packet of materials,
table of contents, deeds of the property, certificate of tax clearance, notice of refusal, application for appeal,
maps of the area from a city perspective on Atlas as well as Google,
photographs of the property in the surrounding area, architectural plans and drawings,
and the correspondence from the Point Breeze CDC.
We also have a petition as well of support from many of the neighbors on that block,
which includes the nearby neighbors at 936 1936 and 1940 Tasker Street as well make that a little
bit larger yep better perfect all right sorry about that you know it's hard for me to sometimes
maneuver when it's so large so uh but uh this property is owned by uh Danny Dacu
and then you'll see the tax clearance i'm just going to just step take a step back so from a
perspective standpoint you can see a little better um but you know you'll see that there
was a balance that was on this property for 2021 that balance was actually paid as you can see
from this receipt showing that so that now the property owner is compliant in all respects with
respect to this you know the obligations to the city uh the notice of refusal so this is an rsa
5 property and we have two refusals the first is to use as an rsa 5 property we're trying
the by the way the refusal states that we want to have three units after meeting with the community
and talking to many members of the community both at the community meeting and then afterwards
you know to when we canvass the neighborhood we think it's more appropriate to make this into a
two-unit, not a three-unit. Although it would be satisfactory, we think it's probably better
in terms of just how the community felt about it to make this into a two-unit.
The second refusal is an open area refusal. It's not uncommon because of the size of this lot.
It's almost 900 square feet to have issues with open area. The width of the property is only 14
feet wide so given the width of the property we in order to have the staircase you know have
have a functional staircase we would have to go from front to back and we need that extra depth
open area or building coverage to account for that so whether it was a multi-family structure
or a single family structure we would be we would run afoul of the zoning code of Philadelphia
with respect to this refusal so here's our application for appeal
as well as our refusal, as well as our project information form.
Then maps of the area.
Again, we're between 19th and 20th, between Vernon and Dickinson on Tasker Street.
And then you can see from a Google Maps standpoint.
So photographs of the property.
Right now we're a vacant lot.
We're between an older construction property and a newer construction property.
You can see pictures on Tasker Street from the right of the property to the left of the property.
And then here, again, my philosophy in terms of zoning variance practice, if I walk by the property used or built as proposed and it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb, then it's something that makes sense.
Obviously, with the input of the community and with the deference to this board, but if you look around the neighborhood and look at other RSA 5 properties, there are other multifamily uses within the vicinity.
There are other multifamily uses within the vicinity.
So 15...
So 1541 South 20th Street, 1535 South 20th Street, 1506 to 1512 South Opal Street, 1928 Fernand Street, and then here are our plans and drawings.
So again, we're trying to do a brick facade, a more white-ish, yellowish brick facade,
but still a brick facade to try to mimic the historic nature of, you know, the Point Breeze
section of Philadelphia. And then let me just reduce the size of this so it's just easier to
maneuver. I'm trying to get to floor plans. Yeah, here are our floor plans. So it's the typical
three-story duplex that we present to the city of Philadelphia. Here there is no bedrooms in
the basement. It's an open floor plan, but the first floor unit, you walk through the front
door. You go to right to unit A. You go up a flight to unit B. Unit A is first floor and
lower level. It's one bedroom, one bath. Unit B is going to be three bedrooms, two baths.
And then correspondence from the Point Breeze CDC. So just again, just, you know, full disclosure.
make that large and large yes yeah so full disclosure mr chairman i heard you state that
it was a split vote it was a split phone in this sense the actual board itself voted 2-2
they they voted 2-2 in in terms of this project essentially non-opposition this project the
coordinating the rco though opposes this project because there were eight individuals there two
in support of the project, six opposed to the project. So just full disclosure, that was the
vote. So that's when we decided to canvass the neighborhood, right? Because my understanding,
and I don't want to say anything wrong, but if memory serves me right, there was no one on that
block or on Vernon Street that was in opposition, my understanding of memory. So I asked my client
to canvass the neighborhood. And I said to him, most important thing is, who are the people most
affected, 1936 and 1940. So if you look at this, this letter, and this is, you know, this petition
that we distributed, 1910 Tasker Street, 1912 Tasker Street, 1914 Tasker Street, 1916 Tasker
Street, 1918, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 40, 42, 21, 1911. So he really tried his best to
reach out to members of the community when we did not have a vote which I which we thought were was
should have been reflective of what's around there so we actually reached out and most importantly
we got the support of 1936 as well as 1940 Tasker Street and just again to reiterate the board
itself the one that hears cases every single month and gives letters to this to this board
their executive board essentially was a non-opposition they were 2-2 the only reason
why they wrote a letter in opposition is they're saying that the people who were at the meeting who
voted were in opposition. But as you can see from this letter in this petition, the people of this
block are in support of this project. So with that, I have Beckham Daku, the owner's representative
on the call or online, if you can virtually raise your hand, who's going to adopt my testimony.
Good afternoon, sir. Please spell your full name, first and last name, and I'll swear you in.
I am Daku, B-E-K-I-M, last name D-A-K-U.
Where are from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Notkinson?
Yeah, Mr. Daku, you heard everything I stated tonight.
Correct.
And is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Questions from the board?
Anyone else like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
Chair, we have France Pierre.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Pierre, good afternoon.
You're still under oath from earlier this morning.
Please identify yourself.
Mr. Pierre, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Pierre, please unmute yourself.
Let's go to the Planning Commission and come back to Mr. Pierre.
Planning Commission?
Great.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the Board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for residential single-family use.
This is an 886 square foot lot.
There is nothing unique about this property
that would prevent it from being used
in conformance with the code.
We recommend the board deny the requested variances.
Thank you, Mr. Pierre.
Chair, we also had Ms. Gamble.
Let's get Ms. Gamble if she were ready
and then we'll come back to Mr. Pierre.
Okay, please unmute yourself, Ms. Gamble.
How are you doing?
hi please uh identify yourself uh first and last name hi this is petra gamble i am the
coordinating rco member last name yeah first and last name first name is p as in peter i e t as in
tom r a my last name is gamble g as in game a m as in man b as in boy l e you swear for him to tell
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you, Ms. Campbell. Please proceed.
So as Mr. Newsom explained that we did have a split vote with the board ourselves, but the
community, as for what I can remember, they wanted a single family home. They didn't want apartments
at all. I appreciate the fact that he went around in the neighborhood and did get votes from people
that were close to it, but the votes that we have were within a two-block radius. So at the time,
the people were totally against this project so as we stand as a group we are still against this
project we would rather see a single family home there instead of apartments thank you
mr chair just one other thing if the board should grant the variance we would ask for a proviso
to reduce the request from three units to two units
did we get mr mr france
Is there anyone else out there
while we're waiting for Pierre?
No, Chair, there's no one else.
I don't see Mr. Pierre.
How many square?
The Planning Commission, you said that property is what?
800 square feet?
Yes, sir.
I believe
886 square feet.
Which if this was an RM1 property, we'd fall well within the confines of the property of the code.
MI 2021-001564-1938 Tasker Street. My vote is no.
My vote is yes.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
Okay, got it.
Thank you.
Next case is number five on our list, MI 2021-0015671939 Poplar Street.
That's Mr. Clinton, and we do have a letter, but we don't have a letter from the RCO.
Hi, Mr. Clinton, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last
name, please?
Sure. Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N, address 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19146.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and don't think about the truth?
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And finally, have you emailed the exhibit packet in 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, in all regards, and I do have a letter of support.
Okay, great. You may proceed.
Can I share my screen?
Thank you.
Coming up.
Can you see that?
I'm sure.
So I'm just going to go page by page. This is my cover sheet for 1939 Poplar Street.
Table of contents. I ask that all these exhibits be admitted into evidence. I'll walk through each
one. My appearance statement for today's hearing. The refusal. This is a request for a parking space
in the rear of an existing single family house.
I have several photographs to give you a perspective.
The property is on Poplar Street,
but the small street behind Poplar Street
to the north is George Street.
And there's about 10 or 12 other parking spots,
both on Cambridge Street to the north
as well as on Poplar Street.
And when I show you the photographs,
that picture will tell the entire story.
So here's the referral, I mean, the refusal rather,
indicating that a parking space is not permitted unless it is nine feet in depth or close to that
and that the parking spot is prohibited in the front side and rear yard.
Here's the RCO letter of support from the Francisville Neighborhood Development Corporation.
It was forwarded after the five-day period, but nevertheless, we did get it, and it is supporting the project.
Here are the photographs.
An aerial view indicating this is the rear of Poplar Street, and to the north is Cambridge.
The small street, again, behind Poplar is George Street.
This is looking north at the facade of the single-family home.
this is giving you an aerial perspective to the right would be to the east and you can see that
there's several parking spaces there and also to the north you can see that there's parking spaces
in two or three locations already
now we're looking east on george street which is a small street behind poplar as i've said
and you can see that their vehicles are already parked on cambridge street as well as on poplar
street in fact the adjacent neighbor at 1937 has a parking space also in the rear we have turning
radius per the streets department and we have a curb cut there already again this is a face-on
view of the rear parking space this is looking westbound to give you another perspective of
george street this is the part the two parking spaces directly across the street from the rear
of my client's property and here's the zoning plan again it's an existing single family house
and the proposed parking spot is in the rear you can see there's ample turning space and
turning radius to get into the rear of the property like the other properties on the block
the remaining documents are pro forma documents that you will see in all of my applications which
is the tax certification, the project information sheet, also the project information form,
and our zoning map, which is redundant. That's the second time it's in there. The deed indicating
the owner, and I have a representative of the owner on the line with me, Mr. Joel Schmidt.
And that's basically my presentation for today. I asked if I could have my client
uh adopt my testimony and if there's any questions uh from the board we certainly
will entertain them does the board have any questions no no no are there any witnesses
i only have witness uh my client just your client okay um do you want to bring him up
sure his name is joel schmidt if he could be unmuted
Joel has been unmuted. Please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Mr. Schmidt, could you give your name and address for the record?
Joel Schmidt, that's J-O-E-L-S-C-H-M-I-T-T, 105 Rebecca Drive, Downingtown, PA, 19355.
Planning Commission?
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry, Madam Vice Chair?
I'm sorry, Madam Vice Chair.
I just want to swear in Mr. Schmidt.
And I'll let you go with that.
Ms. Sunkin, I didn't hear what you said.
I'm asking, could you swear in the witness for Mr. Sunkin?
Oh, sure.
Thank you kindly.
Sir, do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Schmidt, were you on the call?
did you hear my testimony throughout this presentation yes i did if you had the opportunity
to testify would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct and accurate yes
thank you mr schmidt with that i rest madam chair thank you planning commission
thank you very much chair vice chair tenari and members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends this property for residential single-family use this is a pre-existing
parking pad which seems to mirror the other parking pads on this block we recommend the
board approve the requested variance thank you one second calendar number one five six seven
1939 poplar street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
Thank you very much. Sure. Good luck. Calendar number 1562-3121 Jasper Street.
Attorney is Alan Nockamson.
Mr. Nockamson is coming in as a panelist.
Hi, Mr. Nockamson, can you put your name and address on the record? Spell your last name,
please. You're already sworn in.
Alan Ockamson, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19109.
Thank you. You are sworn in. 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 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?
Okay, you may proceed.
Can I share my screen? Yes, there is a letter of opposition from the Harrogate Civic Association
and Councilman Squilla is also in opposition. That's for the record. Good afternoon,
I'm still Alan Occamson and I'm here to present 3121 Jasper Street. This is a corner property
in the Harrogate section of Philadelphia. As you'll see from the photographs of the property,
There's a mix between RSA-5 properties, IRMX properties, as well as RM-1 properties.
Particularly, you'll see a picture of a property which is across the street, which is an RSA-5 property, which is an HVAC warehouse.
So it's not uncommon that the zoning in this part of town is a little jumbled up.
But it is a corner property, as you can see from at least in the front page of my materials, my client has kept it in good repair.
So you'll see this table of contents, which is my typical table of contents, deed to the property, certificate of tax clearance, notice of refusal, application for appeal, maps to the area, photographs of the property, as well as the surrounding area, and architectural plans and drawings, as well as correspondence from the Harrogate Civic Association.
I also have a letter of support from the next-door neighbor.
The next-door neighbor would be the one who would be most impacted generally with the increase of use of the property.
And we met with them, and they are in support of this project.
So this property is owned by Jasper Flats, LLC.
I do have online Avram Ozlik, the owner's representative, who will adopt my testimony.
Certificate of tax clearance showing that we're in good standing with the payment that was due.
Notice of refusal. So we are an RSA 5 property, but as you can see, you'll see this is a corner property.
Most of the other properties on the different corners in this part of Philadelphia, there are examples of multi-unit CMX 1.
Across the street is completely RM1, and across the street from there is the HVAC facility, which is RSA 5.
Our application for appeal that we filed with the ZVA maps to the area.
So this is the RM1 property that is across the street.
The RSA 5 property is on Clementine. We're in the corner of Jasper and Clementine.
The RSA 5 property is on Clementine. We're in the corner of Jasper and Clementine. So what we're looking at right here is an RSA 5 property, which is a warehouse, which you'll find and see on the pictures.
You'll also see that most of the other corner properties in this neighborhood have some type of multi-unit capacity, a grocery store, there's a parking lot.
But if you go on the zoning map, there are a mix between, again, IRMX, RM1, and CMX1.
Photographs of the property, this is our property from the front of the property on Jasper Street to the left of the property on Clementine.
So this is where we would store the garbage in the rear of the property.
You'll see property on Jasper to the right of the property.
And then this is Jasper to the left of the property.
This is the property on Clementine that's across the street from us,
which is technically an RSA 5 property, but it's an HVAC warehouse.
So again, it's not uncommon for the zoning to be jumbled in this part of town.
And then East Clementine to the right of the property as well.
And then East Clementine to the left of the property, which you can see, this is our property.
Across the street is a warehouse facility.
So our plans and drawings are pretty basic and simple.
We're not changing the configuration in any way.
You go front door, you go to the right of the property, to the right, there's a door.
It's essentially one floor of a bedroom, living room, and a kitchen, and you can go down the flight of steps, which is the basement area, which is unfinished.
We would agree to a proviso of no bedrooms in the basement if that makes the board feel comfortable.
Our intention is not to have bedrooms in the basement.
We feel it's appropriate from an affordability standpoint to divide this property into two, as well as the way it's configured.
But we would be agreeable to no bedrooms in the basement.
You go up a flight of steps, it's a two-bedroom, one-bath property.
So we did meet with the individuals in the community through the Harrogate Civic Association.
Basically, they stated it's zoned this way, and that's how it should be, even though from a planning perspective, typically corner properties are multi-unit in nature.
And given the fact that there is a mix between RMX, RM1, CMX1, and even the RSA-5, as you saw across the street on Clementine, is not being used in a single-family fashion.
So this is not a single-family part of the neighborhood, even though that's what they stated in their letter.
And then here's our letter of support.
Again, we reached out to the community.
we feel like that 31-2023 would be most or directly impacted by our use and they are
actually in support of this project. Here's evidence of, you know, notice that we sent
to the community in terms of the community meeting. And with that being said, I would
ask that Avram Oslick virtually raise his hand.
hello can you hear me
hello can you put your name and address on the record please and spell your last name
and first avram oslik a v r a m as in mary o s l i c k 541 east cambridge street philadelphia
Pennsylvania, 19134. Thank you. Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the
truth? Yes. Okay, Mr. Notchamson. Yes, Avram, you heard everything I stated today. Yes, I did.
And is it true, correct, and accurate? 100%. And do you adopt as your own testimony? Yes, I do.
And just one other piece of information, Mr. Oslick actually lives in close proximity to
the property. So you're not looking at a developer who is trying to
just move into a neighborhood through development purposes. He actually
lives in the area. He self-manages a lot of properties in this part of the area.
So he's invested in Harrogate as well.
Okay. Does the board have any questions?
Yes. How many square feet is there
in a property? The lot is 904 square feet.
And you want two units?
And you want two units?
You're asking for two units?
That's correct, Mr. Holliman.
i thank you tom you're um you're echoing
All right, thank you.
Tom, you're...
sorry about that okay that's great now i can understand so the property the lot is how many
square feet it's the lot itself is 904 square feet according to a public record and the home
The home, let me see. I have to look at the public records for that. Let's see. 3,121 is almost 1,300 square feet.
Okay. Mr. Holloman, do you have any other questions?
Okay. Is there anyone in the audience, the virtual audience, who would like to testify?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Vice Chair Tonari, members of the Board, David Fecto, City Planning
Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single-family use.
This is a 904 square foot lot.
There is nothing unique about this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the code.
we recommend that the board deny the requested variance.
Calendar number of...
Wait a second, where am I?
Calendar number 1562-3121, Jasper Street.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
Thanks. Professor, can you take this case?
Calendar number MI 2021-001559, 3212 Morning Glory Road.
Anyone here for this case?
Yes, I am Brian Perrini, for the applicant.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your first and last name.
Yes, my name is Brian Perrini, B-R-I-A-N, P as in Peter, E-R-I-N-I.
I'm an attorney at Lipskine Brandt.
I represent the applicant.
Address is 1101 Market Street, Suite 2020, Philadelphia, PA, 19107.
You sure are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
It's a councilman's support letter, which came yesterday and which was sent yesterday.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We have yes to both.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
So this, and if I could share my screen as well.
please go ahead
so this is just the notice of refusal and there's one um refusal which dealt with the the fence
my client is uh constructed a six foot solid fence on the property line
which is the cause of the refusal second page is the application for appeal but third page or I
guess third exhibit which we showed was a certificate of tax clearance and I just want
to get you to so here's the RCO a support letter you'll see here that there are 24 plus three at
the committee so 27 total all were in support later on you'll see numerous letters to support
from the near neighbors here's the councilman support for variance for the fence and here's just
there's numerous pictures that were sent as part of the exhibit package but just to make it a
little easier here's just a look of the the fence from the front of the yard to the side it's a white
The fence from the front of the yard to the side, it's a white fence, good construction.
advance.
It's a good look for the neighborhood, for the property.
And just to give you an idea, this is the Google map of where the fence is.
It's a corner lot.
It's literally on the cul-de-sac.
There's one way in, one way out.
And there's letters from 3214, which is the next door neighbor.
32110, which is really the only neighbor that would have sight line to the fence,
and then neighbors across the street. Also, there's other support as part of this package,
and the package is sent as part of our submissions. My client has kids. The fence
and the size of the fence, there's numerous reasons why we're looking to get this approved.
um from a safety measure point of view uh for the neighborhood there's a potential that might
climb like try to put a pool in that side yard a four-foot fence just isn't going to cut that
for for protecting not only the neighbors from coming in possibly when nobody's home
um but also um you know we'll keep hopefully we'll keep we'll keep the neighbors out and
and there's not yep uh the four-foot fence really is going to do much for that
But also, like I said, he has kids.
So from a security perspective, people walking by aren't going to be able to look into his yard.
People won't be able to hop the fence.
And if he leaves some stuff out, take those things.
The neighborhood itself has numerous fences that are in excess of four feet, that go to six feet, that are not opaque as well.
And, you know, overall, like I said, from the perspective of the cul-de-sac, there's no visibility issues.
there's no light uh issues there's really no it really doesn't affect anyone and if it did
um there's letter support pretty much across the board in the neighborhood um so so again you know
because of that uh councilman's support neighbor support uh safety security um you know and alike
we ask that the defense be approved and that the request be approved thank you is uh professor can
i say something there's so many other pools in the neighborhood though without fences
it's not necessarily just for a pool um it could be if they decide to put one in but as you'll see
the the pools here none of these houses front the exact sidewalk the way the property is situated
there's you know there's behind the house but obviously doesn't have room there um you know
like i said the three two ten neighbor here who only who really has the only neighbor aside from
site line actually would be connected uh has approved it 14 has approved you know that we
have letters to support across the street um you know these neighbors have have agreed that it's
not you know that they've supported it everybody that came to the meeting but again you know his
the way his property is set up is a little different because it's right on the side there
and literally anybody walking by is going to be driving by walking by will be able to see directly
into that yard if, you know, the four-foot opaque requirement, you know, if that had to stand. I
mean, at the end of the day, again, if there was a pool, we actually think it would benefit the
neighborhoods. People can't get into it so easily, especially if nobody's home.
Okay. Confessor?
Do you want me to?
That's fine.
do we have any questions no no question
say that again tom you're breaking up no questions oh okay i might get my phone is on the line as
well that's brown anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter chair we have alice
Udovich, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Carol, you sore her?
Alice, do you want to put your name in it?
Ms. Udovich, do you want to put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please?
good afternoon madam chair members of the board alice udovich from councilman brian o'neill's
office city hall room 562 the councilman has no objection to the granting of the variance at this
location. Thank you. Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth?
I do. Thank you and thank you Ms. Sunkett. Are there any virtual other witnesses wanting to
testify
i see no hands madam chair okay
Okay. And the Board has no questions, Planning Commission.
and the board has no questions planned
Good afternoon, Vice Chair Tonari, members of the Board. David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for single-family use. We do not believe the applicant has shown an adequate reason for why they need a fence that is taller than the code allows and less than 50% transparent.
It is out of character with the rest of the block. We recommend the Board deny the requested variances.
this calendar number one five five nine my vote is no
my vote is uh no my vote is no my vote is yes
calendar number two oh mr chair do you want to take over can you hear me now
Yes, I apologize. I was shut me down on everything, but I'm back. All right. Calendar number MI 2020-002-706-3800 Palton Avenue.
Mr. Patterson, West Poulton, Saunders Park, 24th Ward, People's Emergency Center, Community Development Corporation, Poulton Village, Civic Association, all send a letter of support with a revised plan.
Hi, Mr. Patterson. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please?
Sure. Thank you. Ronald Patterson, Claire Harrison Law Firm, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia EPA 19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
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 uh yes to all the above okay great you may proceed okay thank you
um sure can you hold to see my screen
yep we can see it is it the map can you say
is it the aerial photograph yes okay great i just want to make sure what screen's working
so thank you this regards uh the address of 3800 palton avenue um it concerns and it is a
pen presbyterian hospital it encompasses a large footprint a property here spanning 38th street
Palton Avenue, Filver Street, and Sloan Street. It's approximately 12.5 acres,
which equates to about 546,000 square feet. As a picture show.
there's some of course i think we all know where this is uh here's kind of the area where we're
going to talk about so um of course there's a hospital here and related buildings that are all
permitted as a matter of right there's also a parking lot which you're looking at here
and at a parking garage that exists, it's a five-story parking garage having 676 parking
spaces that you see in this picture. So this application involves demolishing that garage
and constructing a new eight-story garage of approximately 481,000 square feet with a retail
space height of about 88 feet having 1456 parking spaces we're also looking at revising and
reconfiguring some of the open area which would create some additional
surface air parking if i can get this here is our site plan so where i'm denoting here
is the existing parking garage and the denoting here up on the left hand corner is the new garage
and below it here you'll see some additional landscaping and reconfiguration of existing
parking lot so the property is located in the cmx4 commercial zoning district as i mentioned hospital
use is allowed so is parking and what is proposed as i mentioned is this garage it's an above ground
garage the parking garage use itself is not prohibited it's it's permitted but the fact
that the garage is above ground requires special exception approval from the board and so
requires special exception approval from the board.
And so, you know, with respect to that,
we will show that this will have no adverse impact
on the public health, welfare, traffic, and safety
by showing that we've met numerous times
and had our outreach with the various RCOs,
both officially and officially noticed meetings
and also, you know, informally and formally
throughout the year or so.
as well as a traffic impact study that Pannoni has prepared to satisfy the criteria of the Zoning Code 14-603 that's required for this above ground garage.
We also were subject to and went to civic design review for this building since it is greater than 100,000 square feet of new floor area.
And that meeting was held on May 4th, 2021, and the completion letter is in my exhibit package, Exhibit 11.
So with that said, I have two witnesses, first one being Mr. Steve Cobb, if you could promote him.
Good afternoon, Mr. Cobb.
Please identify yourself, spell your last name.
I swear you in. Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, members of the board. My name is Steve Cobb,
S-T-E-V-E-N, C-O-B-B. You're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Hi, Steve. Could you tell the board
by whom you're employed and what your position is there?
i sure i'm the government director the government relations director at penn medicine
okay and obviously you're aware of this project that's why you're here and uh would you agree the
testimony and present presentation you've heard me provide is true and accurate and you would
adopt as your own so far yes uh can you briefly just tell the board uh and i'm sure it's inherent
because this is a beneficial use you know what the purpose and nature of this new garage is and what
will serve? Yes, so the current garage that Mr. Patterson mentioned is currently obsolete
and must be replaced. It's costing around $250,000 per year just to maintain in working order.
We are also looking to create sufficient on-campus parking for employees so as to
discourage parking in the neighborhood. The new garage will also allow for the campus to
accommodate for future expansion. Thank you. And as I mentioned, there was a significant
outreach effort that was undertaken. And can you kind of summarize how those meetings went
and the results? Yes, we have been meeting with the four RCOs that cover this area,
as well as near neighbors on Sloan Street for over a year now. Since September of last year,
we've met at least eight times in a group setting to discuss the plan and to discuss,
you know, the future of the campus and how to work together. We have, as of April,
was signed on April 20th, a letter of agreement with the four governing RCOs, whereby they
agree to support the project, and we set forth a number of items we're going to work together
on some features of, you know, some community benefits that are incorporated into the project
and other things like that.
And what I have on the screen, Steve, represents the culmination of those meetings and the
support by all these groups both with respect to the design pursuant to civic design review
and this requested special exception relief for the garage is that fair to say yes okay
thank you if there's no questions for Mr. Cobb I'll move on to Craig Bryson b-r-y-s-o-n
Bryson please uh identify yourself spell your full name and I'll swear you in
Mr. Bryson, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hello?
There you go.
I hear you.
Yes, my name is Craig Bryson, B-R-Y-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Patterson.
Thank you, Mr. Patterson.
Hi, Craig.
Hi, Craig.
Again, should you tell the board where you work?
Again, she's...
Yes, I work for Pannonia Associates.
And what's your position there?
I am a vice president.
And you're familiar with this project?
And you're familiar with the plans that we've shown the board and submitted as part of this zoning permit application?
Okay. And also, Mr. Chairman, we did submit revised plans a few weeks back, which would be part of this application we'd ask you to consider.
Is it one page?
It's one page, yes.
So, Craig, you heard my testimony presentation. Would you agree it's true and accurate and you would adopt this if it were your own?
Yes. And so as to the garage, how many spaces are in this garage proposed?
The garage is proposing 1,456 parking spaces.
Okay. And then along with an additional 27 surface parking spaces, is that accurate?
That is accurate.
And we've also revised the plans to show additional landscaping and shrubbery. Is that true?
That is true.
And, you know, this is a large garage, obviously, and has some impact on the area.
And so naturally, this has gone through vetting by the streets department. Is that fair to say?
And they reviewed, such as the locations of the curb cuts, traffic circulation, the density impact and the like along that area?
Yes, they have.
And what have they concluded?
They have approved the traffic impact study.
And as part of that, they've asked for several public improvements at various intersections.
In which we've committed a lot of dollars and time, mainly focused around pedestrian safety at these intersections.
Okay, thank you.
And lastly, as I mentioned in my opening, that because this is an above-ground garage and requires special exception approval, we commissioned Pannoni to conduct a traffic impact study under the guidelines of 14-603 of the zoning code.
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And that traffic impact study can be kind of summarized or described as a level of service study?
That is correct.
And a level of service would mean that you look and you count the number of cars at the nearest lit intersections during rush hour at 15-minute intervals.
Is that accurate?
That is accurate.
and the result and the determination in accordance with the zoning code
would be that there shall be no degradation of the level of service
at those intersections?
Correct.
And what does the level of service mean?
If you could just summarize that.
It's a grade given to the operation of basically a time delay
that you're at the intersection, A being perfect, F being failure.
and you would assign a level of service A through F.
So it just means how long you wait at the intersection.
Correct.
And whether this garage will cause you to wait any longer.
You know, it's not acceptable.
And so in your report that it's on the screen here,
you concluded that there would be no degradation of the level of service?
That's correct.
we've determined that all intersections operate at an acceptable level of service.
Okay, thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Bryson?
If not, I just wanted to include that based on the above and what we have submitted
and the testimony you've heard, that we feel that we prove there's no adverse impact on the public
health, safety, welfare, traffic. No one has, at least that I know of, has raised an objection
that that would happen. And so that coupled with the fact that we did submit to prepare the traffic
impact study, that meets the criteria of section 14.603 for granting a special exception for an
above ground garage, namely that there is no degradation of the level of service. As I
described, we would ask the word to grant this special exception relief.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Anyone else like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Deborah McCarty. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please spell your full name. I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. Deborah McCarty, D-E-B-R-A-M-C-C-A-R-T-Y.
Where from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
So I'm here representing the Pelton Village Civic Association,
and I think it's worthwhile noting that I believe Mr. Patterson misspoke
when he stated that there's a demolition of the existing garage, which he showed on 38th Street.
My understanding of this project, and I'm pretty sure I'm correct,
is that there's going to be a demolition of an existing seven-story building at 3910 Poulton,
and this garage that they're proposing will be built in its place and take up, you know,
a greater area, the parking lot, et cetera.
Yes, you're correct. Sorry about that.
So nonetheless, you know, Penn work collaborative with the surrounding communities and the result is a compromise, which is acceptable to those of us involved.
We are very pleased that the agreement sets up a process that we expect will significantly involve neighbors in future Penn Presbyterian Medical Center development.
And so we support this project and would like to see it go forward.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Andrew Goodman.
Mr. Goodman, please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Afternoon, Mr. Goodman, identify yourself, please, and I'll square you in.
Good afternoon.
Andrew Goodman, G-O-O-D-M-A-N, here representing the office of third district council member,
Jamie Gaudier, room 586, City Hall.
You square it for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Thank you, sir.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, members of the Board, given the size and impact of the proposed use, we ask
that the applicant take more time than what is normally asked to engage with near neighbors
and community groups to unpack the impact of the new garage, think through ways to mitigate
that impact in a collaborative way, as well as make commitments to a similarly collaborative
effort as Penn continues its master planning of the Presbyterian Health Campus. Based on all the
progress that's been made, as other witnesses have spoken to for these reasons, Council Member
Gaudier has no opposition to the requested special exception this afternoon. Thank you. Anyone else
to testify? Yes, Chair. We have Pamela Andrews. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please identify yourself with a record, spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can now. Please spell your full name.
Thank you so much. Pamela Andrews, P-A-M-E-L-A, Andrews, A-M-D-R-E-W-S.
You swear our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you so much.
Please proceed.
My name is Pam Andrews.
I'm the chair of West Clout and Saunders Park RCO, and I just wanted to make a brief comment that the community and the various RCOs in the area have worked very hard to engage in collaborations with Penn to support this project in a way that would continue to allow the community to have ongoing impact.
in future construction projects at Penn.
I just wanted to note that we're very excited
that there's going to be an ongoing working group
between the various RCOs
to deal with any additional problems or concerns
that might come up in regard to this project.
With that said, West Patmos-Arndes Park community
is here to support the project and to help it move forward.
Thank you.
Thank you, ma'am.
Anyone else?
Chair, we have one more person, Ms. Ingrid, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair,
please.
Good afternoon, ma'am.
Please spell your full name for the record and I'll swear you in.
Ingrid Bernadette Weiche W-Y-C-H-E
You swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed
Hi, my name is Bernadette Weich, Democratic Ward Leader of the 24th Ward.
Hi my name is Bernadette Weiche
I, Bernadette Weich in the 24th Ward, and I know there's RCOs that's in my ward, I support
this project.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else?
i see no more handshake thank you planning commission good afternoon david fecto city
planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this
property for commercial mixed use for one of the most permissive classifications in the zoning code
we believe the applicant has shown that an above ground parking garage will have no more of an
impact than a garage otherwise would in this location. We recommend that the board grant a
special exception. Thank you. MI 2021. That I'm sorry. Let me repeat that. MI 2020-0027063800
Palton Avenue. My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan. One page approved today.
My vote is yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Thank you. MI 2021-001427, 5303 Chester Avenue. Mr. Notkinson, you're still under oath.
And, well, we'll ask you the question. I have a note that we've not yet received the RCO letter, but you'll clear that up for us, I'm sure.
Mr. Nockmson, do you also do a great away the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. The only thing I would say is Ms. Amazon will be presenting this matter in the
following matter as well. Okay. Excuse me, Carol. Just one minute. Nine in
a lime cone plague is not connected, right? Just separate case. Separate cases. That's
correct mr chair thank you okay and where is she she's here you are hi hi can you put your name
and address on the record and spell your last name yes of course clemente amazon um from
rockinson pc 123 south broad street suite 1600 19109 you swear from to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth. I do. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
refusal, or referral, photos, and our 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, and we actually have a letter of
support from the RCO. Thank you. You may proceed. Okay, so I'm just going to share my screen.
can everyone see my screen yes it's a positive reaction
again my name is clemente amazon i'll be presenting 5303-05 chester avenue
um so during my presentation i'll be going through the deed certificate of tax clearance
The notice of refusal, this property is currently zoned as RSA 5. When my client purchased it, it was an RM1 property, so we're just looking to have multifamily use here. We are requesting to have nine units.
We also have the application for appeal, map of the area, photographs of the area, our proposed plans and drawings.
So, we had a couple meetings with the community for this project, so we do have revised plans
as well as a proviso form because we wanted to incorporate some of the feedback that we
received from the community, which also provided us with a letter of support because of the
changes that we did make.
So, here's the deed showing that my client does, in fact, own the property.
And then the notice of refusal.
Again, the property is zoned as RSA 5, so it's actually 5303 and 5305 Chester Avenue
that we are looking to consolidate and we are looking to have multifamily use here.
We have the application for appeal.
Again, the refusal, our project information form.
The map of the area.
So as you can see, property is zoned as RSA 5.
But when my client purchased it, it was previously zoned as RM1.
As you can see from the map here in 2019, when my client purchased, it was RM1.
And then it made the transition to single-family.
and then it made the transition to single-family. Another map of the area, as you can see, we're
Another map of the area, as you can see,
this lot right here. Here's a view from the front of the property, a view to the right of the
property, a view to the left of the property, and we have our revised plans and the form.
So the only changes that we're making here is we're removing the roof deck, we're extending
the porch to the full width, which is something that the community requested of us,
as well as that fence wall will be reduced by two feet.
So here we have the elevations and site plan,
another view of the front of the property,
and then this just indicates some of the views
and changes that we made for the structure of the building and the design.
And here is our rendering for the property.
So we have a beautiful porch,
and we incorporated a lot of the design from the neighborhood as well.
Our floor plans, again,
we're just looking to have multifamily use here. We do have an ADA compliant unit as well, which
the community is very clear about. Yes, Mr. Holloman. Can you go back to the basement plan?
Can you blow it up some? Just the basement plan. Okay, let me see. So this is actually not a full
basement because we are a bit above grade here and we do have separate entrances for these units
as well. What percentage are you above grade? I believe it's about 50% above grade, but we also
do have the architects on the line that could verify that as well.
So I believe it would be low design, either Evan or Leah Litvin.
are you saying the architect will get on line yes i believe their hands raised
your architect's name it's either evan or leah litvin from low design
hi um i believe we were just unmuted yeah please uh spell your full name and i'll swear you in
Hi, this is Leah Litvin from Low Design, L-E-A-L-I-T-V-I-N.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Tom had a question.
Mr. Holloman had a question for you.
Do you have a second for the exit from the basement for the windows?
Yes, we do.
Yes, absolutely.
We have egress wells from both apartments that have any basement space.
Both of the lower-level apartments are bi-level, so their main living space is accessed at grade.
And as Clementa mentioned, it's only partially below grade.
What percentage below grade?
It's about 50% below grade.
You know, the code requires six feet above grade.
So you can see that the building is actually split level, so the high basement in the back
is, if you zoom into the section, helps you understand.
Just bear with me a bit, my computer's a little glitchy here.
do the grades slope uh no the grade does not slope significantly so there are um the front
unit is five feet below grade and how many feet above grade four feet yeah four feet above grade
And that's in order to keep the porch line consistent with the rest of the block.
And then at the center, we have a split level plan for this building so that at the grade
on level one, we have a unit 2B, which is an ADA accessible unit.
So that's why we've done grade access for unit 2R.
and then the third unit in the back at grade is bi-level
with an egress well out of the back rear bedroom.
Do you know what the IBC requirements for out of the grade
for sleeping units in the basement?
Yes, to have egress.
No, speaking of egress, I'm talking about building out of the grade.
What does the IBC require?
uh they they require emergency uh rescue access out of the basement bedrooms
They they require emergency rescue.
and they give a dimension
yes i believe there there is a minimum dimension 5.7 square feet is the dimension i believe off
the top of my head to access the egress well you gave me square feet what about linear feet
three feet deep for the egress well
minimum so what i believe that these are all larger than that
they're they're they all exceed that dimension but you're not giving me a dimension though
what's the ibc i don't have the ibc open in front of me during this hearing i apologize
guys. I would have to look it up. But they are code compliant.
If they're six feet out of the ground, there'll be code compliance.
What section of the code are you referring to in IBC? Chapter five, section two.
okay well um would you like us to look it up and get back to you no problem
but you must ask the chairman
yeah we can do that um we have one other case uh how much time do you think you would need ma'am
um about five minutes just to look it up in the code yeah okay so we'll go through this and if
it's not five minutes then we'll come back to you we'll go to the next case i think uh miss uh amazon
are you handling the next case as well line kiln pike yes i am okay so we'll still be with you
all right any other questions from the board no no else to testify in this case please raise your
hands chair we have excuse me andrew goodman please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
thank you mr goodman you're still under oath just identify yourself and proceed
good afternoon andrew goodman here representing the office of
mr council member jamie gaudier room 586 city hall
mr chair members of the board i attended the most recent rco meeting hosted by the coordinating rco
this past monday i can speak to what i observed that evening which was a very fruitful and
positive conversation about many of the design revisions made by the applicant which i assume
will be you know described further once once their presentation resumes since they and all
these changes were made since the initial meeting with the rco a few weeks before that for this
reason the council member has no opposition to the request of variance very much anyone else to
testify i see no more hands here you planning commission good afternoon david fecto city
planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this
property for residential single family use this is a 1700 square foot lot there is nothing unique
about this lot that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the code we recommend
that the board deny the requested variance thank you uh miss amazon is the architect is she available
yes i see leah is still here um but if i may just point out that this was an rm1 property
when my client purchased it in 2019 and then it did become rsa5
um so if the architect is ready if not we'll move to the next case and hold the vote on this
until she gets back on is that leah
yes um we're we're looking at 502 section 502 and it's there's nothing in there about that um
chair if i may um if i could just present lime kiln and we could get a little bit more time
i'd like to wrap this up if we could uh miss litman you're saying there's nothing in the
code that addresses the question from mr holliman as far as we're aware sleeping rooms can be below
grade and we do this all the time as long as there's adequate egress um as far as the area
of the window to egress out of and proper egress wells and we're providing all of those things for
this property and it seems like this would be a building code issue that will be addressed
i believe the code also says the building has to be six feet sleeping in the basement
I believe the code also says the building has to be six feet.
The sleeping in the basement has to be six feet out of the ground.
Isn't that there?
That's correct, Tom.
What's that?
Go ahead.
No, go ahead.
I was saying that's correct, Tom.
Most of the window and access egress has to be out of the ground.
Go ahead, ma'am.
I'm sorry.
No, that's okay.
No problem.
If I may, I would also just like to point out that we did community outreach.
We received 20 letters of support from the community as well as support from the RCO.
And as Mr. Goodman noted, we did receive support from the Councilwoman as well.
Yeah, I think what Mr. Holliman, to his credit, is asking the question as it relates to, it's a safety issue.
Of course, I understand.
And we want to make certain that it's meeting the requirements of the code.
so um before we move on do you mind mr holliman just clarifying what code section you're referring
to is it section 502 you said i'm sorry chair um would it be this is tanya i'm sorry would it be
a good idea um for the board to hold the case uh this case for one week for information slash
clarification and um the board can discuss it at executive session i was actually going to say
something similar to that but i was going to give them i was going to give them one more shot so if
tom if you could answer that question from this litman litman then maybe we can move on and do as
Ms. Sunkit just suggested.
It's the IBC
Chapter 5, Section 2
Chapter 11, Section 2
of the IBC.
Chapter 11 is
accessibility. I'm looking at it right now.
Chapter 5 is
about addresses
in Section 502.
all right so maybe what we're doing okay i'm sorry finish oh i'm just saying that i'm trying
to find the section that he's referring to to clarify um but i'm not able to find it
well we're confident that it's code compliant can you state for the record
the distance the building is out of the ground at the basement level
in the rear the building is four feet below grade and at the front it's it's i'm sorry it's fully
below grade at the rear and at the front it's four feet above grade thank you yes thank you is that
tom do you have enough info to vote on this or do you still need more clarification
no i can vote on it i didn't know if you needed any any other information okay
All right. Planning Commission already voted. MI 2021-001427, 5303-5305, Chester Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is no.
So you, MI 2021, that's 001-561-6630, Lime Kiln-Pike.
Ms. Amazon, you're still under oath.
Just identify yourself and proceed.
Yes, I would just ask that.
I apologize.
This is yes with proviso.
Oh, which one?
Chester Avenue?
Yes, it is.
One page?
Yes, one page.
All right, we'll revote it.
MI 2021-001-427-5303-5305 Chester Avenue.
My vote is yes.
With the proviso one page approved today.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
What property are we voting on?
That was the one you voted no on.
It was pointed out there was a revised plan.
chester avenue number nine time my vote is still no thank you all right we'll move to
lime kiln pike number 10 on our list i read that into the record please proceed
thank you uh do you want to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate frank mr chair
uh yes i think you need to do that yes okay do you agree to wave 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,
refusal referral,
photos under plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO?
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes, and we have a letter of support as
And do you have a letter?
Yes, and we have a letter of support as well.
well. Okay, great. You may proceed. Thank you.
Again, my name is Quentin Amazon, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600,
and I'll be presenting 6630 Lime Kiln Pike. So during my presentation I'll be going through a
similar packet of materials include the deed, the certificate of tax clearance, the notice of
refusal, our application for appeal, maps of the area, as well as photographs of the area,
our proposed plans and drawings, and a bit about my client, We Care Learning and Development Center,
as well as some of the letters of support that we received from nearby neighbors,
as well as some of the other commercial businesses in this neighborhood as well.
So here we have a deed showing that my client does, in fact, own the property.
The tax clearance information, I'm sorry, if you just give me one moment.
I apologize.
We also have the notice of refusal, this property is zoned as RSA 5, however, we are looking
to have a daycare here, specifically for WeCare Learning and Development Center, and later
in my presentation I will give a bit more information about the organization.
Here we have the application for appeal, again the refusal, our project information form,
map of the area, we are on the corner of Wincoat and Lime Kiln, the property is owned as RSA
Here's a view of the front of the property.
So we do have ADA accessibility here in the event that any of the children may be disabled
or may need a little bit of assistance getting in and out.
We have a view of the property from Lime Kiln Pike, a view of the side of the property,
view to the right of the property along Lime Kiln Pike, view to the left of the property,
view to the right of the property on Wincote, view to the left of the property on Wincote.
and here we have our site plan as well as our proposed drawings so as you can see here it is
three floors and we are looking to have children up to the age of 10 and a bit of information about
we care learning and development center they focus on educating children and their unique
styles of learning as well as enhancing their independence and ability to contribute
in a positive manner. They focus on the three P's, which is passion, patience, and purpose.
They are a three-star facility pursuant to Keystone Stars, which is a state program that
rates daycare centers. So they really do pride themselves on the service that they provide to
the children. And here are just a few of their alumni. And we did reach out to the community,
and we had a community meeting in which we did receive support for this project.
we also made sure that we reached out to nearby neighbors to see how they would feel about this
proposed use as well and we did receive resounding support as well as several other letters from
commercial businesses within the area our meeting with the name with the community was on may 27th
at 7 pm and we notified 103 properties in total our certificate of mailing indicating that and
if i could just have my client um adopt my testimony if possible
it should be diane green
miss green you can unmute yourself and please wait for the chair good afternoon miss green
please identify yourself with the record spell your last name and i'll swear you in good afternoon
Diane Greene, G-E-R-E-E-N.
For him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, ma'am.
Please proceed.
Ms. Amazon?
Thank you.
Diane, did you hear my presentation today?
And was it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
anyone else have any questions for this witness please identify yourself raise your hand
chair we have someone with the last name can please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
i think that may actually be an error that was my client from the prior projects
thank you anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
okay we have Cynthia DeVoe please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
Okay, we have Cynthia DeVoe. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
I apologize. I'm not here for this case, but I do know what she's talking about. Yes, I would be in agreement with it.
Thank you. Anyone else?
Lastly, we have Hillary Emerson. You may unmute yourself.
Good afternoon, Ms. Emerson. You're still on the oath from earlier today. Please identify yourself.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Hillary Emerson on behalf of Councilwoman Sherelle Parker.
I just actually wanted to ask preliminarily if Ms. Amazon could identify a couple things on the plans for me.
I was a little unclear about in reviewing the plans after our community meeting.
Could she please identify the exits on the building and where the trash is being stored?
Of course. Let me just pull this back up.
My notes indicated there were three exits, but when I went and looked back at the plans, I can only find two, and I didn't know if I was missing one.
Gotcha.
The safety and exits were an area that the community was interested in and, you know, wanted to make sure was properly addressed as noted in the provisos and the RCO's letter.
Let me just share my screen again here.
so we do have one entrance and exit here we also have an entrance and exit right here
and i believe there is another entrance and exit from the it's actually two i apologize
so we have one here as well as one on the side. So both entrances are are both both entrances and
exits are on the first floor? Yes that's correct. Okay all right I had a note in my notes from the
meeting that there was also an exit from the second floor but I didn't see it so I didn't
know if I wrote that in error that's why I was checking um and where would the the trash be
stored um it was my understanding that it was in the in the rear but I don't know if the rear meant
on the wing coat side or the lime kiln side and I didn't see a place on the lime kiln side
absolutely so we would have it come through the side yard and I think it's actually a little bit
better to see it from this view and then we would bring it into the front of wing coat for pickup
oh okay okay all right so it would you use this shed that's already there then exactly okay all
Right. Thank you. So in reviewing the application and attending the meeting, or I attended the
meeting, and listening to some of the questions that were raised by the community, the councilwoman
doesn't oppose having a commercial use at this property because it has had a consistent
commercial history for decades, and while it's surrounded by residential, it does have commercial
businesses around it on that kind of island between the streets there.
We did have a couple of concerns, one being the decision to have the youngest children,
the young toddlers, in the basement where there's not a direct means of egress. They would have to
go upstairs to one of the other means of egress and then the children on the third floor having
to come down two flights of stairs in order to get to egress on the first floor and I know some
of this would be renewed reviewed by the state but also by the city pursuant to a certificate of
occupancy but we think it may be the business and property owner may want to consider not having the
youngest children in a place where they'd have to go upstairs to get out. Our other concern is
that the outside play space is kind of an alley between two buildings. I don't know if that's
going to be sufficient even rotating you know with the children being rotated. However again
we do know that that is something that will be addressed by the state in their in their review
process um if the board um and i just want to know but both of both of the concerns about egress
um and the the play space along with kind of um fire extinguishers fire suppression
were things that were mentioned in the letter um from by the rco while it was a letter of support
they didn't indicate there were things that they would like to have provisoed um our office would
Our office would ask that if the board decides to grant this application, that it give provisos, one, that there be a certificate of occupancy obtained prior to occupancy of the building.
ask that if the board decides to grant this application that it
And also that the pickup and drop off would occur on the wing coat side of the building only because there are residences across the street on the lime kiln side.
And I've seen some of the businesses double park there and cause problems for traffic to get by.
so we wouldn't want to have that be an issue. There's more space on the windcoat side.
That is all of my comments. Thank you. Thank you. I have a question for Rebecca Cole.
I believe the CO request is appropriate, but what about the drop-off zone?
That's something I think that streets would be handling, correct? I'm not sure on that.
we're happy to have drop off and pick up on the windcoat side yeah yeah i believe that's
been proviso'd on other applications before okay all right i wasn't sure that so okay
all right uh planning commission
good afternoon david fecto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board
the comprehensive plan recommends this property for commercial mixed use
The block appears to be largely commercial in nature. We recommend that the board approve the requested variance.
Thank you. MI-2021, that's 001561-6630, Lyme Kiln, Pike.
My vote is yes with the following provisos.
CO to be obtained prior to occupancy and the vehicular drop-off lane be on the windcoach side of the property.
My vote is yes with provisos.
yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you uh we now go to case number 12
mi 2021-001565-9432 east roosevelt boulevard
and mr klein i believe is the attorney representing the applicant
excuse me one second to the court reporter this is our last case
on this round after this we'll take a break thank you carol okay thank you uh please put
your name and address on the record and spell your last name certainly good good afternoon
uh mr chair members of the board jared klein k-l-e-i-n from black rome 130 north 18th street
philadelphia do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and i'll think about the truth yes
i do do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i can waive
the reading i can't stipulate to the to the accuracy part of our appeal uh is an appeal
against lni but i can address that uh pretty efficiently for the board as i move forward
okay great have you emailed an 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 to all of the above okay great you may proceed
thank you uh if i can share my screen is everybody seeing that yes all right so yeah this is 9432
Roosevelt Boulevard, which is owned by the law enforcement health benefits. And the refusal that
we received is for use of a portion of the second floor of an already constructed building as a
healthcare facility. What it's going to be is a minute clinic type of use where they'll have
doctors from Temple University Health that are there to provide sort of urgent care, walk-in care
for people who are members of the health network. When we filed this appeal, it was put in as both
an appeal against LNI and, in the alternative, a request for a variance. As I'll get into in
just a minute, we have pretty broad-based support from the RCO and the councilman. And so I'm going
to address the variance aspect first because I think that the board might be able to resolve
this case just on the variance request alone without having to get into the legal issue of
the appeal against L&I. The sort of very short summary is this location was previously the home
of a medical building. What was there previously this was the signage for it and it was affiliated
with Frankfurt Hospital and it had an MRI center in there. Law enforcement health benefits filed
an application for the complete demolition of what was there before and to build a new
And to build a new building in generally the same place for use as this health care facility, personal services, some office space, and this minute clinic.
building in generally the same place for use.
Unfortunately, when that zoning application went in, the way it was worded referred to personal services use rather than medical office.
and so the LNI took the position that there had been abandonment of the prior medical use
as a product of the demolition of the existing structure and so we filed the appeal against
LNI to address that. However I don't think we need to get into that legal issue so let me
just briefly take the board through this case. The subject property is here it's located along
Roosevelt Boulevard. As I mentioned, it's already constructed. This is an aerial view as you can see
and this is an image of what the building looks like now. As I said, Law Enforcement Health
Benefits is the owner of this building. They are a private medical network only providing
medical services for people who are members of that Law Enforcement Health Benefits group.
So unlike the prior building that was here, this is not open to the general public.
You need to be a member of the health network to get inside.
You need to be a member of the health network to obtain any treatment.
Photos of the zoning notice posted in the windows are here.
And the area that we are talking about in the building is on the second floor.
And it is this area here that I'm circling with my mouse.
That's the area that would be what we're calling the mini clinic.
Again, it's already constructed, so there's no dimensional or any other variances other
than use because of the overlay in this area of the city that's designed to restrict medical
office use.
We did have a very productive conversation with the Civic Association.
Their unanimous letter of support is here.
The one thing that I will add is we did tell the community, we started our presentation
off there there will no be there will not be any uh methadone treatment services coming from this
facility and we're happy to agree to a proviso if the board is so inclined on that that that issue
that was something that was important to the uh rco and not something that was in our treatment
plans uh and here is the letter of uh non-objection from councilman brian o'neill also so we think
with the broad-based community support and the fact that this is going into an existing structure
that was previously used for medical use, that we've met the requirements for a variance.
And I would have my client adopt this portion of my testimony and then leave it to the board
to decide whether they would like a presentation on the appeal against LI aspect of this.
Mr. Reuters waiting in the wings. So let's get your client, Jared, to adopt your testimony. Then
we'll go to Mr. Reuter. Absolutely. And by the way, for the record, I apologize. I screwed up
again. I skipped over number 11. So after this case, we will then go to 760 South 18th. Sorry
about that. John Gatins, if you can raise your virtual hand. Mr. Gatins, please unmute yourself
and please wait for the chat. Good afternoon, sir. Please spell your full name and identify
yourself and I'll swear you in. John Gaitens, G-A-I-T-T-E-N-S. Do you swear for him to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Klein.
Thank you. John, can you just tell the board what your role is with the LEHB?
I am the Administrator of Law Enforcement Health Benefits. Okay. And did you have an opportunity
to hear the uh presentation i just made yes sir i do and do you adopt it as true correct in your own
i do thank you um so mr chair i will rest there let mr reuter weigh in and then if i need to uh
spend any time on the legal side of it i'll be happy to do so before we get into that um any
questions from the board so no no okay so mr reuter uh thank you members of the board may
please the board leonard f reuter r-e-u-t-e-r for the city of philadelphia we're affirmed to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed um i think uh as
mr klein had already indicated uh there is a challenge to the refusal but there's also they
are also seeking the variance and the alternative um i think if the board were to uh i guess bifurcate
this and just simply decide
hear from city planning first
and then decide whether the
variance would be granted anyway, then the
appeal against L&I can just simply be
marked moot. So
So, I mean, obviously I'm here.
obviously I'm here.
We do believe that the refusal
We do believe that the refusal was properly granted,
but again, I don't think the board needs to address it
unless the variants were to be denied.
And the city's not taking any, the city itself,
not to speak for city planning,
but the city itself isn't taking any position
on the variants, but I,
so maybe you wanna hear from city planning first.
Thank you.
Planning commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the existing commercial area zoning.
A group medical facility is the type of activity that a reasonable person would expect to find in
an auto-oriented shopping center. We recommend that the Board approve the requested variance.
Thank you. Before I go, is there anyone else to testify in this case?
chair we have alice judovich please unmute yourself and wait for the
good afternoon alice you're still under oath from earlier just identify yourself and i'll
swear you in thank you chairman alice judovich from councilman brian o'neill's office city hall
room 562 i apologize you're already been sworn in please proceed yes uh the councilman fully
supports the granting of the variance at this location very much anyone else to testify in
this case chair we have bernard please unmute yourself and please wait for the
afternoon please identify yourself spell your full name and i'll swear you in
uh bernard jadak uh i'm with greater bustle in the civic league bernard please spell your last
name j-a-d-a-c-h swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed uh yeah it's just uh uh the concern that uh that property had been
brought up uh uh on multiple occasions to be a methadone clinic and we were just wondering if
that could be included in the restriction or as a proviso or something along with the
sole practitioner use of the medical in that in the uh in the building facility
i'll ask counsel for that i'm not sure if we can make that a proviso it might be considered
discriminatory but i'm not a lawyer so rebecca i'll need to check i'm not sure on that i no chair
this is tanya it's not it can't use it as proviso no yeah i figured it would be a somewhat
But OK, well, I mean, as long as it's stated as sole practitioner, you know, it can't be a clinic and that would probably suffice.
You know what I'm saying? So that's the counsel for the applicant has stated that on the record.
Right. Well, it will there will not be any methadone service from there.
Just to clarify, it's not a sole practitioner.
It's a group office that's going to provide minute clinic or urgent care style of care.
But there will be no drug treatment or methadone service.
Anyone else to testify?
Thank you very much.
I see no more this year.
Okay, we already got the planning commission.
So, Leonard, do you have anything else to add?
We're going to vote this.
No, again, I think once you vote on the variance, then you can address the challenge against L&I, which I'm going to guess is probably going to be moot at this point.
Okay, thank you. MI 2021-001-565-9432 East, Roosevelt Boulevard, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
there weren't any provisors correct i mean any right any change in plans not right no thank you
all right and again i apologize i got a little confused i made some notes earlier today
we're going to go back to mi 2021
mi 2021 that's 001 569 760 south 18th street the attorney is rachel pritzker
I'm sorry I'm chair I heard Mr. Ruder were you trying to say something Mr. Ruder
okay it has to be it is it okay to be excused I think oh okay I think I could be wrong but
I was just asking that the record reflect then that the appeal against LNI is moot.
Thank you. I wanted that on record. Thank you, Mr. Rudder.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Tanya. Okay, Ms. Pritzker.
Okay, Ms. Pritzker.
Thank you.
She's coming back in as a panel.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Good afternoon.
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please?
Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA-19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
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, a copy of the refusal,
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? You may proceed. Thank you. I'm going to
share my screen. Thank you. So this is 760 South 18th Street. This application proposes the division
of an existing lot that runs through the width of the block from South 18th Street to South
Cleveland Street into two separate lots, lots A and B, one fronting each on the aforementioned
Street, so one on 18th and one on Cleveland. The erection of two new single-family houses
is what we're proposing. I'll go through the revisions to the project as well as one of the
front of the existing structure on 18th Street is to remain in place based on conversations with
the community. This application also proposes the erection of roof deck on the existing structure
on lot A. As you can see, we have the refusal. We generated three refusals, all dimensional
variances, and I'll kind of go through how we're very similar to the other lots on the
block as far as lot size. So I'm just going to, for illustrative purposes, and our architects
did a great job in our presentation to kind of illustrate this, but just so the board
can see what I'm looking at. The code 14701-1 states that properties in RSA 5 must be 1,440
square feet. However, we're proposing 840 square feet for lot A and 740 square feet on lot B.
The code also requires 25% open space. We're proposing 17.1 on lot A. We do not have any
variances for rear yard, height, side yard, front setback, just these refusals. As you can see on
the subject block of South 18th Street and the adjacent block of South Cleveland Street, there
are several other lots which do not meet 1440. As the board may be familiar because we've had a
number of cases on Cleveland Street, this block notoriously has very, very small lots. There's
everything but about four other properties including ours that do not that are uh not
street to street there's only four properties total that are street to street uh two of which
have rear parking uh coming from cleveland street which was not preferred by the people on the block
or something they were looking to have us do with this and so we are looking to subdivide it
make these in alignment with the lots that are already there and provide two new single family
homes. As you can see, all of these lots are under 1,000 square feet, significantly under 1,000
square feet. The properties, the sizes that we're proposing are actually going to be larger or in
line with what's already there. As I mentioned to the board a few minutes ago, we're providing,
we're looking to provide lots that are in line with these already existing, although a little
smaller than the 1440. You have a mix of 800 square feet, 600 square feet, 700 square feet.
So our lots, again, 840 is from lot A, which is right in line, actually bigger than the majority
of the existing lots. And then lot B, 740, which is in line. Just to give an example, I did another
case in front of the board, 748 South Cleveland, that was a 704 square foot lot. So we're larger
than all of those. Additionally, the existing lot right now is about 1560 square feet. It also
has an existing duplex, so we're not adding more density. We're just spreading out, and actually
we'll show in the plans we're going to be providing more open space. The existing building right now
takes up a lot of that lot and also goes pretty far back, blocking a lot of light and air in
addition to the fact that the way that it's aligned cuts off some of the rear yards that
all the other properties have. Additionally, it's worth noting that many years ago this board
approved another project on this block right down right a couple houses away at 767 South Cleveland
that it was a 553 square foot lot and they approved a number of variances for that project that are
um and they approved a number of variances for that project that are more um a little bit more
severe than what we're asking for specifically they were asked for two foot rear yard depth
we have no refusals for rear yard depth we're providing seven and nine on each of these and
also for open space again we're at 17.1 on just the one lot and this was almost allowed to provide
zero percent open space so just uh showing kind of the comparison and that we're trying to meet
the least modification of the code while still providing um livable houses that are in line
with everything else that's there um we met with sasna um we'll go the architects uh can go through
our plans um the concerns were uh not around the subdivision or the open space um the concerns were
mostly around the aesthetic we had originally proposed. I'm going to stop my screen so that
the architects can jump on. That's Evan and Leah Litvin from Low Design, so they can show the
changes that we made. But just to characterize, on the 18th Street side, the biggest concern was
wanting to not do the demolition of the existing structure, leave the facade that's there,
and utilize that for the new home.
We agreed to that.
We've made those revisions
and actually provided that in a second meeting
to the architectural committee of SASNA.
And I believe that they were happy about that change.
And that was something that was reflected
in the comments from the community.
On the Cleveland Street side,
the comments were around kind of lightening up
the facade that we had originally proposed
and mostly was around providing a mansard roof.
We have since amended the plans to provide a red brick instead of the darker brick we were looking at, and also providing a mansard roof to meet those recommendations.
Again, there wasn't much opposition from my understanding and my experience in the meeting related to the two refusals.
Again, open space and also lot size.
the concerns were really around the existing facade of the 18th street and putting a mansard
roof and having the Cleveland street side look a little bit more in context with the homes that
were there. Again, we're just asking for these lots to be similar, actually a bit larger than
what's currently there on all the existing properties and looking for the board to support
our variance given we've made those changes requested by the community. So Leah and Evan,
if you can go through your presentation, and I think just for illustrative purposes, it's helpful
to go through the lot sizes of the adjacent properties just because when you see it visually,
it does a bit better than me just listing them out. Absolutely. We'll start at the beginning.
Sure, and my name is Evan Litvin, L-I-T-V-I-N, 2116 Locust Street, Philadelphia PA 19103.
You swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Ms. Litvin, excuse me, you are on their oath from earlier.
Thank you.
Great.
Thank you to the board, and we appreciate your time in allowing us to share this project
with you.
I need to share the screen.
Sorry, bear with me one second.
There we go.
Can you confirm that you're seeing the screen?
As Rachel mentioned, the lot is street to street between 18th Street and South Cleveland.
The existing structure on the lot is a single-family home. It had a single structure,
I'm sorry, that was functioning as a duplex to give a sense of the site. We have photos
looking north on 18th Street and looking south on 18th Street, as well as south on Cleveland
and north on Cleveland. The existing site is 97.5 feet by 16 feet. The current structure is 62 feet
six inches deep. So it's one single structure that is three stories tall all the way back.
It has a 35 foot deep rear yard and the lot area is 1,560 square feet.
We're showing you the existing site plan on the left and the proposed site plan on the
right.
What you will notice is that we are removing the rear portion of the existing structure.
The front portion is to remain, but we are removing the rear portion of the three-story
three-story structure and it actually is creating this open space that does not exist.
structure and it actually is creating this open space that does not exist.
Right now.
Right now the existing structure comes back to align to the rear of the Cleveland Street
fronting home at 759. So we're creating a 16-foot open space to the structures to the north
allowing more light and air than is currently provided. We are here to review two refusals,
the subdivision of the lot and additional open area for parcel A.
To discuss the subdivision first, parcel A, which fronts on 18th Street, is 16 feet by 52 and a half feet deep.
And parcel B, fronting on South Cleveland Street, is 16 feet by 45 feet.
and again if the lot size is 1560 square feet if the lot were 1600 square feet the subdivision
would be allowed by right based on the size of this lot and the adjacent lots so we're just we're
just under the cusp the second refusal pertains to open area of parcel a only we are providing a
7-foot rear yard for parcel B. It's 45 feet deep. Because it is 45 feet deep, it is exempt from the
open area requirement, and we are providing the 7-foot required rear yard. For parcel A, which
is 52.5 feet deep, we are providing the required 9-foot rear yard. However, as it relates to open
area, we are providing 17% as opposed to the required 25%. And while we could potentially
get to 25% by making the rear portion of the structure narrower, the impact to the houses
to the north do not come from that. They come from the 16-foot space from the back of the
building to the back of the building that we're creating. Right now, it's a three-story structure
in this space.
And to just give a sense of how what we are proposing fits into the context of this block,
we put together an informal survey and looking at houses to the north and houses to the south,
as well as their rear yards and the dimensions between the backs of houses.
This was not prepared by a professional surveyor.
this is, you know, pulling from our information that's available to us. But when you see that
we're on Cleveland Street, we're showing a seven-foot rear yard. When you look up, you have
around six feet, 6'2", 6'6", 7'9", 7'3", 6'3", 5'11". Again, we're providing seven feet. The house
to the, our fronting on South 18th Street, we're providing a nine-foot rear yard, seven feet,
8, 10, 11, 9, 8, 10, and then this one's a little deeper, 14 and a half, but then three feet.
So what we are providing is very much in the spirit of what is currently on this block.
And just to give you a photo to sort of emphasize the density that exists here.
um house fronting on south 18th street is a uh four bedroom four bathroom house with two half
baths 20 around 2600 square feet we are keeping the floor plates as they are currently uh located
which allows for the alignments and um the house to um to uh to remain of the context
Our initial proposal was this. It involved replacing the existing facade, it involved
replacing the bricks, increasing the size of the window openings, and however we were intending to
keep the cornice line. I show this because it's important to understand that this is not what we
will be building, we're intending to build. After this was initially proposed to SOSNA,
What we are now proposing after extensive feedback and extensive time speaking with immediate neighbors, presenting to the architectural committee of SOSNA, our client has elected to retain the existing facade on this block.
And he will restore it, which will be a painstaking process, including replacing, because it's in pretty rough shape right now, we'll be replacing the stone headers.
we will be restoring the cornice, replacing the windows, pointing brick, any stone that needs to
be repaired will be repaired or replaced, as well as a custom door. This will be, as well as
planter boxes, etc. And I just want to state that we, this is the,
planter boxes etc and i just want to state that we this is a specifically important point to the
community and the immediate neighbors especially because this is uniquely one of the only remain
you know like rare very rare remaining intact block so of historic row homes so we really did
take this point into consideration as we made this pretty major change to the design as a result of
the neighbor feedback.
We'll continue.
Parcel B, the home facing on South Cleveland Street, which is currently open, is a four
bedroom, three bathroom house, roughly 2,440 square feet.
This was our initial proposal.
I mean, yes, this was our initial proposal.
The intention was to keep the cornice line implied through and have a contemporary interpretation
of the two-story homes on this property with a clear material change at the third floor.
The feedback for this property was to add a mansard roof by angling the third story back
and switching to red brick, which we have obliged and we are doing.
I just want to make a note that the third floor here, we don't have a refusal to do the setback
on the third story we're providing a mansard roof as a um in consideration of the community feedback
and the uh feedback we got from uh the sasna organization but we do not have a refusal for
um the third story setback it's uh permitted by right to be flush and again we're doing the mansard
roof correct and that is what i have to share with you um the last thing uh i wanted to
just provide was to address the comment that had been made about the zoning posters. We did post
the zoning posters on the 18th street side of the property. If you can unshare your screen,
Evan, just so that I can show that to the board. It was included in a packet, but I just want to
As you can see, they were posted right here.
Anybody walking on the 18th Street side of the property could easily see this.
It wasn't behind the door frame.
It's posted on the property within 21 days of the hearing as required by the code.
You make a big point to make sure that this is done.
so just uh to the other the other comment that was made i just wanted to you know to make that
point clear to the board um thank you okay uh any questions from the board no no no okay we'll open
up for testimony from any from anyone else could we get my uh the client on to just adopt our
yes we can thank you uh jordan clafee is the owner
mr clafee please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good afternoon sir please identify yourself spell your first and last name
jordan clafee j-o-r-d-a-n c-l-a-f-f-e-y you swear if i'm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do thank you miss pritzker thanks jordan um have you heard the testimony
given today in front of the board i have do you adopt it as your own and do you believe
it to be true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes i do thank you
questions from the board no no anyone else to testify please raise your hand
chair we have lionel ginsburg please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
i'm sorry fatina could you promote him to panelists sure he's coming back in this panel
thank you good afternoon sir uh you were sworn in earlier i believe so just
identify yourself and spell your name lionel artem ginsburg l-i-o-n-e-l last name a-r-t-o-m
G-I-N-Z-B-U-R-G.
If you get a little closer to your microphone or raise the volume, that would be helpful.
Okay, here we go.
I may share my screen with the panel.
Here we have on July the 13th on the rear, no zoning note.
July 12th, on the front, no zoning notice.
July 12th on the front, no zoning notice. July 12th in the rear, no zoning notice.
July 13th in the rear, no zoning notice. July 13th in the front, no zoning notice.
I'm limited as to what I can say being testifying as an attorney, as a person. I live at 748
and that poster was A, not the required orange zoning notice poster and B, was up for exactly
one day prior to the big rains that we got on July 4th weekend. I should note that the zoning
hearing says, notification signs shall be posted within five business days after the applicant
files an appeal to the zoning board and remain continuously in place through the day of the
hearing, which shall take place no less than 21 days. If signs are not posted in accordance with
the requirements of the above, the zoning board shall delay action on the matter and require
or reposting. Unless the zoning board determines that the required posting began or before
and the applicant made good faith efforts. There were no good faith efforts. It was up
for one day. I should add on the zoning issue with the SOSNA issue. SOSNA had, if you give
me one second, originally on July 8th, asked for a continuance because the zoning committee
he did not take a vote the plans that have just been presented with the new facade and i don't
even know about the rear because those plans i i saw those plans the first time five minutes ago
both as an attorney and as an immediate neighbor i have no idea if they're there or not
you look yesterday we had an issue where the art developer was slipping notes under the door
implying that he had Sazna
approval. That's not correct.
I'm going to object, Chairman.
I am not.
Let me continue because I need to put this on the letter.
Sir, sir,
please do not speak over each other.
What's your objection, Rachel?
Just the mischaracterization of the
letter. I have
a letter here from Sazna
saying that you would
Mute him. That's it. Okay.
okay all right rachel continue yeah thank you i just and i don't mind using first names so
please excuse me yeah uh chairman i have never been reached out to by this individual i'm not
sure if he represents himself or anyone else as i showed the posters were posted um there's as the
board is well aware we no longer use the orange zoning posters since the pandemic um and uh clearly
plenty of people were aware of this meeting in addition to Mr. Lionel Ginsburg. So he was not
at any of the meetings that we had. So and just so you're aware, this letter that was sent around
basically said, and I had a conversation with Nicole, she can testify to this. And I sent her
the letter. It basically just said that the SASDA was encouraged that our committee encouraged was
encouraging and supportive of the revisions we made it did not say that sasna supported the
project and again we asked for a hearing hold so that we can accommodate another meeting with the
community i don't know what else to say on that point chairman i agree uh we're not going to be
labor this this hearing so um any questions from the board no no no all right planning commission
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board david effecto city planning commission the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the single family zoning for this property
the proposed buildings are consistent with what with what the code permits and with adjacent
development in terms of use in bulk. The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board
grant the requested variances. MI 2021-001-569-760-South 18th Street. We're going to,
when will we resume this Rachel? You have the meeting with Sasna Nguyen? I am not sure. I believe
whatever Tanya can get us in if she has room this month or in August. I believe that
the other matter was given an August resumption. And it'll only be limited to
the letter from SASNA. Is that correct? Yes, Chairman. That's correct.
Anya, do you have a date for us?
August 25th.
Two o'clock? August 25th.
What time? 2 p.m.
Thank you. So MI 2021-001569
760 south 18th street this hearing will be resumed this hearing will
This hearing will be resumed on August the 25th at 2 p.m. and limited to the letter from SOSNA.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
I think this does complete the 2 o'clock list.
It is now 4.30.
We'll take a 10-minute break.
and we'll be back at uh 4 40. okay okay um chair if i could yes um just put on a record um i i'm
not sure if it's very clear um we you stated it would only be for the letter to be read
at the resumption however there are multiple hands up now so either they would testify here today
or testify at the reception hearing.
Why don't we do this then?
Thank you.
I apologize for the mix up.
So we will have a full hearing
because if we have testimony today,
it may not be germane to what the changes are.
So I think in fairness to everyone,
let's see what the changes are,
how Sassana decides to act on that with the letter,
but also give folks an opportunity
to speak at that hearing as well.
We're absolutely fine with that, Mr. Cameron.
Thank you. Thank you, Tonya. Okay. So, Chair, just for clarification, there will be a resumption hearing August 25th at 2 p.m., where testimony will be allowed from all those who have their hand raised today.
And there will be no notification going out. Hearing is scheduled for August 25th. There will be no posting requirements. Thank you very kindly, Chair.
Thank you. Thank you for clearing that up. All right. See everyone back at 440.
Thank you.
You've begun.
And Tanya and
Fatina, you'll let us know if you're ready.
We're ready to go, Chair.
I'll get started and Carol will catch up.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Frankie Chico.
I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along
hearing along with our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza,
and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator, Fatina L., and our Board Attorney, Ms. Rebecca Cole, are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings,
I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded, and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded, and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat. For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to make an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
And I'd like to remind everyone, please do not attempt to testify in the chat.
Any comments or concerns should be addressed to our board administrator, Ms. Fatina L.
Ms. Fatina L.
Having said that, we will now go to the 3.30 list.
And is anyone requesting a continuance or withdrawal on the 3.30 list?
If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Hallie. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record, spell your first and last
name and then I'll swear you in. Do you need to unmute yourself?
chair we also have nicole um whoever okay so um i'm sorry but
um whoever okay so um i'm sorry but are these hands raised for what we're discussing at the
3 30 session yeah because nicole was on the sasner list at 2 30 2 o'clock rather and 7 22 hicks
for three um but i'm i'm i'm uh coming off mute at this point to carry over some conversation
because we were cut off at the last section we can't we cannot uh we cannot adhere to this august
25th i'm sorry nicole we are discussing 330 sessions if you have any questions you can put
them in a chat or you can contact me directly okay nicole okay the only new hand that i know
of is mr france pierre i'll unmute him chair okay mr pierre you're still under oath please
identify yourself for the record. Hello. Yes, please identify yourself. Yes, that's France
Pierre, Councilmember Johnson's office. That's F-R-A-N-T-Z, last name Pierre, P-I-E-R-R-E.
You're still under oath. Please proceed.
I appreciate that. First, let me just say I appreciate you, Mr. Chairman and fellow board
members. I understand that you, as well as the ZBA staff, work extremely hard at the appeals that
you hear and take in each and every week, whether it be Tuesday or Wednesday. So first of all,
I just want to applaud you for that, because I know it's not an easy job. But I do want to,
if I may, have just your ear in regards to, I believe it was the last appeal, I'm sorry,
i just moved my screen um in regards to seven
break it you're breaking up french hello
hello hello yeah we can hear you now you're breaking up oh wonderful um i i was saying if
i could mr chairman if i could have your ear in regards to the appeal for the two o'clock calendar
760 South 18th street. I appreciate that. Um, what I was hearing from the RCO, uh, in this matter,
Sazna, um, what they were saying, um, is in regards to the continued schedule, because
essentially, uh, this appeal was, uh, continued, but it's being expedited, uh, to, uh, an August
state um what she was saying was that she uh the zoning committee is going to have a difficult time
in regards to making sure that they can add them onto their calendar because it is already
filled for the month of august um and as you know mr chairman uh the these rcos also work
extremely hard they are volunteers they are community members that care about their community
and that's why they are involved in the ZBA process so what I would just ask is that the board
extend this continuance until possibly September or to a later date that works best with SOSNA
as they can try to adhere to the new hearing for this. Thank you and I apologize for if I
rushed that but I figured since there's going to be another meeting and changes may be offered at
that meeting by the applicant no sense going through the current application um but having
said that as miss sunkett just reminded uh the lady from sasna you can speak with miss sunkett
offline on that and we'll work something out um if i could mention also chair that it's inappropriate
to have a discussion about a case when the attorney is not present and that was why i cut
people off unfortunately the attorney who represents the applicant should be weighing
in regarding this so if it could be discussed offline that would be appreciated it is a
resumption hearing so it does not need to be posted okay friends
understood i actually think rachel might be on this 330 calendar i'm not too sure i could be
wrong in regards to that but i believe she might actually be on this calendar but yes i do
understand um i i we they weren't allowed uh and and again you don't have to apologize mr chairman
i understand um that it is difficult um you know the days get long and the hearings especially get
um you know the days get long and the hearings especially get long and very contentious
long and very contentious
uh but i just wanted to put that on record because if it's not said um then uh you know um
you know our job is to represent the community and the constituents so we want to make sure
they're being well point well taken thank you thank you all right uh having said all that
we will now go to the first case. I'm sorry, anyone asking for a continuance or withdrawal
on the 330 list? I see no hands, Chair. Thank you. MI 2021, that's 000031, 101 Emily Street.
This is a pro se, and I believe Mr. Smith will be representing himself. There's a letter of
non-opposition from Pennsport Civic Association and also a letter of non-opposition from Council
Member Squilla. So Mr. Smith if you're out there please raise your hand.
He's coming in as a panelist. Thank you Mr. Smith please spell your first and last name and I'll
swear you in. Francis Smith F-R-A-N-C-I-S-S-M-I-T-H. You swear affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
Uh, I, I know I had a hearing, you know.
Third, real quick, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents? Yes. Proof
of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the referral, refusal, photos and plans five days
prior to this hearing? Yes. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes. Please proceed.
all right this is for a single family dwelling in 101 emily street and
um mr councilman i have my son with me because i'm really not no good with the computer so he's
going to be helping me out with this a little bit sure all right so for the you wanted the
pictures of the refusal because i have the document that was sent to the email yeah whatever
exhibits you can share with us it would be helpful and your name sir uh my name is edwin
E-D-W-I-N-E-I-D-E-L-L
And do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
So I'm going to begin sharing my screen now.
Hold on a second, I'm trying to figure out how to do this.
Okay, so I'm going to pull out the packets that we shared to the email that was given to us before.
where it's when i went to when i went to and i got a letter from frederick marshall
who said i had to go to the streets department and the city planner and i did that on 10th march
10th 2020 where you can see the places go back to relations let's go back eddie
so i have two separate documents so uh this one that's uh
If you go back to that document, the floor plan, if you can make that a little bit larger, that would be helpful.
There's another one on the floor plan.
Give him this one.
So I have this one image right here, and this is just one of those, and I can scroll down to other ones if need be.
Tell us what it is you're planning on doing.
It's a single-family dwelling house, a four-story house with a roof deck.
garage and what is what is currently there nothing it's an empty lot oh it's a vacant lot and you're
putting up a new uh a lot in the houses so uh i have two separate documents oh here's another uh
blueprint but i have two separate documents so if i look it's so here's uh the views from the sides
it a lot and then here goes the actual lot so you're right on this image with the fences so
you're right on the corner right right on the corner yeah if uh emily and uh it's front and
correct okay i own the house to the right of it and the lot is where i'm going to build the
other one and i just finished that house right beside it okay and did that house there very
but okay um just looking and board have any questions no no is there anyone else to testify
in this case if so please raise your hand chair we have lisa
chair we have lisa please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good afternoon ma'am please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
lisa galslow g l-i-s-a g-a-u-s-l-o-w you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth yes please proceed um i live on emily street um i didn't realize this was a four
story um structure um that is very high um higher than any surrounding building any surrounding
residents. I oppose that. I primarily oppose the parking, the garage, which, you know, as you can
see on Front Street has two parking spaces at the corner of Front and Emily. There's two spaces
is also to the right of the house on McKean Street. So there's four parking spaces on that
block. The owner of, you know, whoever lives in that red garage often parks in front of
garage um that doesn't bother me um but this new proposal for another garage on front street
um that would further further reduce the parking on front street um you know creating
um parking for only that house um access into that house and eliminating
um you know street parking so i strongly oppose that um three stories seems to be standard
most houses on emily street have two stories um the one that he just finished at 103 emily
um it it does um um coordinate with the other houses on you know in the area
but they are getting taller four stories um that's that's kind of pushing it in my opinion
um so i definitely oppose the garage to that um house mr smith
we're looking at the photograph of the house on emily that you recently completed what is the
height of that building same it's the same height as the house right beside mine it's
four stories they're only 38 foot yeah so you're with you didn't you didn't go beyond the 38
don't mean it's going to be higher i know that's why i'm asking is it 38 feet yes correct and what
you're proposing is 38 feet yes correct i just want that for ms goslow to understand that 38
feet is a is a buy right yeah you're not exceeding that okay thank you all right uh any other
questions out there anyone else have any questions or comments please raise your hand
i see no hands chair thank you planning commission
uh ron bednar city planning it's r-o-n bednar b-e-d-n-a-r we're in firm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed uh this property is indicated
for residential use on the city plan we recommend the crescent variance for rent
Thank you. MI 2021, that's 000031, 101 Emily Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you. MI 2021, that's 001256, 128 East, Phil, Eileen, Melina Street, E-L-L-E-N-A.
Henry Clinton?
Henry, we see you, but we can't hear you.
Mr. Chairman, I'm here. How about now?
Good. Henry, before you begin, is Springer Street different? Is that a separate case?
Yes, but it's back. It was one lot and it's subdivided. So it's going to be the same house
will be built on Springer Street and Philolanda Street. So I'm presenting them in one presentation
because all the issues are the same. That's why I want to know, so I'll read that in. MI 2021,
that's 001257141 East Springer Street. Those two cases will be joined.
141 East Springer Street.
Those two cases will be joined.
All right.
Thank you.
And I think you were on earlier today.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
You're still under oath.
Carol?
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please?
Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia
PA, 19146.
Thank you.
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,
refusal referral, photos, and 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 the above.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you. May I share my screen?
all right here it comes coming up
is that visible
yes yes okay uh these are two properties back to back and as i said to the chairman at the outset
I'm going to present them together because the issues and the refusals are basically the same
with one minor deviation. This is my table of contents containing exhibits AA through
A, let me get to the bottom there, through A10. These are my appearance statements for each
project, Phil LaLana, as well as for Springer Street. Here are the refusals. There's no
issues with regard to height, open space, rear yard. The refusal is simply that in this zoning
district, there's a minimum five foot wide side yard between the houses. And because of the
configuration of these lots, the one house on Philolena Street is only four and a half feet.
and so it's six inches off the required five feet which we consider the minimus or minimal
and the other refusal which I'll show you is for Springer Street and it's the same issue
a minimum side yard width is five feet and we have three and a half feet and that's because
when I show you the plan for that particular lot there's an offset in the lot so the first
20 feet or so are only at three and a half feet, but the remainder of the lot, which is 75 feet
deep, does comply with the five-foot requirement. So I'll move through the presentation. We do have
a letter of support for both projects from East Mountain Area Neighbors, and there are a number
of provisos that they've asked for. We have agreed with all those provisos. The change in plan
for each project is that there's been a reduction in height and that's why I'm asking the board if
they look kindly upon these applications that we have one page uh stamped today the proviso sheet
as well as the plan. And I believe Mr. Clinton that the only proviso if you can go back to those
that are enforceable through us would be the not to exceed 32 feet in height correct and that's why
that's the only thing i put on the provisional sheet and the rco mr jeffrey hayes i believe is
on the call and he does understand that but my client has agreed to adhere to the requirements
as laid out in this letter that the height does that change the plan in any way was a revised plan
Yeah, there's a revised plan for each project, one page.
One page, each, okay.
And the proviso form, both of which were sent to Attorney Saleta last week.
I'm sorry, thank you.
That's okay.
And then this is the support letter for Springer Street.
You have one for Springer as well as for Solana.
And the requirements are the same on both projects.
So, again, to give the board some perspective, Phililena is in the forefront here, and the
back street, which I'll give you another perspective, is Springer Street.
Right now the lot goes from Phililena to Springer, and that's why the lots are back to back.
Another aerial view, it's a vacant lot right now.
I don't know how long it's been vacant, but I think the members of the community are well
are well familiar with how long it's been vacant. These are just photographs to give
familiar with how long it's been vacant.
These are just photographs to give.
perspective on the lots. This happens to be a photograph just to show the board of
my client's house is 128, which is to the left of this existing house. This is 126. So right now,
this is the distance between the two houses that have been in play for a long time. And that
distance is roughly 10 feet. Again, there's only posters that indicate that we did post
the property and post it properly on both sides. The plan, I think this is the most significant
plan, and I'll blow up the plan on the left. So the plan on the left is showing the lot
as is, which is about 150 feet deep, if you can see that. And this photograph, or this
plan, shows how we basically took the lot and just divided it in two. This is Philalena,
and this is Springer. The same house that is built on Philolena will be built on Springer Street.
It's a mirror image. These are the proviso sheets. Again, there's one for Philolena and one for
Springer. These are the floor plans, there's three stories, no roof deck, no basement.
This is the elevations, all the homes, most of the homes in that block you enter on the
side, not through the front. And again, this will be the same elevation on the front of
Phililena as on the front of Springer Street. I have tax certifications, all the other pro
forma documents that are required for this submission, my project information form, my
notices of appeal. Again, the zoning map to show you this is zoned RSA 5, and we're complying
with that in terms of the single family house. And I do have one witness on the line. These are
my zoning notices and certifications that everything was mailed and we met with the RCO
on several occasions. So I don't want to belabor the point, but basically we have two individual
homes, two single-family homes and two single-family lots.
We're asking for de minimis relief on the side yard
so that the houses will have 16-foot fungers.
Do you have a client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, I do, Mr. DiCicco.
Angie?
DiGrusa?
If she could be unmuted.
Hi, everyone. How are y'all?
Please identify yourself. Spell your first and last name.
Angela Gresso, A-N-G-E-L-A. Gresso, G-R-U-E-S-O.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Mr. Clinton.
Mr. Gresso, were you on the Zoom call when I made this presentation concerning the lot on Philadelphia and the lot on Sprinter Street?
yes sir okay i also uh real quick want to state that the owner is on the call as well okay um and
if you had the opportunity to testify would you adopt
my testimony as your own and that's true and correct
yes sir i do all right thank you questions from the board no
anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
chair we have cynthia devoe please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good afternoon ma'am please spell your full name for the record and i'll swear you in
good afternoon cynthia c-y-n-t-h-i-a devoe d-e-v as in victor o-e you swear affirm to tell the
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed chair i have a petition here from the
neighbors on our block as well as other um blocks on the neighborhood it says we the undersigned
oppose the development project at 128 east filolina street as well as 141 springer street
the construction of the new home will block the view of the nearest neighbors it will block the
sunlight, the developers have destroyed existing properties to the nearest neighbor's home.
the developers have destroyed existing properties to the nearest neighbor's home as well as their
construction and they are non-responsive to the concern of the residents who are ingenious to the
block and the neighborhood therefore we request that the council member cindy bass and the
philadelphia zoning board oppose this project until concerns of the nearest neighbors who are
directly impact it by the project are addressed now chairman we have um they have been putting
up these houses this is the first time that we have been in one of these zoning meetings
there was no zoning prior to this put up for the other houses that was built we had no contact or
knowing how to go further we've been to our council uh woman cindy bast and everything but
No one did anything at the time. Also, the inspector, John Leck and John Daugherty,
they have been in charge of covering up everything when we try to get in to speak to someone.
So I appreciate you allowing me to speak. There is damage done to several of our homes on this
block due to construction. Before this construction can proceed, we would like to ask that they can
address that as well as guarantee that our children, for one, will be safe. They have jeopardized
children's lives. I have pictures of how they left all the trash and debris out on the sidewalk.
Now, I understand these are different projects for these houses, but they are the same people
doing the construction. I have followed around in the neighborhood and seen the construction
they're doing. They're the same workers, and they all are familiar with each other in this group of
these projects are building these homes. They also are putting commercial stairways on the front of
these houses, which is not safe for anyone. And some of the buyers are not aware that these are
commercial stairs in front of the home. Also, they have not did any showing up property. They dug down
three and a half feet below my foundation, and I have proof or pictures of that as well. And they
have damaged my neighbor further down the street property as well. Now, the space that he's speaking
about, the five inches between home, they have not left me my space, although they said they
weren't. They also have pulled up the plaque, which caused me now to have water damage coming
into my home, which affects my business. I have a daycare here. I'm a family daycare. I've been
here for 20, I've been here for 30 years. I've been doing a daycare for 20. They don't speak to
you when you try to communicate with them as well we have issues with communication they comes up
you never know when someone's there working someone come in they're working now these houses
have shut off my son the viewing for us to be able to see and and um when you and i can barely
keep my blinds open because you never know when someone's in the house and the windows are so
large on the side that it takes up my whole side if i walk from my dining room you can see me by
walk in my kitchen you can see me so we have issues with them not even communicating on what
type of building they are going to build and why they're building it also with the surveying the
city has allowed resurveying to be done if you purchase something and you expect to have that
property we don't understand how the city can resurvey the block to say that we are now on
their property so according to them we are on their property i'm three inches on their property
now on their property line now and according to them also my wall that belongs to my house that's
on my deed is fenced into this property which will be the same situation over at 128 because once
they build their house anything that she need done to that side of her wall she will not be able to
get done because it's fenced in and you cannot go on other people's property to dig up and that's
one of the issues. I have to have my wall. They did not paint the side of my wall, so the wall
needs to be dug up and painted. I have an estimate for $12,000 to get that done. I don't have $12,000.
Neither will Ms. Rebecca have it because she doesn't. She's a senior citizen, and she needs
lighting in her place, and we need to know that she's still in there safe if something was to
happen to her. She live alone. So we have an issue with these buildings going up so high,
and we are not considered and our children are safe we also had a lady
because they don't close up the holes and stuff as they're working
a lady moved in earlier this year not knowing that it was a hole right out front on the sidewalk
from when they dug up the hole to do the plumbing and they left it wide open so when it snowed it
covered the hole and the lady never knew that it was a hole there because she don't live she
that it was a hole there because she don't live she didn't live here at the time and she fell in
didn't live here at the time and she fell in this six foot
this six foot deep hole and someone has to pull her out so i have a video of that so we don't have
clear safety issue um safety with these guys and i don't know who east monia we got the
survey from because when we did our walk no one was in agreement and i have everyone
name and addresses um that we talked mr roe did you attend the rco meeting we didn't get any um
information on that. That's what I'm saying. Some of this stuff, and we have problem with
mailing and stuff around here. We get mail on Sunday morning sometimes. We don't get mail and
stuff on time. And they know we have issues. But no, I did not attend because I didn't know about
it. And I didn't see the zoning. They have the zoning for that property so far back. I did not
see that zoning. If Ms. Collin hasn't came over to ask me for help to do the petition,
I wouldn't have knew that Zoni was there.
Mr. Clinton, could you show us any photographs of the posting?
Yes. Oh, I'm sorry.
I'm getting there, Mr. Chairman. Bear with me. There's the addresses.
Yeah, understood.
Mr. Vaux's address, I assume, is on that list.
Yeah, I mean, just for context, Mr. Chairman, Miss Dubois lives across the street.
And we had actually a telephone conference with her and the councilwoman yesterday,
and she expressed all the concerns about her daycare and about the water damage and everything.
and that's not related to my client and the next door neighbor is miss cowens she also was on the
call and she had complained about a gate her gate was damaged and my client went out and and fixed
that so i just don't want you know different issues to get uh mixed up so mr vote lives
across the street not adjacent that's my understanding yes but this is also a neighborhood
Yeah, I understood, Mr. Wood.
Just hang in there.
I want to see.
Show us a picture of the posting.
Yeah, I had them in here, so.
There's one.
There's the close-up.
There's the other one.
There's the other one on the other street.
so i think they're close to the front property line is that accurate yes i mean that's what i
told my client to do and you know we sent out the mailings and we have the certification of
mailings we met several times with east mount airy with well-attended meeting so when when we
were asked by charles richardson to participate in a call yesterday we obviously did it uh we
gave Ms. Cowens the owner gave Ms. Cowens her cell number I gave her my personal cell number
but I was going to ask you to do that okay you already did that okay so and the contractor
will have a contact number and to advise people when when work will be being performed absolutely
all right is Mr. Richardson on the call
yes chair please unmute yourself Mr. Richardson Richardson you're still under oath but just
identify yourself again please actually you have to swear me in because this will be my first time
today well I have I I'm I confuse you with folks I apologize we laugh about that often I know all
so give us your full name and I'll swear you one Charles Richardson from the office of
Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
Thank you, Swearer, for I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
We're kind of surprised with that testimony that just took place because yesterday afternoon,
as Mr. Clinton did mention, the Councilwoman did hold a Zoom meeting that included Ms. Cowens,
the developer, Mr. Clinton, the zoning chair of Eastman Area Neighbors, Jeff Hayes,
and several of our staff members.
She received everybody's, as he said,
she received everyone's personal cell phone numbers
for her to call if she had any questions or concerns.
We do know that the neighbors did receive letters.
They were mailed at the end of May.
And actually with Ms. Cowens herself,
Actually, with Ms. Cowens herself, who is the resident at 126 East Filalina, did send us a text message copy of the letter that she had received from the developers regarding the two meetings that took place on June the 8th and the RCO meeting that took place on June the 22nd.
who is the resident at 120...
Unfortunately, she did not make that meeting, and it appears that a lot of the folks did not make it either, but they were notified.
The councilwoman at this point is going to go no opposition on this.
The RCO meeting did take place.
There were 20 people in attendance.
Nine that were in support and one near neighbor was in support.
Three of the other attendees were not opposed and one near neighbor was not opposed.
only one uh person opposed the uh who happened to be present that was not a near neighbor either
um she supports you're you're comfortable and your office is comfortable with uh
understanding that there was proper notification yes sir okay thank you uh
i think i asked her right i'll ask any questions from the board no no anyone else to testify
Here we have Jeffrey Hayes. Please unmute yourself and wait for this.
Afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself with the record and I'll swear you in.
Yeah, this is Jeffrey Hayes, J-E-F-F-E-R-Y-H-A-Y-E-S.
Can you swear I'm firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Yeah. I'm chair of the Furry Spanary Neighbors, and I want to express my apology that some of the people on the call did not attend our meetings.
I do agree with Charles Richardson that we sent out mailed invitations to over 100 near neighbors.
uh for we have we it's our policy to have two meetings we have a community meeting that's you
know just a non-binding um informational meeting where um our committee can get to know the project
and neighbors can um participate and understand a little bit better what's happening and then
two weeks after that we have our voting meeting and uh so those meetings were held and i i'm sorry
that more people weren't able to attend but you know we we did send the letters and and i think
the receipts are there so there were two opportunities to be a part of this um i would
like to um i just wanted to to sort of read into the record or make sure the record did reflect
that we did ask for five provisos i realized that not all these are under the um controlled
zoning board i do appreciate that the 32 foot height reduction is part of the
of the decisions it will be a part of the decision today
and i'd also just like to make sure that the other items the the changes in materials the street tree
the rear yard becoming green space and clarification on the side yard part of that being green space
as well that those are all um we have verbal agreement from the owner to to provide those
things and and hearing henry clinton's um agreement on that as well but i just wanted to to put out
there for us that those things are important and they were agreed to and that is part of why
this project got the support that it did um at the rcme thank you thank you for your testimony
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Anyone else?
Yes, Chair, we have Ms. Tomlin Corbin, please unmute yourself and please wait for the-
Good evening, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with the record.
Spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Ms. Tomlin Corbin
please unmute yourself
Chair we have one more person
William and Darlene McMillan
please unmute yourself and wait for the
evening good folks please identify
yourself spell your full name and I'll
swear you in
my name is William
McMillan that's M-C
capital M-I-L-L-A-N
I have my wife Darlene McMillan
I have my wife, Darlene Macmillan, as well with me.
as well with me
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Yes, we do.
Please proceed.
This property at 128, I did not see that notice, along with a letter that was sent to us concerning this construction.
There's not presently a home there, and the space between the houses, it seems kind of
that there would be none when the property is constructed. Not only that, but many of the issues
that Ms. DeVoe had mentioned, especially with the architecture of the home and the way
our homes are constructed it just looks like a monstrosity in the middle of our block we
generally have homes and the ones that were constructed previously were so much higher
than ours till it makes our architecture look wrong for this area so my concern is that space
between them and the um the construction part of it it's not architecturally sound with the
with what we have on this block
thank you anyone else uh yes with the not just the architecture but i'm sorry who's speaking
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed.
With the homes that have been built here, our street has been torn up for three years.
I'm handicapped and I use a walker.
and I couldn't park my car on my side of the street, which made a dangerous bus crossing the
street. This particular block has been dangerous for everybody, pedestrian and car, for so long.
I don't understand the thoughts of the contractors when they decided to do this.
is there a start and a finish time or is it allowed to go on for three or four years like
these past constructions? More than likely the contractor, the owner of the property will want
to get this to build as soon as possible. It doesn't make sense monetarily for them to wait.
okay mr chairman henry clinton i i agree with that uh if we have a
decision today in our favor my client will immediately apply for building permits which
will take uh 30 to 45 days and then uh she will proceed i mean there's no underpinning here there's
no basements that's the other thing that we tried to do so that the miss cowan's home would not be
disturbed other than you know a three and a half foot to four foot foundation um so yeah my clients
she she's ready to go understood okay thank you um planning commission
uh ron bednar city planning
these properties uh both are indicated for residential use on the city plan
And we recommend that the requested variances for both properties be permitted.
Thank you.
MI 2021-001-256-128 East Phil Alina Street.
My vote is yes with the proviso.
Maximum height, 32 feet.
And one page, Mr. Chairman.
And one page, yeah, I'm sorry.
Revised plan, one page approved today.
Thank you.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
MI 2021-001-257-141 East Springer Street.
My vote is yes, with the Proviso.
Maximum height 32 feet.
Revised plan, one page approved today.
My vote is yes, with Proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
Yes, with Proviso.
Thank you.
uh and carol and the rest of the board i think i may have mentioned i i have to leave now at
five it's 5 30 i apologize apologize for being rude earlier but i'm getting old i guess anyway
thank you everyone for your cooperation and support everyone take care great job frank
i'm comfortable using first names too yeah have a nice evening calendar number 1434
Calendar number 1434-2232 West Estelle Street.
2232 West
Hopefully I pronounced it properly.
We're looking for Clarence Dupree.
Madam Vice Chair.
i do believe that that case was withdrawn okay if we if we can move on to the next one and i
will confirm momentarily thank you calendar number one two four five thirty two eighteen
denfield place the attorney is sean whalen
hi mr whalen can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
Certainly. Thank you, Ms. Tenere. Sean, S-E-A-N, Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N, Vintage Law, 6 Coulter Avenue, Suite 1000, Ardmore, PA, 19003.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
see. I agree to waive the reading. I believe one of the refusals is incorrect, but it's immaterial
to the variance we asked for today. So I'm willing to move on with it. Okay. Have you emailed the
exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, 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, yes, and yes. Okay, you may proceed. Thank you very much. And for any of the
board members. I understand sometimes we slip, so I will not be offended if anyone uses my first
name. And I apologize if I do likewise for any of you. So I am here on behalf of On Point
Development LLC, and I will be sharing my screen. Hopefully you can see right now a Google aerial
view. Here's the property 3218 Denfield Place. It's right in between South 18th Street and South
20th Street. Way down in South Philly, you can see Chickie and Pete's down here to kind of give you
an understanding of where we are. Geary Street comes in right here, curves down, and this is
actually Denfield Place. It's a continuation from up there, and then curves into Hussleman.
Um, so the project that we're talking about today is, again, this is just sort of an aerial view to give you a layout.
This is, uh, we are requesting a single-family home, and, uh, this is in just a, you know, a full C of single-family homes.
So, contextually, we're, we're in the league.
Um, this, again, this is Geary Street, where it turns into Denfield, and then turns into Lusselman.
We're talking about this one, 3218, which is right at the corner.
You can see here there's a long line, and basically the whole neighborhood was all built together.
All of these homes on Denfeld and all of these homes on Hussleman range between approximately 1,800 and 1,900 square feet per lot.
They're all roughly the same size, built at roughly the same time.
And then, you know, the decision was made by whoever the developer was at the time that the two houses at the corner, instead of figuring out how to round that corner, this house right here on Hussleman would take a large triangular or trapezoidal parcel, and so would my client's parcel at 3218.
You can see here's an existing home. There's a large pool and actually quite a large single family or single family, sorry, single story edition can tell it's the end of the afternoon for all of us.
A single story edition right there, right behind us. And you'll see that in a minute has been approved.
and this is actually an older aerial photo from the city's websites, there are five new buildings
with 48 dwelling units built behind us. Notably, there is, and this was raised by the RCO,
you know, there's never any parking up here in the front. However, there's a complete rear drive
aisle that goes all the way from Geary to Handcraft here and that would service not only would there be
parking for the existing house that has existing parking you'll see that photo in a second
but it would also include three additional car off-street car parking spaces.
uh three additional uh car off street car parking spaces for the new property
um so again this just sort of gives you we're right at the curve right at the curve it just
splits in two and you know there's a large triangular parcel on each side um the parcel
next to us has a very large uh one-story addition already built onto it um and you know we have one
there as well which will be demolished we will be keeping this existing one story
existing house demolishing the existing one story addition and we're seeking to build one more house
right there so the the application that's in front of you right now is actually just for
a subdivision of the property here's a street view again looking like this would be the property line
right here. Here's the other triangular parcel right there. This is the existing home. Essentially
what you'll see is we're proposing another house right next to it, just one more in the line,
and here the opposite house has already built out considerably on its property.
So what do you propose to demolish?
sorry so you can't see it i'll show you in the next photo we have but it's not it's not 3218
denfield so so 3218 denfield um is going to remain in place this is an existing home
and we're going to subdivide right along the property line right along the building line so
that building this house will become a uh another another row house and then we'll be building
another row house immediately adjacent to it. So instead of being an end unit, this will become a
interior unit. Okay. So and I think again these are just photos showing the build out in existing
conditions. So here's a little bit better. It's tough with overgrowth. This house will stay and
then right next to it you'll just see there will be another house, another single family house built
there. So again, the same condition right next to us. This is the rear access drive aisle.
You can see it's very wide. There's rear access parking for everyone.
Right here starts on the left, our property. It's just over 100 feet long. That will be part of the
new property. This is proposed parcel B if you're looking at the packages. So parcel A would be the
existing house and that would be by right the only issue here this might be a better scene so
here you see a one-story addition that was previously added that's going to be demolished
and basically the new home is going to be built where that is now out over to the pool
these are the multi-family buildings right immediately behind us that also share that
rear drive aisle. Are they the ones behind Holy Spirit? Yes. Yeah, exactly. Okay. Excuse me.
So what you can see is we have two refusals, both with just regard to the only refusals we have
deal with the very front portion of the properties. I think we can see it here. So
this is the existing house. This is the proposed subdivision line. And then you see we have to
have street frontage for the proposed parcel B. So that's this narrow portion here to just have
street frontage. Really, the house will have rear access. I mean, again, you have over 100 feet
of access in the rear along this enormous triangular parcel. So just to put this into
context, the average size, again, of all of the row home properties in along both Denfeld and
Hussleman is between 18 and 1900 square feet. When we go through with this subdivision, this
existing home will be on 1965 square feet. And this triangle will actually be 5300 square feet.
So you're talking about an enormous lot for a single family house that will be built by right, will meet all of the conditions and setbacks and whatnot, and then would have rear access here.
So we got a refusal because you can see this narrow street frontage here, and we got a refusal for this narrow street frontage here.
The issue that I said I could not stipulate to, this width right here is 11.3 feet essentially.
It only needs to be under the code two-thirds of 16 feet, which is the required width for a lot.
two-thirds of 16 feet, which is the required width for a lot, which comes to 10 and two-thirds feet.
So that is actually allowable by right. So we should have and do have a refusal for this
angle right here. But again, we're not appealing LNI. We're just saying that we want the variance.
We believe that to be a de minimis variance that the board can overlook. So we went in front of
the Packer Park Civic Association. They opposed the project. To be fair, they had a difficult
meeting. It was, my understanding is, from their chairwoman, Barbara Kaposi, it was their first
in-person meeting. They actually had a split in-person and Zoom meeting. So I presented the
matter by Zoom, but that was not necessarily heard by everyone in the audience. And it was
very confused and jumbled. So we received an opposition vote, we believe mainly because of
parking and traffic along Denfeld and Hussleman. However, there will be no, this house will have
no parking or traffic congestion along Hussleman or Denfeld. Again, it has three cars off-street
parking in the rear along that drive aisle and has over 100 feet of access in the rear. So
there, you know, nobody's going to be parking along that frontage. So because of the confusion
that we felt happened, we asked for a second meeting, and we were denied a second meeting to
present in person, which we thought would better allow us to present to the community. I'm, I don't
know if Ms. Kaposi is on the, on the line, or anyone from Packer Park Civic is on the line today,
But, you know, for some reason, we were declined an in-person second meeting.
Because of the outcome of the RCO meeting, Dominic Novelli, who's on this call on behalf of the LLC owner,
went door-to-door along Denfeld and Hussleman and up South 18th, the nearest major street,
and got an 18-person petition in support, 12 of those people being people who reside on Denfeld
and or Hussleman themselves. So, you know, he went door-to-door for the most immediate neighbors
and got all of their support when he had the opportunity to explain the project to them.
so again we have a very large awkwardly shaped parcel we're trying to just all that's before
you today is to subdivide the parcel to make the end unit building into a it will become a middle
building and then we will have a by right building that's actually not in front of you today
a by right home. Obviously, if that's not by right, Elle and I will require us to get a
refusal on a variance and we'll be back in front of you. But I can attest that that's not going
to happen. So that is the entirety of the project. And I would just happy to answer any of the board's
questions. Otherwise, I would just call my witnesses and have them adopt my testimony or
answer your questions does the board have any questions no no um are there any witnesses
yes uh so i would like to call uh vince is he on
mr mancini you can please unmute yourself and please wait for the
oh and i apologize i did it myself uh is mr mancini on the call yes
Hi, Mr. Mancini. Name and address. Spell your last name, please, and then I'll swear you in.
Vincent Mancini, Landmark Architectural Design, 1325 Snyder Avenue, Philadelphia, 19145.
Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Sean, are you asking him to adopt your testimony?
Yes, I will.
Thank you.
Mr. Mancini, have you heard all of the testimony that I've presented today?
Yes, I have.
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, I do.
And would you adopt it as your own?
I would.
All right.
And just finally, if there's anything pertinent or necessary for the board, please let them know.
Otherwise, I'll offer you up for questions from the board.
I have one additional thought that I thought it would be an important fact.
the lot that's being subdivided is in fact over 5,000 square feet, which is three and a half
or more times the required lot of 1440 in a residential district. However, I want everyone
to rest assured that that's not the size of the home that's being constructed on that lot.
The home that is being constructed on that lot will afford
The home that is being constructed on that lot will afford approximately 67% open area.
Thank you.
So the home would be very similar to the homes that are adjacent to it.
And the majority of the lot will remain open.
As I said, 67% or thereabouts would remain open.
So I thought that was a very important fact rather than being misconstrued to that we were building the entire footprint.
Thank you. Does the board have any questions for Mr. Mancini?
Okay, are there any virtual witnesses?
Yes, one final witness, Ms. Tenere. Dominic Novelli, please raise your hand.
Please unmute yourself, Mr. Novelli, and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Novelli.
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Dominic Novelli, N-O-V-E-L-L-I, 1818 Holzman Street, Philadelphia PA, 19145.
Do you agree to wait?
No, strike that.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
You may proceed.
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. Neri.
Mr. Novelli, you are here on behalf of On Point Development, LLC, correct?
And did you hear all of the testimony that was presented today?
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Thank you very much, Ms. Tenere, Madam Vice Chair, I should say.
I offer Mr. Novelli up for any questions that the board may have.
Otherwise, I am concluded.
Does the board have any questions?
Okay, is there anyone here from Packer Park Civic?
I see no hands, Madam Chair.
Okay, Planning Commission?
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Ron, have you been sworn in?
Yes, I have, but if you want to do it again, I'm fine.
No, go ahead.
property is indicated for a single family residential use on the city plan believe the
applicant has not demonstrated a necessary hardship regarding requirements of the code
the application is not consistent with the requirements uh subdivision requirements we
recommend that the request of variance not be granted calendar number one two four five three
218 denfield place denfeld place my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no
calendar number 1248 720-22 south hicks street that's you again
you're just that lucky today madam vice chair i know name and address and spell your last name
please? Of course. Sean, S-E-A-N, last name Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N, Vintage Law, 6 Coulter Avenue,
Suite 1000, Ardmore, PA, 19003. You were already sworn in. Do you agree to waive the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I agree to waive the reading. There is one refusal,
again that I think is de minimis but is I believe erroneous but I will agree to just move forward
with the variance request. Thank you. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership
tax compliance refusal 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 all. Thank you you may
proceed okay uh thank you again we have a letter from sasna uh in opposition yes your honor
uh yes madam vice chair okay um
sorry let me have to get uh denfeld out of the way okay
all right let me share my screen
I am here asking on behalf of Katie and Matt Ostroff for another single-family home request.
We received a number of refusals that I'll walk you through.
So again, this is right on South Hicks Street in between Bainbridge and Fitzwater.
And it actually backs up to South Mull Street where it curves into Senate Street.
uh senate street so just pictorially you can see uh most of the single family homes
So just pictorially you can
along 15th street front on south 15th street and south hicks is actually the rear access
for most of those homes that front on south 15th and then you can see we have an existing
one-story warehouse that has 100% lot coverage, and we are seeking to demolish that and replace
it with a single-family home. You can also see this is the Scottish Wright house. It's a 12-story
building, multifamily apartment, and our one-story existing warehouse actually backs up to a large
surface area parking lot here's just the frontage you can see there are a number of new homes built
at the end of hick street here all three stories in height and we would be in line with with those
properties so here's here's a couple of the newer homes that have been built looking down south hick
Street. Again this is looking kind of further north on South Hick Street. This is the existing
it's actually one story because it's all one inside has an existing curb cut and existing
front access parking which I believe is the one refusal that is not proper from the refusal that
we have. So this is what's immediately after across the street from us. This is what I was
describing these are the homes up front on South 15th Street and these are the rear access parking
areas for those homes. Here is this picture is taken from leaning up against the rear wall of
South Hicks Street so you can see there's just a large surface area parking here and then this
this would be what's right behind this is again you can see these couple cars in the last photo
this is the 12 stories right there. Here's the rear of South Hick Street, our property,
and here are the new homes. You can see this one double wide, that one single wide.
Again, just a cleaner image of our rear area. The rear area is important here because we are
seeking to have no rear yard setback. It is 100% lot coverage now, and we are seeking essentially
to include the open area which is a refusal on the second and third floors and because this is
a parking area we are not impugning on anybody's light or air and you know there's no rear property
to be protected back there so again here just some more of the photos and nobody can read that so
this is an rm1 district so it could be a multi-family but instead katie and matt
ostrov who are here to testify today are actually very excited they live in this area and they found
this in this neighborhood immediately and they found this property and are looking to build
their home their personal home here to keep their kids in the same catchment and you know continue
you living in this neighborhood immediately. Most of the houses or most of the homes that I showed
you up and down the block are on lots of approximately 750 to 850 square feet. This
is a situation where we actually have a double wide lot. It's 1,600 square feet.
So it's twice the size of most of the lots on the block.
um and uh you know we obviously back up to that large parking lot in the 12 story
access uh we did present to sasna and we have a letter of opposition uh i will i believe miss
kodecker is on the call so i don't want to speak for her um but the the meeting went well essentially
they thought that you know the information we received was a number of very good specific
criteria that they hope to see revised. But overall they thought that the project was just
over large and so what happened was we needed to move this forward. SOSNA suggested a continuance
so that we could present revised plans. We agreed to a number of revisions at the meeting itself.
SOSNA only had the original plans in front of it, so it voted in opposition to those
And suggested maybe a continuance for us to meet with them again. Unfortunately, the Ostrovs are hoping to have this home finished before the beginning of next school year, which is, you know, approximately 13 months from now.
and suggested maybe a continuance for us to meet with them again.
Unfortunately…
um and with a continuance you know continuances are already being granted by the board as all of
you know uh for the end of this year and that would really uh preclude any ability to get this
home done for the Ostrovs and their children uh by you know next next summer so their kids could
go there for school um so we believe that we have addressed uh there's I always forget to say this
So there's one page of revised plans, and Ms. Agata Reister is on as the architect that can go through with specificity about what was done.
But essentially, here's just an example.
We really dug in, listened to what Sosna had to say, and Ms. Ostrove actually went door-to-door talking to neighbors, finding out what their issues were.
ultimately got 29 signatures in support on a petition, which I have, and I can show you if
need be. And we actually eliminated two of the zoning refusals that we originally had, and
are, you know, we have not cured the other several refusals we received, but we ultimately pulled
back and lessened all of the refusal requests we had on those, including reducing the height by
two feet. You know, the double wide lot actually, and Ms. Reister can testify to this better than I
can but the double wide lot requires substantial more substantial support beams which adds to the
height and actually pushes us over 38 feet but we agreed to remove a pergola there's no pilot house
and there's no parapet wall so in functional height we're actually lower than you know your
traditional 38 foot height home can be by right with the parapet wall that is allowed
um so with that i would uh like to turn this over to miss reister and have her kind of walk you
through exactly what the changes were like i said i believe them to be significant uh and i believe
that if we had the time we could go back before sasna and and you know i hope um but obviously
can't speak for them get uh get approval for the project going forward um so if that uh i'm happy
to answer any questions from the board otherwise i'll call miss reister as my first witness does
the board have any questions no no all right thank you uh if mr miss reister could raise her hand
i've unmuted someone who's under the name christopher noble um no it's it's actually
agatha reister it might be that my computer is logged in under one of my employees um names but
it's it's myself agatha reister with landmark architectural design
can you hear me yes i can can everyone hear miss reister yes yes can you put your name
name and address and spell your last name at the reister with landmark architectural design
1325 snyder avenue philadelphia pa 19148 the spelling is a g a t a r e i s t e r
Thank you.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, you may proceed.
Mr. Whalen.
Ms. Reister, before you jump forward, you are the project architect, yes?
That is correct.
And did you hear all the testimony already presented today?
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt it as your own?
All right. And Ms. Reister, as you just said, you heard me discuss the significant revisions to the
plan in order to try to meet all of the concerns that we heard from SOSNA and the concerns that
we heard from near neighbors. If you could walk the board through just kind of the breadth of all
of those and let them know just how substantial those changes were. Yes, may I have the ability to
share the screen or Sean could you pull up the revised zoning plan also the provided plan sure
the revised zoning plan also the provided plan sure i'll pull up the plan now
I'll pull up the plan now
is this what you were talking about
she's coming back in as a panelist oh okay in that case i will stop sharing
and let miss reister share so that she can control and show you exactly what she wants you to see
okay um could you just confirm that you can see the screen
yes i can see it i don't know about everybody else members yes we can see it thank you um so
as shown mentioned uh this currently this property is occupied 100 occupied it's a two-story
structure that basically occupies the entire lot. To north of us is a property that is recessed,
that has windows on both sides, south side and also west side. Our proposal took into consideration
that there are present windows. The property to south is 100% occupied, no windows. We position
are building accordingly. What you can see in this portion, this is the open area, all of
these elements in here are decks that allow light and air to this neighbor to north.
Building, the lack of rear yard setback occurs only in this portion and only occurs for
about 11 foot height. Again, currently we are 100% occupied for two stories, so we
limit the amount of
encroachment that we are proposing.
The home
on second and third floor,
we are proposing
25% open area,
which is in line with the
requirements of the zoning code.
The fourth floor is set back
at the front
by eight feet, which actually
puts it at only 48%
open, 52%
occupied area, which
we are trying to really limit the amount of encroachment and also the volume on the side.
As you can see, this is the profile. First floor, 11 feet in the rear, 12 foot setback on the second
floor for the entire building. On the north portion of the proposed building, which you can
see this line and here it's actually an additional setback of nine feet that would allow more
light to the neighbor from north to the north. Fourth floor front, as you can see, it's the
setback here. We are not proposing any parapet walls. This is open railing. This is a low
parapet wall on the third floor with also opening railing. No pilot houses have been proposed.
just an open stair to the roof deck. Originally we proposed a pergola that occupied a good portion
of the roof which was since then eliminated. As far as the revisions that had been made after
the meeting with SOSNA and the local residents, we eliminated one of the parking spaces to preserve
the two trees we reduced the size of the operable garage door we had set back the roof deck on the
third floor roof by five feet to eliminate the refusal reduce the height by two and a half feet
we eliminated the fergola as i mentioned we increased the rear yard area from 120 feet to
145 square feet, which would make us in compliance with the zoning code and eliminating one of the
additional refusals. We increased the open area on second and third floor to comply with the zoning
code and also set back the decks on the third and fourth floor to open up more light and air for the
building to north of us. So all of these revisions were really a result of all the comments that
came up at the meeting, and we thought that they were addressed very sensibly. I would like to
show you the building, what we are proposing. This is adjacent building to south,
building to north. This is the relationship of the structure. As you can see, we try to line
ourselves up with the existing building one door down, which is three stories with the setback
at fourth floor. That is basically how we mimicked it. This portion, this is a one.
That is basically how we mimicked it. This portion, this is a one two-story building that conceivably could ask for additional two floors without any setback required in the future, just additional.
Ms. Reiser, just also, can you explain what is the condition of that two-story existing duplex in between us and the other homes of our height?
um the condition as far as physical condition um yes is it physically in good condition
and i i would i would state um and at the rear there is a tree growing from the back of the
building um uh surveying our property we could actually see significant cracking in the wall
from from the roof down there's potentially water entering um but those are really observations that
they're done from the exterior um we have not been able to enter the building on the interior
and right now it's occupied as a as a duplex okay thank you please proceed um these additional
views um are very helpful as you can see we are proposing an open stair no pilot house
we did not want to add additional height all of the railing surrounding the roof deck it's an open
rail to lower the appearance of the mass of the structure. We are proposing a green roof and also
living walls. There are elements throughout that they're environmentally friendly. At the rear of
the property what you can see is really how we addressed the relationship of the existing homes
to the existing homes.
This two-story structure to south of us
entirely occupies the site 100%.
There are no windows that we would be taking away light from.
As you can see, out of all the buildings,
we're actually on the second, third, and fourth floor
reset back more than any other structure on this parcel.
next building to south of us is a 100% occupied site that the volume basically extends all the
way up to fourth floor. The elements here that are being presented really take the neighbor
into consideration, especially the neighbor to north. As you can see, our building closest to
the neighborhood to north is setback even further to allow more light and air.
This is only the first floor portion that is occupying the site without a rear yard.
There's a good portion here that still provides setback at the rear yard.
There are just additional views that you can see just showing the relationship of the building to the context.
All right. Thank you very much.
You're very welcome.
Does the board have any questions for Ms. Reister?
Tom, do you?
Are there any other witnesses?
Yes, I would call Katie Ostrov, please.
Ms. Ostroff, you can unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Ms. Ostroff, yes. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Yes, ma'am. My name is Katie Ostroff, K-A-T-I-E, Ostroff, O-S-T-R-O-F-F.
My address is 770 South 16th Street, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear in front of me to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, ma'am.
Thank you. You may proceed.
uh yes miss ostrov uh you're one of the two owners of the property correct yes and you intend to have
this be uh your personal home correct correct okay and you heard all of the testimony that
was presented already today yes i did and do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of
your knowledge and information yes sir and would you adopt it as your own i would yes
and with that do you is there anything else pertinent or necessary that you think
would benefit the board and its determination today
um we we really hope that everyone can see how important the neighbors and the neighborhood
The neighbors and the neighborhood are to us.
are to us we've been living here for
We've been living here for over 10 years, and we're really looking to stay forever.
I don't know.
And our kids are starting at Stanton in the fall.
So we would like all of it to be a smooth transition, not only for us, but also for the neighborhood as a whole.
Okay, thank you. I would ask if the board has any questions.
that's up to the uh uh madam chairwoman
i have no questions okay no me either thank you very much uh any other witnesses
um i i would uh just in the issue of time suggest that matthew ostrov katie's husband
would testify similarly and i'm willing to stipulate that to that so that we're not
duplicating anything in front of the board thank you planning commission
um madam vice chair i think we need to hear from uh miss kodecker from sasna
okay you did ask if there are any other witnesses i see her hand up oh i'm sorry it's not my
witness i apologize i i just i represent i made representations about sasna so i didn't want to
cut off miss kodecker tanya are there any other witnesses who need to testify
Yeah, it does appear to be a couple here.
Okay, Confessor, can you take this?
Thank you.
Is there anyone else?
Hi, this is Nicole from Sazna.
Nicole, please identify yourself for the record.
Nicole Kodeiker, K-O-E as in Edward, D as in David, Y-K-E-R.
I'm the executive director for South of South Neighborhood Association, or SOSNA.
You sure are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
This project was initially presented to SOSNA zoning committee and our community on June 16, 2021.
Community and zoning member concerns included the size of the two-car garage,
the mass and height of the building, and a lack of stated hardship for a five-story building on a smaller block.
SOSNA wrote a letter of opposition to reflect neighborhood voices on this project.
project. It was requested by our zoning committee and the community to make additional changes
to the plans which are reflected in updated plans submitted to the ZBA and sent to SOSNA
on June 29th after our zoning meeting. The applicant's plans were updated after a vote
was taken on June 16th and include many of the changes that Agata mentioned earlier on
in the presentation. SOSNA is appreciative of the changes that the applicant was able
to implement prior to the ZBA hearing but cannot change the vote that took place at
our original zoning meeting on June 16th without additional community input. If the applicant
would like to request a continuance so they can represent updated plans to the community
for another vote, SOSNA is open to accommodating this meeting. Please note the votes were close
and the decision to oppose the project is based on the zoning committee and near neighbors
majority vote against the project and without having the benefit of reviewing and formally
voting on the proposed changes offered in the applicant's subsequent June 29th letter.
Thank you. Anyone else that would like to speak in this matter?
Yes, we have Oliver. He's been unmuted. Please wait for the change.
Thank you. Please, sir, identify yourself for the record.
Oliver are you there would you like for me to move on to France Pierre yes please yes please
thanks confessor you're welcome Mr. Pierre please unmute yourself and please wait for the
yes hello france pierre councilmember johnson's office
how are you doing madame good good it's another name today
you've already been sworn in
um my apologies i think there's a lag here uh nevertheless uh that's france pierre councilmember
Johnson's office. Spelling of that is F-R-A-N-T-Z, last name Pierre, that's P-I-E-R-R-E. At this
point in time, Council Member Johnson's office does join the neighboring community as well as
the registered coordinating RCO in their opposition to the appeal. Thank you.
Thank you. Is there anyone else? Yes, Madam Chair. We have
Is there anyone else?
Jonathan Newman. Please unmute yourself and wait for the Madam Chair.
Mr. Newman. Mr. Newman, are you there? I'm here. Hi, can you put your name on the record and spell
your last name? Sure. My name is Jonathan Newman. Last name is N-E-U-M-A-N-N. I live
at 728 South Hick Street. Thank you. Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing
but the truth? I do. Mr. Whalen? This is not my witness, Madam Vice Chair. I believe this is just
a member of the public who wanted to speak. Okay. Mr. Newman, you may proceed. That's correct.
um i i will just kind of reiterate and i will i will not take up too much time but i'll reiterate
the comments that i made at the sosna meeting that i believe that the project is too tall
i have concerns about a four-story project on a primarily two-story block particularly without
the setbacks i had also voiced some concerns about the height of the project and how it had obstructed
my own roof deck and offered to meet with the folks to discuss that. I know that these
things happened pretty quickly, but that nobody had taken me up on that offer. So with that,
I will conclude. Thank you for the time. I appreciate it.
Thank you so much. Thank you for your time. Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning. Properties indicated for residential use on a city plan based on
revised plans we recommend the request of guidance be granted. Okay. Calendar number 1248720-22
South Hick Street. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Okay. That concludes. Thank you so much. I'm sure you don't want to hear me present anything else.
so i'll uh i'll leave you to your evening okay thank you that concludes the hearings everyone
thank you so much did uh tanya you figured out the one uh yeah albert yes um that one is withdrawn
great and um if we could just make the announcement madam chair to ensure that
all cases were covered today okay tanya which one was withdrawn number four uh 1434 esto street
Yes. Okay. Calendar number 1434-2232 West Estos Street has been withdrawn. Have all matters been covered today? Is there anybody waiting in the wings to testify or with a case they believe that is theirs and has not been called?
Chair, we have a Michael Murray.
Okay, Mr. Murray
Mr. Murray, can you hear me?
It looks like he's gone
Is he gone?
Sean Willen
yes can everyone hear me yes i apologize i do this a number of times i said it early and then
i forgot to reiterate it uh we had a one page revised plan and so we need i i don't believe
that you voted uh to include the revised plan proviso no um so we'll re-vote that we need to get
calendar number calendar number one two four eight seven twenty dash twenty two south hick street
yes for proviso yes and that's that's one uh plan consisting of um revised plans consisting
on one page yes thank you very much yes with proviso thanks thanks everybody
i'm checking out madam chair we're not finished we're not finished one more person right
right we have crystal gutman goopman please unmute yourself and wait for madam chair
crystal can you hear me
hi sorry can you hear me yes i can hear you what case are you here for uh 720 slash 22 south hicks
uh 720 slash 22 south hicks uh just wanted to say that you know we live right across the street and
uh just one
um i'm sorry i'm sorry we we already covered that case i got it okay sorry all righty sorry
once it's closed we can't put anything else on the record legally okay
thank you all for everything um rebecca is that everything you have it all i got it thank you
Thank you, Jason, also.
Thank you, Planning Commission, Board Members,
DPC Zoom.
Thank you, all.
Thanks, Tim, by Confessor, by Tom.
Bye-bye.
Good night, all.
Rebecca, if you need anything, you can just email us, okay?
Yep, I appreciate it. Thank you, guys, all.
All right, good night, all.
Good night, Ms. Sunkett.