two to three minutes okay i'd love that thank you how are you bill i'm good how are you this
morning everyone good thank you who's planning commission oh and i see enos morning hi how are
you i'm waving to you and i see no face okay
Thank you.
Madam Chair, it appears as though there's about 80 or more attendees and if you will allow
may I make an announcement before you start the session 80 or more attendees yes and then I just
want to make a quick announcement to the attendees please do not raise your hand unless prompted
by the board thank you very kindly if you have questions please ask in the Q&A thank you all
very kindly. Madam Chair, we're ready to go forward when you are. Okay. Good morning. Am I
off? Okay. Good morning. My name is Carol Tenere and today I'll be the chair of the Zoning Board
of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with Board Secretary Confessor
Plaza and Board Members Thomas Holloman and James Snell. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and
board attorney Sharon Saleta are also in hand. Jason Hand is also in attendance as the administrator.
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.
This is available to the public and on the web. Third, for anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to unmute
yourself. That's star nine, then star six to unmute yourself. To enter an appearance statement,
call 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. The
number again is 267-270-5548. And fourth, the question and answer box is not for testimony.
Any comments are to be directed to Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
and i will now continue with
continuances starting with calendar number zero nine five six
sharon is that correct
13 north 3rd street joseph consul is the attorney
Number five, calendar number 1001, 2500 Wilmot Street.
The attorney is the moving party, and it's also continued.
Calendar number 2673, 3120 North Rosewood Street.
This case is withdrawn.
and number 10 on our list, 0-119-3442, North 18th Street.
This is also continued.
Are there any objections to these continuances?
If so, please raise your hand.
Madam Chair, Mr. Leo Wolfiel has his hand raised, so I will not have to speak at this time.
Mr. Leo Mulvihill has his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time.
Mr. Who?
Mr. Who?
Mr. Leo Mulvihill. He has his hand raised.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Good morning, Chair. This is Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L-V-I-H-I-L-L, address 213 Green Street, 1st floor, Philadelphia, 19123.
This is not an objection.
One second. Do you swear to affirm or tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
are you speaking about any of these cases i just called no this was another continuous request
madam chair excuse me that will be called after i apologize thank you thank you there's a third
party continuance request calendar number 0657 4157 north 7th street is joseph vaccaro present
and is there anyone from the council person's office
Mr. Vaccaro has been allowed to speak now, Chair.
Thank you.
Mr. Vaccaro, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Good morning.
Attorney Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O, attorney for the applicant.
My address is 5918 Toursdale Avenue, Philadelphia, 19135.
do you swear from the tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do okay proceed please
yes this is a request for another continuance so that we could have another meeting with esperanza
the rco who had some additional uh questions uh that we could hopefully work out at the july
meeting okay is there anyone from the council person's office here yes we have slone folks
you can unmute yourself. Good morning, Madam Chair. Good morning. Name and address, and I'll
swear you in. Yes, ma'am. Sloan Fuchs, S-L-O-A-N-E-F-S-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, representing the Office of
Councilwoman Maria Kenyana Sanchez, room 508 City Hall. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole
truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, ma'am, I do. Okay, you may proceed. Yes, ma'am. We requested
this continuance on behalf of Esperanza, specifically as per what Mr. Vaccaro requested
a secondary meeting to further discuss the issues that presented themselves at the initial
meeting and to hopefully identify or address those issues and come out with a meaningful
conclusion. Thank you. Thank you. So there is an agreement. Calendar number 0657
4154 North 7th Street this case is continued thank you very much sure thank you very much
are there any additional requests for continuances
4930 I have a Mr. David Garcia with his hand raised I will allow him to speak at this time
Okay. Mr. Garcia, can you hear me?
Okay, I just unmuted. Okay. Madam Chair, good morning. This is David Garcia on 66.
Can you spell your last name, please? And then I'll swear you in and give me your address.
Yes, Madam Chair. It's David, D-A-V-I-D, Garcia, G-A-R-C-I-A. My attorney ID number is 54351 with an address at 602 Allendale Road, Unit 60486, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406. It's listed as 506 on my board notice hearing, but it's 406.
go ahead i'm sorry excuse me this is sharon i just wanted to mention this
mr garcia's case is number 17 on your list it's the first listing you have no exhibits
okay uh do you swear if i'm to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth
yes madam chair okay and what is your request no my request is for a continuance your honor there
There is, or for another date, there is some issue with the appropriate RCO that we were supposed to schedule a meeting with.
There appears to be several that were on the list.
One was non-responsive, but in the latest email received, apparently that's the RCO I was trying to get in touch with before.
We also had some submissions with respect to tax clearances that we have to submit.
But we do have photographs of the notices that have been put up at the location.
at the location okay well with no exhibits this would have been continued anyway
Well, with no exhibits, this would have been continued anyway.
so calendar number one zero one zero six seven four seven castor avenue this case is continued
madam chair can i just just well i'll save my question for
for another day but thank you may be excused thank you yes you may
are there any other additional requests
Mr. Mulvihill has his hand raised again.
Mr. Mulvihill, name and address.
Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L-D-I-H-I-L-L, 213 Green Street, 1st floor, Philadelphia, 19123.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
You may proceed.
This is with respect to the property address, 2061 East Ontario.
this is my request that's number four calendar number two six eight zero there are no exhibits
it's the first listing this is going to be continued thank you members of the board sure
is there any other requests
Mr. Ori, Fybush has his hand raised, he's been allowed to speak.
Mr. Fybush, can you hear me?
Yeah, I'm not sure how I did that, forgive me, but I did not intend to raise my hand.
Are there any other additional requests?
Madam Chair and Mr. Cole Olson has been allowed to speak, he had his hand raised.
Yes how you doing? Hi can you put your name and address on the record spell your last name
and then I will swear you in. Cole Olson, K-O-L-E, last name O-S-I-N.
and your address uh 270 slocum street okay do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do okay and you may proceed which case are you speaking about
i'm i'm calling about the the four-story apartment building on 67 17 chew avenue that's trying to be
billed sir are you here representing a case no okay so are you just here to testify yes you
should not raise your hand unless the case is being presented and they ask for people who wish
to testify okay apologies no worries that's okay and that's number 16 on our list number 16 okay
thank you yeah okay any additional any other additional requests
madam chair if i could make um one observation on the record if anyone there are two um requests
for reconsideration that are going to be voted by the board today they will not be
voted until the start of the two o'clock session. Okay.
No, we're ready to go for it, Mary chair. Okay.
Calendar number 21962655 Emerald Street.
Mr. Dorizio is the attorney.
uh madam chair this is a vote only i know so he does not have to be present he does not
thank you okay calendar number two one nine six twenty six fifty five my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes do you know what i vote is yes i have a correction it's
26 55 emerald street it's bad when that happens the first case you call
Okay, we're ready to proceed. Calendar number 1095-3355 Jasper Street. Is there an interpreter here for that case? That's number nine on our list.
I have Damaris with her hand raised. She's been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Madam. My name is Damaris Figueroa, Certified Interpreter. You may proceed.
Can you spell your name, please?
Gladly. D as in David A, M as in Mary A, R-I-S, last name Figueroa, F as in Frank I, G-U-E-R-O-A.
I must note, Your Honor, for the record only, I have been contracted by Globo HQ as a private
For the record only, I have been contracted by Globo HQ as a private interpreter.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
And has your, can you ask your client this?
I'm sorry, Madam Chair, please, if we could, before we go forward, just have the applicant
come forward first.
Okay, can the applicant raise their hand?
Aplicante, ¿podría por favor levantar su mano? Si es tan amable, por favor acérquese y levante su mano.
Investor, do you want to handle this one?
I'm seeing no one with their hand up. Bedita, are you present with the client?
Say that again?
Who we have?
We're waiting to see if Biditza is present with the client.
I was going to ask you to handle this particular one.
What do we need, an interpreter?
The interpreter is here.
Okay, Madam Chair, you can continue to the next case.
No one appears to be here.
I'll try to reach out to the applicant who made the request.
And Damaris, I'm going to mute you.
if you could just stand by until we check to see if the applicant is going to go forward today
thank you very much i will lower my hand thank you thank you
thank you calendar number 2603 100 east allegheny avenue the attorney is zen jin
Mr. Jin has been promoted to panelist match.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Jin, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Zin 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 applicant.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do 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, 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 to all questions.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information relating to this case.
I have before you the cover letter showing what we have submitted. I do want to point out the RCO
issued an opposition based on a failure to reach a particular agreement point on the benefits
agreement. I will address that as a later part of the presentation. First thing, this application
is for the use of the property as it is existing. What my client is requesting is to subdivide
what is essentially a street-to-street two-building property that has been consolidated in the past
into one back into two so that she may sell the one half which contains an entire structure that
also contains an existing pizza shop. The other piece is an existing grocery store with residential
above, and we intend to keep that, my client intend to keep that as her property still at this time.
In order to subdivide a relocation, the lot line has to happen. One thing that triggered these
refusals is that the property, which I'm going to show via the plans, the existing property
runs from street to street. There are two halves. This is the half facing Allegheny Avenue. And then
we have the other half, which faces Wishart Street. And the entire side of the property
runs along Front Street. However, the existing property covers 100% of the lot running from
Allegheny to Wishart Street, triggering the refusals you see before you, which are basically
dimensional in nature. In addition, they are also triggered by existing non-conforming conditions.
the, let me zoom in so that we can see them clearly. So the code says that if you are
subdividing and your property is already in a non-conforming condition, you're increasing the
non-conformity and therefore it is being refused. The minimum rear yard depth is an existing condition
it is being refused. The minimum rear yard depth is an existing condition of zero
of zero.
because again the building runs from basically one street to the other.
Because it's an existing non-conforming condition and all we are really trying to do
is to simply separate what was two properties back to the same two properties,
we are not really increasing or changing any conditions on the property that would trigger
any additional new negative impact to the community, this is again a change to the
existing non-conformant condition, which under case law generally is not something that the
court would find in this favor. Now, addressing the existing uses, one is a convenience store
which has prior zoning, and the other is a pizza shop that also has prior zoning. So
both properties running all the way down the street has all existing uses as part of their
zoning permits. Now, what had happened originally is the lot line that my client tried to do before
a subdivision ran through the middle of one of the properties. This application is to correct that
by making sure the lot line actually runs to the back of the building number one here,
leaving building number two, which includes the pizzeria, facing Wishart Street, its entire
property. There are existing trash storage, existing AC storage. All this is existing here
on this property. None of this is new. When we worked with the community, we tried to work out
a community benefits agreement with them based on the fact that this area is an area that is
is suffering from some issues, both in trash and other issues, safety. So we worked with the
community to try to come up with the agreement to limit certain things, particularly trash
management. We agreed to put a camera system in that will link to the police department.
And this way, we'll avoid and disallow and kind of hopefully monitor any activity that will be considered illicit activity at the property on the convenience store site for the future.
There are one point on this discussion which my client could not agree to, and that led to the opposition from Hasse, and that is Hasse wanted an indefinite and absolute prohibition to any application for alcohol at this location.
While we understand that alcohol application is always an issue, we do want to point out that the Liquor Control Board controls that and not the zoning board.
And that a indefinite, and they want this to apply to future owners as well.
That is essentially a deed restriction against alcohol on a property that has no alcohol now, no application for alcohol in the near plans.
But I cannot in good conscience advise my client to accept such a restrictive term for a subdivision of lot.
On the other hand, what we offered in our proposed agreement very clearly is that my client would notify the community of any attempts to go for any liquor license.
Not to say that liquor license itself wouldn't require notification, but we would make the extra effort to make sure that the community would be given notification of any intent to allow feedback before the liquor licensing process begins.
But again, HACI does not accept that and wants essentially a prohibition.
So I would ask the board to take into that consideration. That is the only point that caused essentially an opposition from the community RCO. It's because they want us to indefinitely agree to never sell or have a liquor license at the property.
I think that is an unfair request, given that if the area changes and ultimately in the future becomes viable for a restaurant, my client may very well need to have a liquor license.
And there is a public notice restricted process through the liquor board for that.
Other than that, Hasey's letter really has not had, I mean, the community meeting went very well.
We did not have other issues.
Again, we agree to make sure we provide trash storage, monitor it, and put a camera system in.
And I have no problem having those still as provisals or have that as a benefits agreement with the RCO.
Finally, I want to point out again, this is a very limited application to simply allow the two lots that was consolidated to be once again subdivided according to its property line.
once again, subdivided according to its property line. There's no other point we're asking for.
There's no other point.
We're not asking for use changes or anything other than that specific point. And again,
it's pre-existing conditions that trigger the refusals, not something my client did at this
point to change anything. So I would ask the board's favorable consideration in this request
to subdivide the lot into their respective deed mentioned sizes. I'm happy to answer any questions
or present any aspect of the presentation
again to the board if needed.
Does the board have any questions?
Is there any existing code violations
from the building?
No, not at the present.
I actually checked the Atlas again this morning,
especially on the convenience store side.
There are no existing code violations on file.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience
who has any questions if so please raise your hand yes jason i'm sorry
one of the folks has the same race i've allowed him to speak okay good morning again madam chair
cba board sloan folks office of councilman maria canada sanchez 1508 city hall i am sworn in i
I know you are. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. The applicant has met with the coordinating RCO, which is I say, I say did raise a number of issues at the community meeting with the residents.
Issues included nuisance, I'm sorry, substance loitering, poor waste management, substance abuse on or around the site and illicit activity.
Now, the applicant had worked with HACI to address a number of those issues, but the primary issue, as stated, was the prohibition of alcohol sales.
Until an agreement can be made between the applicant and the community, our office cannot support this application request.
Thank you.
Excuse me, this is Sharon.
And Mr. Folks, you do understand that the board would not be able to add that as a proviso.
It's understood that that's outside the board's purview for the proviso.
But that's the stance of our office.
Thank you, ma'am.
Thank you.
Mr. McNeil, go ahead.
If I may, just to address that again, I understand the community's position with regard to the situation in the community.
There are issues with trash.
There are issues with loitering.
However, I asked for any evidence of my client's property having those particular issues being reported to the police, being reported to the L&I.
I received no such evidence, and I have not found such evidence on the Atlas system of Philadelphia, which addresses the property as well.
There are only two minor violations, which one is, I think it is a building co-violation for fire alarm cert, which was addressed years ago.
And then there were no other violations relating to trash loitering or anything of that nature on file. So I cannot, I have to, again, indicate that there has been no evidence presented to me of the claims from the RCO of these particular issues at that particular location.
I understand that they mentioned that there are problems all around.
I understand that, and I appreciate that.
And that is why we agreed to do the trash management.
We agreed to do a police cam, which is actually an extensive addition to the building to allow the police station to monitor that particular store.
My client had faced that the store was not doing anything illegal and was willing to put that in, and we're still willing to put that in.
The only item that we cannot agree to, and this is the impasse I've reached with the RCO, is that to put a restriction on a contractual basis indefinitely to not ever have alcohol is essentially a deed restriction to my client's property.
and they wanted to apply to future owners as well.
So even if my client doesn't want to do this,
when she sells the property,
everybody will have to then go through the RCO again
to negotiate that because it becomes something
that would be a title issue.
So that is why we did not want to agree to that.
What we said in the agreement very clearly
is that we're willing to notify
and keep the community within any process
that involves a alcohol application.
Again, Chairwoman Tenere, there's no alcohol at this property.
There's no plans to put alcohol at this property at a convenience store.
So this is, again, it's a very speculative request.
So this is, again, it's a very speculative request from the community that is also extremely restrictive.
And quite honestly, I do not believe it should be applied to a zoning process like this.
We're not even trying to open a restaurant here.
This is an existing store.
So I just want to ask the board's consideration in that, that we're asking for what is really a very minor subdivision of lot
to allow the two lots to be back to what they were before and there are pre-existing
non-conforming conditions nothing new was introduced during this application so please
again i would ask the board's consideration in granting just the subdivision aspect of this
zoning case thank you thank you does anybody on the board have any questions additionally no no
Planning Commission. Good morning, Chairwoman Tonari. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City
Planning Commission. H-D-G-A-R-T-Y. You swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth. I do. Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the Board,
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial mixed use zoning at this
location. The proposed dimensional variance does not represent any proposed change to the existing
dimensions or use. We believe the variance is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose
and spirit of the zoning code and is clearly the least possible variance to avoid an unnecessary
hardship. City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the variance. Thank you.
Calendar number 2603, 100 East Allegheny Avenue. My vote is yes.
i'm sorry if i may may i see if my client's here to um uh adopt my testimony
thank you uh it should be mrs stamia um i know her last name's a little difficult to pronounce
um poppin poppin cool out sorry i probably am doing a poor job of it um stamia are you there
can you raise your hand?
I'm sorry.
I don't know.
We can stimulate that with you being an officer of the court.
Thank you.
With her hand, the hand went up.
I'm allowed to speak right now.
Okay, great.
Excuse me.
Can you hear me?
I'm right here.
Yes, we can. Yes, we can. Name and address.
Stamatia Papanicolaou. My address at home, it's 11742 Academy Place, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
19154. Okay, now I'm going to have to ask you to spell your first and last name.
Sure. It's Samatia Papanicolaou. It's S-T-A-M-A-T-I-A. My last name is P-A-P-A-N-I-K-O-L-A-O-U.
Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay. Mr. Jin?
Thank you.
So, Mattia, you have heard my testimony and saw the representation I made to the board regarding your property.
Can you verify that my presentation and testimony are true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, yes. I testify to that.
Thank you.
Thank you. Okay, confessor, you can continue with the vote.
Yep, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thanks, guys. Calendar number, sure. Calendar number 0983, 1542 Fontaine Street. Oh, you're the attorney again. Mr. Jin?
I removed them. We'll pull them back.
I re-promoted it to Panama Smith-Sahaw.
Good morning again.
Hi, name and address, please.
And you're already sworn in.
Xenjin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103,
here on behalf of the applicant.
Okay. I'd also like to note before you start that there's a 30-second ward RCO letter of
that there's a 30-second ward RCO letter of non-opposition.
So you may proceed.
Thank you.
But is the exhibit packet in 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 questions.
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Okay, you may proceed. Thank you. I'm going to share with
the board the information relating to this case. I will go ahead and move right to the refusal.
We did submit all requested information as required by the board. So the refusal for this
property, I want to point out, 1524 Fontaine Street is zoned RM1. It is, however, in the overlay
of north central Philadelphia. My client would like to build a duplex property, a new structure
at that location. We are short from the bite right requirement of 850 square foot by about
38 square foot. So I mean, 38 square foot. So that is one of the primary triggers of this refusal
is that we have a de minimis shortage of lot size.
Given that it's a new structure,
my client is looking to build it slightly larger,
reducing the rear yard and open area
by, again, a rather small amount.
The rear yard would normally require to be 144 square feet.
We're proposing 126 square feet.
It is much easier to see the proposal
from a plan standpoint.
so I'm going to put the plants up before the board. The reason part of the open space is
rather small is because this is a rather narrow lot of 14 foot wide. It is relatively deep at 58
feet. However, once you put a structure, it is more difficult to keep the open space as large.
The area is, again, overwhelmingly multifamily, so we believe a duplex, which is only
short from a buy-write used by a few square feet, would not be out of character or would be
consistent with the area it uses. The property itself would simply be a duplex. One is a unit
that is on the first floor and basement, and then a larger unit that is essentially covering the
above three floors with a rooftop deck as the final piece on the top providing some open space.
We actually met with 32nd Ward RCO and having worked with them closely to address some of their
concerns, we were met with non-opposition. There were 10 attendees at the meeting. What we did
provide to the RCO is a sanitation plan and actually we're working with the RCO directly,
my client would be, to make sure maintenance and trash removal on the property would be constantly
monitored. As a result, we received their non-opposition for this application. The existing
structure will be coming down. It is an older two-story structure and a new structure will be
built in its place and that is essentially the proposal here before the board again if the even
with the north central overlay we're only short by about 38 square feet as far as the lot size
is concerned so i would ask the board's favorable consideration in this particular request for a
duplex use i would be happy to answer any questions or represent any aspect of my presentation
Does the Board have any questions? No. No. No. Is there anyone in the virtual audience with questions?
I see no hands Madam Chair. Planning Commission? Thank you Madam Chair. Ian Hegarty for the
Philadelphia City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to
existing multi-family zoning at this location we believe the proposed variances are minimal 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 calendar number 0983 1542 fontaine street
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you very much i'll see the
board this afternoon. Thank you. Have a good one. You too. Calendar number 1-008-2903
2903 frankfurt avenue the attorney is alan knockamson
Frankfurt Avenue. The attorney is Alan Notcomson.
madam chair i promoted miss clementa amazon to panelists thank you
miss amazon can you hear me
yes i can can you hear me yes i can hear you can you put your name and address on the record and
spell your last name good afternoon comenta amazon c-l-e-m-e-n-t-a last name is a-m-a-z-a-n
address is 123 south broad street suite 1600 19109 do you swear or affirm 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? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax
compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, and we
have a letter of support. Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you.
The letter of support comes from Somerset Neighbors for Better Living, and there's a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
Yes. So this is 2903 Frankfurt Avenue. It's a pretty straightforward project in that we are proposing multifamily uses to CMX2 property. We're just looking for one additional unit.
So during my presentation, I'll go through the deed, certificate of tax, clearance, notice of refusal, application for appeal, maps of the area, photographs of the lot, our plans and drawings, and as the Vice Chair mentioned, we do have a letter of support from Somerset Neighbors for Better Living.
So here we have the deed to the property, our certificate of tax clearance, the refusal of the property is zoned to CMX 2.
We are allowed to have three units as of right, and we are actually looking to have only four units.
So we would be willing to enter a proviso to that effect.
We are not looking for five units.
We're only looking for four here.
We have the application for appeal.
Again, the notice of refusal and our project information form.
We have a map of the area, so we are located on 2903 Frankfort Avenue in between East Cambria
and East Monmouth.
Another map of the area, here we have a view of the front of the property, a view to the
right of the property on Frankfort Avenue, a view to the left of the property on Frankfort
Avenue, and we also have some nearby CMX2 properties that are also five units of multi-unit
use, so it's not uncommon for this particular area.
and here we have our site plans and the floor plans and drawings again we're just looking for
four units here and we are allowed to have three as of right again we have the letter of support
we did meet with Somerset neighbors for better living on April 16th and they did express support
for the project this is the notice that we sent out to the community on March 24th for the community
meeting and we sent it out to all 172 properties as required by the city and our certificate of
mailing showing that it was in fact mailed out with that if i could have my client adam
kesselman is at my testimony
kesselman has been allowed to speak hi this is adam kesselman first name adam adam last name k
k-e-s-s-e-l-m-a-n my address is 1516 north 5th street philadelphia pa 19122 thank you do you
swear from the shelf the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you miss amazon thank you
adam did you hear my presentation today yes and was it true and correct yes correct and would you
adopt it as your own testimony i would adopt it as my own testimony yes thank you adam so i'd be
happy to answer any questions the board may have does the board have any questions no no no is there
anyone in the virtual audience with questions no further hands at this time madam chair thank you
planning commission thank you madam chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing
commercial mixed-use zoning and dislocation. The dwelling unit count, as it appears on the refusal,
does exceed the minimum variance necessary to overcome hardship as presented. However,
we would agree with Council that if the condition was added to limit the dwelling unit count to four,
then the City Planning Commission would recommend approval of the variance.
Thank you.
Thank you. Calendar number 1-008-2903 Frankfurt Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. Madam Chair, it's also with the proviso of four units.
For four units. Yes.
calendar number 1008-2903 frankfurt avenue my vote is yes with a proviso for a maximum
of four units yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
calendar number we're on to 11 0657 4154 north 7th street
Mr. Vaccaro is he here
Mr. Vaccaro
I don't see Mr. Vaccaro's hand but uh Mr. Foulkes's hand is raised again
Madam Chair, do I allow them to speak? Excuse me, Chair, this one was continued.
Number 11? Yes. This was the third party continuance request.
You are absolutely right. So again, I will put that on the record. Calendar number 0657-4154
north 7th street this is continued next case is calendar number 0769 4356 josephine street the
attorney is verne anastasio
mr anastasio if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand and madam chair i'm not
sure this is included in your summaries but we did receive a letter in opposition from councilwoman
sanchez it is and also from frankfurt knack yes thank you thank you is mr anastasio here yes
good morning good morning name and address for the record please and spell your name
Sure. Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, 1315 Walnut Street, Suite 1006, Philadelphia, 19107.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do 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,
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all that okay you may proceed
thank you i'm going to share my screen if that's okay sure that is
all right adam chair this is a 4356 josephine street it's very uh fairly
straightforward. It's an application for a retail sale of consumer goods. There would be no check
cashing, but there would be money transfer on the first floor, the same building with a single
family dwelling above. This property is, in fact, a commercial property on the first floor
and a single family residential on the second. Now, because it's been vacant for quite some
time. The property itself is now zoned RSA 5, but if you look at the history, and here it is right
there, RSA 5, you look at the history of the property, and I'll take you there in a moment.
First of all, here's the, I'll pull it out.
Here's the first floor commercial space and the one family dwelling above.
There's a handicap ADA compliant ramp to the first floor, suggesting, of course, that this has been historically commercial property.
There's the ramp. This is the property. There's the rear. And I want to take you to since the last 60 years, I guess.
um this has been
first it was a vacant storefront with one family then there was a barber shop
with one family this is 1962
and the entire history of this property there's never been a permit pulled for a single family
and the entire history of this
dwelling again here's another barbershop one family dwelling
at some point it was uh well it's again a long history of being a barbershop
and as you can see based on the history
here's a store in a one-family dwelling
here's just another store in one family dwelling so this is you know where we are
so we have a property that is you know commercially set up for commercial use
and we simply want to utilize the first floor for that commercial use.
I understand that the RCO sent a letter of opposition based on two items.
First was parking, which is not a part of this analysis at all.
And it's a local neighborhood store.
So the fact that people may be driving to actually go to the corner store,
that doesn't typically happen very often.
and the other point that with which they based their opposition was in fact that the property
has always been a single family dwelling i think i've just given you ample evidence
that that's not the case and also the rco's position is in direct opposition to everybody
on the on the block i mean here's everybody on josephine street and the side in the side street
on John. Again, all fully supportive of this use. It's what the property is designed to
do, and we respectfully request the granting of this variance. With that, I'd like to call
my client. Here's proof of posting, by the way. Thank you. Yep. And with that, I'd like
I'd like to call my client Jose Cristostomo to raise his hand.
If you're in a virtual audience, sir, please raise your hand.
Jose, can you please raise your hand?
Jose, can you hear me?
he's been allowed to speak
please unmute yourself sir
hi sir can you put your name and address on the record
and spell your name
can you hear me
spell your name jose
can i spell for him because he doesn't speak well
english is j-o-s-e jose and the last name is chrisostomo c-r-i-s-o-s-t-o-m-o and the address
is 4356 josephine street can you also ask him to raise his right hand yes
do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you you're welcome
thank you jose did you hear what i said today to the board yes okay and was it true and accurate
to the best of your knowledge yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes thank you
Jose. Madam Chair, I'm here for questions. Is there anyone in the virtual audience who has a
question? Star Dixon has their hand raised. I will allow them to speak at this time if it is
okay with you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Star Dixon, please unmute yourself if you wish to speak.
hello can you hear me
we can move on madam chair okay does the board have any questions no no no i'm sorry we still
have another person. Just move on from Ms. Starr. So we have Sloan Folks. Okay. Okay.
Good morning. Good morning again, Madam Chair, ZBA Board. Sloan Folks, S-L-O-A-N-E,
f as a fire o lks office of councilman ria canyona sanchez room 508 uh city hall um prior to uh the
F-S-A-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, Office of Councilwoman Maria Keyona Sanchez.
statement that the councilman wants to read into the record i'd also like to um respond um to uh
to um mr anastasio's statement regarding um the petition um one of the things that uh happened
uh since the original uh hearing was um continued was there was not there was a there was an attempt
to bring the community together to have further discussions with the property owner to discuss
the variance. And that didn't happen. That didn't happen because the members of the community
were vehemently opposed to this variance request. At the original meeting, the attendees,
and there's only seven attendees because it is a small block, but the seven attendees that were
at the community meeting, voted unanimously not to support the ban's request. I am now going to
read the Councilwoman's statement to the record. Before you do that, Mr. Folks, I want to know,
who's the entire block supporting this? Ma'am, I don't know who the entire block is supporting
that. We don't have a copy of the petition. We gave you the binder with all the folks who
signed the petition in support. We've attempted to meet with the community after this case was
continued. We sent no less than 22 emails to the councilwoman's office and to the community, RCO,
asking for an opportunity to present. Since there were further questions, we wanted to
provide those answers. We were denied that request. The state representative in the area
just flat out refused to meet with us and a council uh council member canuna sanchez was
trying to defer to the state representative because the state rep had some concerns we
were willing to meet with them we were turned down flat out each time okay mr folks you can
continue now just would just just to respond to that uh in response in response to that the state
representative was working on behalf of the community the state representative did not
flatly denied, the community flatly denied it. That was their, that's how they wanted to proceed
with that, unfortunately. So I'm going to read the response, read the councilman's
response into the record. The councilman states that the applicant has met the RCO
and received a letter of opposition. The RCO's letter cited the former use of the property
and the hopes that it would be maintained as residential, as well as parking issues that may
arise if the property were granted a variance from its present RSA 5 designation. This block,
while very small, has an active senior residents who have stated that they will be negatively
affected by an opening of a phone, card, money transfer business on this corner due to the
aforementioned concerns. Our office would also stress that the Franklin community has recently
had several operators come into the community with no business plan or track record and request
variants for converting a single family residence into a business. Upon granting of the variants,
most of these businesses have failed and the succeeding operators have not been good nativers
and have effectively and actively caused or contributed to blight by safety litter or noise
issues. While we recognize that the owner made significant investments, commercial use will not
be supported by the residents he was asked by the councilwoman to develop a residential plan
that the residents might consider and as and as of now has not been forthcoming
the councilman's office stands with the community and she's supporting this letter of opposition
for the variance request and she urges the zba not grant this various request thank you
i'm chair if i may just address those two points quickly i i fully understand and appreciate the
position of the council office. One of the reasons why they proffer opposition is because of the
actions of some other business folks. My client is not associated with any of those previous
businesses that have failed and turned into decay or disarray. It's very obvious just by looking at
the property that this is, in fact, a corner property that was, and by the history, a commercial
property this has never been a single family home so and I think I've offered enough evidence
to that now if there's a concern that maybe this particular project won't work and therefore it
would be shut down and there would be decay or blight then this board has the opportunity
and the option of granting a variance for a certain amount of time to see in fact how long
this property, you know, my client can succeed here.
this property, you know, my client can succeed here. He believes he will succeed here.
He believes he will succeed here.
And, you know, he's put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears
into this property to make it happen.
And so that's just an option.
I know this board is aware of it
to meet some of the concerns that the council member has
about startups not making it.
Does the board have any questions?
Do council know when that handicap ramp was installed?
There's nothing in the archives to determine that.
It doesn't look new, but I can't say for sure.
So the answer is no.
It doesn't look 60 years old either.
So somewhere in between that time.
It also doesn't look to have a proper slope for a handicap.
Right.
And that, of course, is going to have to be dealt with once we get through the use permit issue.
Then there's going to be a CO with an inspection, and those matters will have to be addressed before anybody can occupy it.
Thank you.
I really disliked suggesting this, but is there any chance of going back, meeting with the community?
That question was asked the last hearing, and I said yes then, and I'd say yes now.
I'm just afraid that they felt like, I think they feel like they've heard us once, and that was enough.
But I'm not going to speak for them.
Chairman Tenere, no.
At this point, it would be fair to say that, you know, the community has some grave concerns.
They are, and they have, you know, even though our office through the state and the state
representative have reached out to the community, the community has made it undeniably clear.
I have to respectfully object.
That's all hearsay.
No one was there.
There was no meeting.
I can't, we don't know how many people they spoke to.
So that's all hearsay.
With respect, the meeting was based on outreach by the state representative to the community.
So if he goes out to the community and speaks to his constituents, who he represents, and
the response to him is that they have had, they're unwilling to meet.
I think that is, I think that should be taken with some accuracy.
That's double hearsay, actually.
That's double hearsay.
Is the state representative in the audience?
I don't know who that state representative is.
I don't know whether we have.
That would be representative of Jason Dawkins,
but I don't think we have anyone from his office,
anyone from him or anyone from his office.
He's probably, he may be on the road to Harrisburg.
I'm not sure, ma'am.
Okay, I'm sure he is.
Just to be clear.
It is with the letter of opposition from the RCO and then hearing that there's an entire block supporting this, but the block is small.
I need some help here.
i madam chair i think i'm offering a nice option which is a temporary uh use variance
to see if the concerns that some of the neighbors might have and or the state representative have
or the council person um that my client won't be successful and then the property will be blighted
I think that could be tested through a temporary variance.
But I've produced signatures of folks who live on Josephine Street.
How many?
That's a half a dozen, I think, on Josephine.
Another half a dozen from the other side street.
That's all been submitted.
I've produced the history of the property that shows unequivocally that this first floor has been commercial.
um how many have signed the letter of opposition there were seven there were seven people in
attendance at the z at the rco meeting and all seven if you take a look at the rco uh letter
and notes all seven voted uh in opposition and again they based their opposition on two items
parking which doesn't really come into play here because this is a corner grocery store
and second is that it's always been a single family residence which as we now know the evidence
proves is untrue so does the board have any more questions uh yes madam chair it's it's the building
uh yes madam chair it's it's the building seemed to have been built for single family
Thank you.
even though it's a corner building thank you
the buildings used for 60 years was commercial at least that's what the evidence suggests
yes it was used but it was built as a single family
i don't know that to be true but what year was the property built
i don't know that madam chair i i thought perhaps tom no uh mr holland no no i do not know
i'm just dealing with the architectural of it and the rest of the block
the porch is
built out
and there's not too many
ADA ramps in single
family homes so
I can't speak to it
well there are some
in single family homes
that would be unusual
though right
Okay, this is confusing because more people are supporting it than are opposed to it.
But the Councilwoman has grave concerns.
So, Planning Commission?
Good morning, Chair Tsunari.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2014, the zoning map was changed from CMX 2 to RSA 5 in this area.
This change was made in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan and in consultation
with the Frankfort CDC and other local civics.
The last documented commercial use of this property was issued in 1966, and so we don't
believe that conditions exist that would prevent this building from continuing to be used as
a residential building.
um we recommend that the board deny the variance thank you calendar number 0769
4356 josephine street my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no
thank you calendar number i'm sorry madam chair um i'm just asking i was
did you call yes thank you uh we did have an interpreter but we did not have the applicant
and number i'm sorry is that the right that's on the regular list for number nine um i'm sorry
number yes it could be continued here and so that now can be continued yes and if we could
allow the interpreter to leave the virtual room yes and and the number
i'm sorry tamaris the interpreter you may leave the room you are excused thank you and
calendar number one zero nine five three three five five jasper street is continued
and calendar number 0964 landvale place the owner is mark mistrangelo there are no exhibits
it's the first listing is there anyone here
mark you can uh unmute yourself and speak to the case that's my case
well congratulations mr anastasio can you put your name i thought i was muted i'm sorry
you put your name and address sorry carol uh verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o 1315 walnut
suite 1006 philadelphia 19107 i did submit uh binders for 3133 land bail i had three cases
of this week, and all three binders were submitted.
I will check my records again.
I have it as new exhibits, but I will check.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, so we'll hold on that and go on to you again.
Calendar number 0960, 4645 North 5th Street.
Mr. Anastasio, your name and address.
Your name and address.
Hello.
Vern Anastasio, 1315 Walnut Street, Suite 1006, Philadelphia, 19107.
You swear affirm, but you're already under oath.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents consisting of proof of ownership,
tax compliance a copy of the refusal of 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 that
okay when were your exhibits mailed in last week thursday i guess all three
okay i emailed them to carol rco zba and sharon
i'm still not finding them mr anastasio not even for this one oh i'm sorry for lanville i was still
looking okay okay um for the record the rco has submitted a letter of support and councilwoman
sanchez is in non-opposition that's great proceed oh thank you please permit me to share my screen
one second here
Okay, this is 4645 North 5th Street.
It's commercial property on the first floor on a commercial corridor.
As you can see, this application is for an ice cream shop, which is appropriate since
it's the hottest day of the year.
It is a former commercial space.
As you can see, there's proof of posting.
this is just a referral it's not a refusal and we met with the community organization
they provided a letter of non-opposition because who can be against ice cream here are the plans
no takeout window no takeout window thank you does the board have any questions
no no no is there anyone in the virtual audience who would like to testify
my client is here uh larry heard great can you uh someone call him please larry could you raise your
hand. You've been allowed to speak, Madam Chair. Hi, Mr. Hurd. Yes. Can you put your name and
address on the record, spell your last name, and then I'll swear you in. Larry Hurd, H's and Harry,
E-A-R-D
Marie Road, Philadelphia
PA 19111
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? Yes, I do.
Thank you. Go ahead,
Mr. Anastasio. Thank you.
Mr. Hurd, did you hear my presentation to the board
this morning? Yes.
And was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
yes sir thank you i have nothing further madam chair but i am here for questions
does the board have any questions no is there anyone in the virtual audience other than larry
madam chair mr mark mastrandolo had his hand raised i will allow him to uh
okay that's that's a different case that's a different case yeah okay mr snow folks
has his hand raised up and welcome to speak.
Good morning again, Madam Chair, ZBA Board, Sloan Folks, Office of Councilwoman Maria
Quinones Sanchez from 508 City Hall.
The applicant having met with the coordinating RCO and garnering a letter of support, the
councilman offers her full support to this various requests.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Madam Chair, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
This is a special exception, and the proposed special exception will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected for this use.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the special exception.
therefore the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the special exception
thank you calendar number 0960 4645 north 5th street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is
yes my vote is yes who could say no to ice cream exactly that's what i said carol especially today
right i know madam chairwoman there may have been a technical issue uh i just resent the package to
attorney soletta um i don't know if that helps um um yes i don't believe miss sunkett was able
to find it either i'll check my um yeah but i just sent it now um the community i don't know
if that helps i mean the community's all for it hi this is tanya no we did not receive the
exhibits either okay that confirms that there was a technical issue
because that's number eight land rail place yeah because all three were sent the same day
and i uh was sending them all in one email but now i spread them you know one after another
and i think that that last one did not reach the board but i did in fact just send it over
to attorney saletta i don't know if that is helpful um again the packer park residents
association supports um this deck so i don't know if we can mr anastasio according to the email that
you forwarded it it appeared that you sent it to your to miss dunn your paralegal i don't see
anything showing us yeah there was definitely a technical snafu there on my end not the boards
okay i'm going to hear this thank you i would appreciate that do we have tax clearance we have
everything i'm sorry do you have anything tanya do you have anything um so that was what i was
stating we have no exhibits therefore our typical procedure and policy in place is to continue the
case but it's your call chair i just sent it over to sharon i could definitely send it over to rco
zba as well it's a i know typically you would continue this madam chair but um i've asked
for a little indulgence here it's a it was a technical error and this is an under you know
it's not opposed no one's opposing this it's a minor decking i'm i'm concerned with being
a technical error because if you have any additional cases then this error is going to
follow on to those cases madam chair can i make one request that if you do decide to go forward
with this that it be moved to the end of the list so i have an opportunity to review the exhibits
okay thank you i appreciate that
calendar number zero nine six four thirty one thirty three landfill place is moved
to the end of the list thank you um miss saletta do i call 14
Okay, calendar number 0981, 5415 Cedar Avenue.
The owner is Lisa A. Bethea.
We have no exhibits for this case and it is the first listing.
calendar number zero nine eight one fifty four fifteen cedar avenue is continued
calendar number two seven zero eight six thirty five west alany avenue
Kenya Carey is handling this pro se we have no RCO letter
I promoted Mr. Kenya Carey to a panelist madam chair thank you
Ms. Carey can you put your name and address on the record and spell your name
hello yes can you put your name and address on the record and spell your name please
kenya kerry k-e-n-y-a-c-a-r-e-y so um the my current address is where am i staying now um
I'm sorry, I'm staying in different places.
128 43 226th Street, Luriton, New York, 11413.
Okay. Do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth?
Have you sent in the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO?
And we showed that there is no RCO letter.
Madam Chair, this is Sharon Saleta.
I can tell you that there were emails back and forth.
We do have all of the exhibits, and I have been told that there was an RCO meeting, but we do not have a letter.
Okay, great.
Thank you, Ms. Salata.
Thank you.
Ms. Carey, did I swear you in?
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and I'll think about the truth?
I'm sorry.
I just came up with a 12-hour hospital shift, so I'm a little out of it.
You may continue.
Yes. What I'm asking for today from the board is to convert my one family dwelling to a two family dwelling, primarily because I'm a health care provider and I do a lot of travel assignments.
So the property stays vacant and I don't want an issue with squatters and break-ins and stuff.
So I'm trying to convert the main floor for a two bedroom so I can try to get a family in there and then I will be on the second floor.
so when I am home I don't have to be concerned. We don't have an RCO letter. Did you meet with
the RCO? I'm going to say if that was Mr. Pass, yes. What is the name of the RCO, Sharon?
Excuse me, Madam Chair, I believe that Hillary Emerson has been helping with this. Could we
check to see if she is fine is hillary are you in the virtual audience um if she is madam chair
i have just allowed her to speak great good morning this emerson hi name and address and
spell your name please and then i'll swear you in yes hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman
Sherelle Parker, H-I-L-A-R-Y-E-M-E-R-S-O-N. Do you swear from the tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? I do. Okay, you may continue. Yes, thank you. The applicant had had
difficulty connecting with the RCO, not through the applicant's fault. The RCO was undergoing
some challenges and has actually now decided as of this week to no longer serve as an RCO,
So our office put the meeting together and a representative from the RCO, Mr. Kim, did attend the meeting, and I thought he was going to write a letter, but he has not.
There were no near neighbors in attendance, just myself, representative from the RCO, the applicant, Ms. Carey, and a representative who's assisting her with the property.
So that was all in attendance.
So there really is not a community position on this one in that sense because there were no neighbors that came to the meeting nor contacted our office.
does the councilwoman have a position
yes she does the the councilwoman is um not opposed to um changing the property from a
single family to a duplex uh typically this is not typical for her um but in in this case um this
block um upon inspection is um already a mix of single family dwellings and duplexes um it's
it's comprised of twins. The other half of this twin already appears to be a duplex. I believe
it's currently vacant, but it has already been converted. And this is a corner property, which
those are often duplexes to begin with. Like I said, we did not hear from any neighbors,
either for or against the project, either at the meeting or contacting our office.
um we we believe there's sufficient square footage at the property to accommodate two units
nearly 1800 square feet um and we do want to note for the record that we greatly appreciate
the applicant um not converting the property before she came to zoning but coming to zoning
first um uh we we don't see that um as often as we would like so we do appreciate that um the one
proviso that that we would ask for is that there be no unit in the basement. And it's, as my
understanding, the basement is only intended for storage, but we just would not want that to be
used as a unit in the future. Thank you. Okay.
Thank you. Okay, is there anyone in the virtual audience with questions?
Does the board have any questions? No. Okay, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing single-family zoning at this location.
With respect, the applicant's hardship claim is not related to any unique physical circumstances or conditions of the actual property.
So the City Planning Commission would have to recommend that the board deny the variance.
Calendar number 2708635 West Alany Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is no.
my vote is no
my vote is yes
excuse me madam chair
we are then going to have to hold this matter
because
it's required that there be three members in agreement
before a decision can be made
the chair will then read the transcript
and it will be voted on a later date
Ms. Saleta
I'm also going to go back to number 8, 3133, Landville, just to be consistent.
We're doing it with every other case where there are no exhibits.
Calendar number 0964, 3133, Landville Place.
There are no exhibits.
It's the first listing.
And this case is continued.
So number 15, the chair will have to read that transcript and
vote on it. Okay.
Calendar number 186717 Chew Avenue. The attorney is Hercules Grigos.
To the appellant and Stephanie Hyman, for the near neighbors.
And Madam Chair, this is a resumption hearing Mr. Grigos has put on his case.
Ms. Hyman began questioning her witnesses.
She has an additional two witnesses to call.
Okay, thanks.
Ms. Hyman has also been promoted to panelists, Madam Chair.
Thank you.
Ms. Hyman?
Good morning.
Hi, can you put your name and address on the record, spell your name, and I will swear you in?
Sure. Stephanie Hyman, S-T-E-P-H-A-N-I-E-H-E-I-M-A-N-N, 7225 Devon Street.
You swear I'm firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay. You may proceed.
Okay, thank you.
I'd like to begin by asking the board to take judicial notice of the Act 2 statute, which is 35 PS 6026.101 to 6026.908.
And then if the board agrees to...
And how are we taking notice to that? Are you going to share that with us?
It's in the exhibit packet. It's the statute.
the board will acknowledge that it has been submitted as an exhibit.
Okay, great. And then I'd like to call Mr. Robert Dixon as a witness. Thank you.
Mr. Dixon, if you're there, please raise your virtual hand so you may be sworn in.
mr dixon has been allowed to speak
hi can you put your name and address on the record please
yes robert j dixon um robert d-i-x-o-n 6800 clearview street do you swear if i'm to tell
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay you may proceed ms hyman okay thank you
Mr. Dixon, can you tell us where you live and how close your home is to the 6717 Chew Avenue site?
I live at 6800 Clearview Street.
If I leave my property and walk directly across the street, I'm at the tennis courts, which rejoin the 6717 site on Chew Avenue.
Excuse me, this is Sharon. I apologize.
Excuse me, this is Sharon, I apologize for interrupting again, but Mr. Griegos has not
been promoted to panelists, if that could be done, please.
That has been taken care of this letter.
Thank you, Jason.
okay um mr gregas i'm sorry yes before we continue can he be sworn in first thank you
sure i'm trying to find someone here
and actually mr reuter as well for the city law department
if he could be promoted
for this case.
He's now been promoted to panelists
as well, Madam Chair.
Excuse me.
So we have both
promoted.
Thank you.
Mr. Grigos, hi.
Name and address for the record, please, and spell your name.
Then you'll be sworn in.
Thank you. Hercules Grigos,
G-R-I-G-O-S, 1835
Market Street, Philadelphia, PA,
representing 6717
to have llc owner and developer thank you do you swear from the tell the whole truth and nothing
about the truth i do okay mr reuter uh thank you may please the board leonard f reuter for the city
of philadelphia um we're i i'm just here because i was informed that uh one of the parties intends
to uh question the uh city plans the city planning rep so i'm just here for that so you're not
testifying i am not testifying but i'll be sworn in in case i say something that sounds like a fact
can i interrupt again um my understanding that was that ms hyman is not going to call
a city planning representative if that's the case then mr reuter would not have to uh
stay signed on yeah i'll watch anyway okay
okay never mind then thanks okay somebody proceed okay thank you um i'm sorry before we proceed can
mr roeder just be sworn in you want him to be sworn in anyway okay he has to interject thank
you kindly chair sure thank you do you swear we're firm to tell the whole truth and nothing
about the truth i do thank you thank you miss hyman again you may proceed okay thank you okay
mr dixon um the 6717 two avenue address is situated right next to the pleasant playground
correct correct and um the play the pleasant playground is more than just a playground it
offers other amenities is that right that's correct it um the playground um also has a um
Fairly new community building where we have community meetings, exercise classes.
I think there's several other types of groups like Girl Scouts or Boy Scouts that may meet in there also.
It also is the site of the Little League Baseball League, as well as a site for the Bantams football team to practice.
And there's a swimming pool in the playground.
There's a swimming pool. That's the swimming pool would be the apartment building with overlooking shadows swimming pool.
How often do you visit the playground?
I mean, I would say probably if there's something going on watching baseball, I probably look at that during the seasons probably two or three times a week.
I walk through it often because if I'm walking from the bus stop, I sort of take a shortcut through the playground just to see what's going on and keep an eye on it as I walk through my house.
And who else in your family uses the playground?
I have a grandmother who lives with me and two of them live across the street.
I take them over there for certain activities, particularly during the summer.
They have swim classes at four o'clock or community swims.
So a lot of times they'll go over there where the community swims when the pool is operating,
which I understand will open on July 7th this year.
And when you visit the playground, how do you observe people using the swimming pool?
Swimming pools, it's quite a pool in the mornings.
I didn't realize this until I started driving around some early mornings.
I would see that people would be going over to the playground early to be around the pool.
At about 10.30, it sort of gets, I won't say taken over, but visited by the numerous day camps that are going on in the neighborhood, and they have time set up for them to be at the pool.
So from about 10.30 all the way up until about 3 o'clock, the pool.
so from about 10 30 all the way up until about three o'clock that um the polls use on during
the summers is utilized on a daily basis by um different community um organizations to have day
camps in the neighborhood at four as i said i think they had a community swim um later on in
the evening they'd had zumba swims which were pretty much for um adults um i'm saying basically
women but i guess men would have been allowed to join too if they wanted to zoom in the water
Okay. And so what concerns do you have about the impact of this proposed
33-unit apartment building on the playground and the pool?
Well, it's going to be right on the adjacent to the pool. I know they were talking about trash
and things of that nature. The fact that it's going to be overlooking, it's going to be shadowing
the pool um it comes up the back i guess the back group of windows will come floors will be right on
top of the pool so you have all those people looking out um the place where there would be
egress which is stoke which they call a slogan street it's really like a little driveway into
the pool would be right where most of the people let kids off go to the pool right to the left of
Slocum, what they call Slocum Street, is the entrance to the playground building, the playground
equipment is right in that same area as well as a spray area, and people go in and go out,
go in and out to egress the field itself. It would be causing all kinds of, I think with that kind
of travel and things of that nature, would be causing all kinds of... Can you talk a bit more
about your concerns with the shading of the pool?
How that would affect the...
Well, it shades the pool.
In this day and age, I don't know if people feel
easy about having people looking down
into a pool of kids or whatever,
but leaving that,
it would sort of black out the sun
in the area of the pool where there's sunlight
on the pool and things of that nature.
In fact, they would consider, and they had
a special event for a pop-up pool
where people, you know, they actually had
booth chairs and things
that way for people to sit and read and things of that
nature. And I think that would be
an infringement upon
that activity.
I just think
that it would sort of be cutting out part of
the area. The area was
sort of set up. We're not on a big street
or anything. It was sort of set up as a community
situation, a community
pool. And I don't think they ever envisioned
when they built it to have something like
an apartment building sitting right on the edge
over top of it great okay uh thank you mr dixon those are all my questions thank you um um as i
told you i'm waiting i have to go right into a hearing for a um sentencing a homicide case thank
you i have a couple questions okay no i'm sorry that's okay no no no problem i just um i'm just
curious if you you mentioned that the pool would be in shadow um i don't know if you saw the uh
shadow study that your attorney um uh submitted into the record i i thought um
and um i'm just trying to pull that we're not we're not using a shadow study for okay but you
put it into the record um and you submitted that as evidence and i just saw it and i think it was
pretty clear um that during the months that the pool was open um there is no shadow on the pool
I just want to know if you saw that.
Okay, I started the shadowing study, you know, last time I did it, when we first had
the first meeting, I was a little more familiar with it than I am now.
If that's what you, if that's your statement, you know, I'm not here to dispute that.
I just, you know, my overall thing is that the shadow and the urban people are just looking
down on the pool.
I just have some issues with that.
Thank you.
yeah i mean i i just um the exhibit that um that council put on um it's 550 pages here but
there was a shadow study included in that um i believe it was um
let's see um
yeah mr dixon is not is not here to testify about the shadow he did he did testify about the shadow
though so i just want to the concerns that he has about the building shading the pool that's right
but not the exhibit specifically if i can just if i may um share my screen here and put the uh
study that uh uh that council put on the record here um this shows just want to be clear here um
Let's see, let's get to when the pool is open.
I don't feel comfortable with Mr. Griegos summarizing our...
I don't feel comfortable with Mr. Griegos summarizing our exhibits here. I would have
someone available to discuss this shadow study, but I don't think he is the person that we want.
Well, he put evidence on the record that...
I mean, you're not the person that we want representing the exhibit.
If you want a witness to testify and explain the exhibit, I can arrange for that.
Well, that's fine, but he did testify that the pool was in shadow, and I'm showing here July 1, 9 a.m., 11 a.m., 3 p.m., and at 5 p.m., you know, based on, you know, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, this building from your shadow study would not have shadow in the summertime when the pool is open.
That's just July 1st.
Okay, and here's August 1st, and then here's September.
September. And then I guess September 1st at 4 p.m. there is light shadow but I believe after
Labor Day. And at 5 p.m. the entire pool is shaded there on September 1st. At 5 p.m. and
at Labor Day I believe the city pool is closed. So I just wanted to put that on. And also I just
wanted to ask
Mr. Dixon
if he was aware, if he saw the plans
that the Slocum Street entrance had been
changed and removed
so there is no
ingress and egress on our revised plans
on Slocum Street.
But there's
egress and ingress on Chu, am I correct?
Just on Chu, correct.
Just on Chu? That still doesn't cause a problem.
If you've seen how those streets
to sit up it'll cause a problem because really um where you ingress and egress is really the
other side of slogan street that street empties right into that would empty right into that
building it's not a continuous um street in that sense but again i'm not there to argue
i'm just there to give you what my views are okay now go to my courtroom
i have no more questions thank you sir thank you thank you mr dixon
another witness yes i have one more witness uh mr kevin smith
mr smith has been allowed to speak madam chair
and mr smith can you put your name and address on the record spell your last name my name is
kevin smith my address is three zero uh smith smith my address is three zero one east vernon
road philadelphia pennsylvania 19119 you swear for me to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes thank you you may proceed miss hyman okay great um so mr smith can you tell
us where you live and how close your home is to the 6717 chew avenue site sure uh i live uh
well my house is the adjacent property to 6717 i live um right on the corner of chew and vernon
Okay. And if I may pull up some exhibits. So is this, this, which has been marked exhibit
14, is this a fair and accurate representation of your home?
Can you see that? I'm sorry. Okay. And is that your house here on the left side with
the with the red detail on the windows yes that's my house and now i'm gonna pull up what's been
marked um exhibit 13 is this the back of your property here yes okay um
and how far is your house set back from the front of your house how far is your
the front of your house set back from the street um it's about 50 feet from uh vernon road and
25 from Chewass. Okay. Um, and how tall are the buildings that are around your house? Um, all of
the buildings are two stories. Um, my house included even, I think that apartment building
across the street is two stories. Um, everything's about the same height for the most part. Okay.
And, um, can you tell us how far is it from the back of your house currently to the
exists to the to the wall um that's that's the closest side of the existing building on the on
the lot currently sure so uh from that wall from like the property to my fence is about 30 feet
to my sense, is about 30 feet, and then it's like another 40 feet to my back door.
and then it's like another 40 feet
Thank you.
Okay. And have you had an opportunity to review the proposed site plans?
So I'm just going to pull up those plans, which have been labeled Exhibit 12.
So this is your house over here, is that right?
Right.
okay and so how far back would um what would the distance be from your property line to the
proposed to the proposed building uh so it looks like zero like there's zero setback there like it
would basically be like right on my property line okay like maybe like even like impeding on my
fence i don't know what that's about um and given that and given the height of the proposed building
what are your concerns about the shading of your property so um for one we use like a lot
of natural light in our house for just warmth we have plants we grow vegetables um that sort of
thing so uh something like four stories like towering over the houses um it would actually
be a pretty big disturbance to like our everyday life essentially um not to mention like the
concern of privacy with like windows looking into our backyard part of the thing about uh
that fence so i don't know if you can see in the other picture if you go to like the previous
exhibit my backyard that fence uh i have a deck in my backyard and on that deck we actually have
built like an additional fence a portion of it was knocked down with the hurricane last year
or a couple years ago but even still facing that back property privacy is a concern so we actually
had a fence built on top of our deck um so yeah it feels like it'd be invasion of privacy in
addition to like losing all of the light that we use for like our garden boxes or our vegetables
all of those things um i think if we were like referencing the shade study uh we even know we
like removed it last time but if we were bringing it back up this time uh my house is actually
like in direct shadow of that building for the majority of the year um which would be a problem
honestly okay all right great those are all my questions for mr smith thank you i'm just going
to ask you're aware that there's no dimensional variances on this site that even a ca1 building
could could be this um massing this height i'm sorry could you repeat that there's no variance
for height or side yard there's no variance for height or side yard on this building that's
correct and what the developer didn't apply for one or as in that it's permitted as of right the
We're not here discussing dimensionals, dimensional issues, so you can build a by right building that size. Be aware of that.
I am aware of that. From what I'm understanding, though, if you build a building that large, you still have to have a setback from the neighboring properties.
I don't think that's correct, but thank you.
You don't think or you don't know? I'm just curious.
No, it's not correct. Sorry.
I have no further questions.
Then I just have a brief closing.
So members of the board,
Madam Chair, as Pennsylvania appellate courts have stated and made clear, their applicant
here has a heavy burden to demonstrate a substantial, serious, and compelling need
for a use variance. They have not met that heavy burden. The applicant has failed to demonstrate
an unnecessary hardship justifying a use variance, and the Marshall Court told us what an unnecessary
hardship is. Marshall states that an unnecessary hardship is established by showing, one, the
physical features of the property are such that it cannot be used for a permitted purpose,
or the property can be conformed for a permitted use only at a prohibitive expense, or that the
property has no value for any purpose permitted by the zoning ordinance. None of that applies here.
what the applicant characterizes as a hardship a cleanup is totally optional under act two
they do not need to clean up the property they can opt in or out
They do not need to clean up the property. They can opt in or out. Nothing prevents them from
nothing prevents them from using the property
using the property as is, and nothing compels them to clean up. Even so, Marshall also says that
mere economic hardship is not enough, it's itself not enough to grant, to justify the granting of a
variance. The board has taken judicial notice of Act 2, and Act 2 is a voluntary program that
property owners can enter into with the state. After cleaning up the property, the property
owner receives a legal liability waiver. That's the carrot that the statute uses to entice owners
to clean up a property, but the decision to engage in Act 2 is purely an optional business decision
for the applicant to obtain a legal liability waiver. No statute, no regulation, no authority
mandates that the applicant pay one penny. If the board accepts this as a hardship, it is minimal.
Let's talk about what the costs actually are. The applicant has inflated the amount of this
optional expense. He commissioned a report with big numbers, but never presented this report. It's
never been provided to me or my clients. And the only report that we have seen is a 2019 report
that was referenced in the applicant's testimony. And we introduced in volume three, page three to
five, the report makes clear that the pollution on the site is limited to a small part of the
property. And it tells us that the pollution is not spreading. It isn't a threat to the neighboring
properties, and it is actually improving over time. That report estimates the cost to be actually
$86,000 to $96,000, which doesn't include the monitoring and reporting costs that applicant
has used in his estimate. Mr. Thomas from Audax testified that the applicant was aware of the
pollution on the site when the property was purchased, and that this was incorporated into
the sales price that was paid. He testified that he was aware of the location of the property
on Chew Avenue and that this was also incorporated in the sales price that the applicant paid.
And the applicant was aware that the site was zoned CA1.
Now, if the board believes there is a hardship, it is so minimal that a wholesale change to
RM1 is not the least modification to afford relief. The applicant now comes before you
saying he needs help from this board to make his eyes wide open, fully informed business decision
more profitable. The argument that his applicant is making that there's no commercial use of this
property, none, it's an extreme position. Mr. Thomas testified that he was aware of many
long-time commercial businesses on Chew Avenue just within a couple of blocks of the site.
His conclusion on the viability of the commercial use on the site is wildly speculative, fact-free,
and a biased opinion. Did we see any data? No. Did we see any reports? No. Did we see any work
papers? No. Did we hear about any of the methodology? No. The only thing we did see was that their own
expert testified that traffic would be increased with a commercial use, but you can't have it both
ways. You can't be totally economically unviable, but also create so much traffic and be so well
patronized that the traffic to the commercial site would be more than the traffic to a 33-unit
apartment building. So that's what their expert told you. Really, the only evidence that they
have presented is that this is a perfectly viable economic use. And you heard the testimony this
morning of Mr. Dixon about the uses of the pleasant playground by children, summer camps,
fitness classes for seniors. And you don't need to be a scientist to understand that a 38-foot
tall building creates shade. And we know from common sense that the building is just feet away
from the public school where the neighborhood goes, the public pool, I'm sorry, where the neighborhood
goes to enjoy the pool and sunshine. And there will be multiple apartment windows overlooking
this public pool. And that's a lack of privacy and vulnerability to voyeurism to those that are
using the pool, including children, which burdens the use and enjoyment of the park pool by
residents. And you heard testimony also from Mr. Smith, and you've seen the plans that build this
tall building right up against the property line with zero setback. My understanding is the code
does require a setback, and this building will tower above the Vernon Street properties, casting
significant shade, harming the use of the enjoyment and the enjoyment of the Vernon Street
neighbors' backyards for gardening and other activities. The environmental cleanup hardship
is pretense and the appellate is asking the board to grant him a variance so that his business
decision to purchase the lot will be more profitable. And it doesn't matter for his
business decision that the use of the neighboring playground's facilities will be compromised
or that the neighboring houses will lose light and air and the vegetables growing in their gardens.
But the code is clear. It says that granting a variance, that the granting of the variance
That the granting of the variance will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property or impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent conforming property.
will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of the
It also says that the grant of the variance will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burden water, sewer, park, or other public facilities.
And again, mere economic hardship will not itself justify a grant of a variance.
A landowner cannot claim hardship when it purchases a property and knew or should have known that
there were restrictions on the use of the property. And evidence that a zoned use is less financially
rewarding is insufficient by itself to justify a variance. Therefore, we are asking the board
this morning to uphold the denial of the variance. And on behalf of my clients, I thank you for your
time thank you does the board have any questions no no i have um sorry i'm sorry i i just have
um a response if i may sure uh i mean i i i appreciate uh uh council's uh statement but i
think um you know a number of uh factual inaccuracies are there concerns and i do have
um john buzan um as a rebuttal witness um an environmental expert that can um testify to
um you know act two and to the uh requirements that any site like this um you know in order to
be financed no matter what the use we need to do a cleanup and we need to go through act two
so i'd like to call mr buzan well my understanding was that the appellant has
had rested. I had not. I had reserved my time and and you wanted to raise issues about environmental
which you did and I had. That was just my my closing statement. It's all contained in the
act. You raised it in Alaska. I would like to hear from your witness. I would like to hear from
your witness. Thank you. John Buzan is here.
hi sir can you put your name and address on the record and spell your name
yes uh john buzan uh b-u-z-a-n uh my address is 14 dale lane malvern pa 19355
you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth
I do. Okay, you may proceed. Mr. Buzan, can you just tell us about your
profession and your professional credentials?
I'm a licensed environmental engineer. I've been in the environmental cleanup business
since 1991.
I've probably participated in hundreds of sites like this one, former gas stations.
My job right now is president of Comstock Environmental, and we still perform tank
removals, soil remediation, tank installations.
and uh you've testified in front of uh boards and townships before i have
um uh i think i submitted uh mr buzan's cv to um to sharon's letter counsel um
i'm sorry we're getting feedback from someone um yeah we submitted mr buzan's um uh
uh cv yesterday that sharon seleta oh i i didn't receive a copy of that i didn't even i didn't
know mr buzan was testifying today um well um you heard i i asked the board to qualify him
or consider him as an expert i would object to him as a witness
i would consider him a witness
um and i apologize in time and if i realized you weren't copied on that i would have floated
um so mr buzan um uh have you had an opportunity to review the um the historic environmental
reports and um the site yeah i reviewed uh two reports one from a company called emg in 2009
uh 17 and then brick house i believe 2019. and can you uh tell us about your findings and tell
us about what your estimated costs are in order to redevelop the site?
Sure. Both EMG and Brickhouse found
a formally closed underground storage tank still remain on site.
They didn't investigate what was in the tank, so there's some question about that.
They didn't investigate what was in the tank, so there's some question about that.
They both identified odors, petroleum odors, in the soil, below the tanks, and around the tanks,
and then both investigated groundwater related to petroleum compounds,
And they found several compounds related to gasoline, waste oil, possibly heating oil, and several of the borings and wells exhibited those compounds, which are regulated and above statewide health standards in the state of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
I reviewed it
I had some comments about it
I would object again to him testifying
to a report he didn't prepare
Thank you
I'll continue
So I estimated
as I do for many
developers
what a good budget would be.
And I know that Brickhouse provided
about $170,000 estimate.
I object to him testifying about a budget.
He's here as an expert in environmental matters,
I believe.
Can you please continue testifying?
You submitted that report into evidence.
And so...
Just to be clear,
when you counsel your clients on environmental remediation, you also counsel on the cost of
cleanup? Yes. So you reviewed the Brookhouse numbers and you reviewed the findings and what
was your opinion now in 2021? So ultimately I agreed with what they suggested. I agreed
with the basic premise of their cost. Although when I looked at the data,
it looked like their estimate for soil remediation didn't incorporate about
600 or 700 cubic yards of soil that I would estimate is contaminated and is contributing
to the groundwater contamination issue. And I would also surmise, based on the data I'm reading,
that the soil would also reveal a potential vapor intrusion issue. Pennsylvania has vapor screening
values. The prior consultants didn't evaluate that. In fact, Brickhouse suggested that that
be looked into. But based on, again, the data that I'm looking at in the groundwater, the
levels of compounds exceed the vapor screening value in groundwater. So I'm assuming, I don't
know for sure, but I'm assuming that the 10 or 11 feet of soil between the bottom of the
tanks and where the samples were taken also exhibits levels of the compounds above a vapor
intrusion standard and therefore that needs to be investigated. I suggested in this letter for
budgeting that not only the soil that Brickhouse said would be removed, which was about 70 yards
of soil. I did a quick measurement. I assumed you would dig five feet around the tanks in addition
to the tanks and underneath the tanks and came up with 670 yards. So I added another $100,000
based on the cost of the soil and excavation and the backfill and restoration.
um so i added a hundred thousand dollars or 110 thousand dollars to brick house's estimate
um for soil remediation soil remediation and again because the samples were in the
they're in the water table i assume there'd be some de-watering so uh how about how about um
USTs, hydraulic lifts? Brickhouse included the removal of USTs and
hydraulic lifts. They didn't mention the oil water separator. But again, overall, I agree with their
numbers. They didn't specify in detail what the numbers reflected. But I, you know, as far as a
as as far as a pro forma you know i don't disagree with it and uh but but with the additional soil
pro forma you know i don't disagree with it
that they seem to underestimate they seem to only estimate about a truckload per tank
and again based on their own data it looks like there's there's at least 10 or 11 feet
between the bottom of the tanks and the contamination that they they identified so
So I added that to the estimate. I also, and it probably wasn't part of their scope, but
in their boring logs, I noticed that they identified fill materials, particularly from
the surface down to five feet. And I know in most cases, most people don't remove that soil,
but they didn't analyze it they didn't analyze anything from zero to two feet
the surface soils underneath the asphalt concrete and in the back back area
so i add another hundred thousand dollars for budgeting for potential soils exchanged there
those surface soils usually have metals or coal tar compounds or in a gas station could have been
subject to spills, overfills that they didn't have the shutoffs that they have now. And so we
commonly see contaminated soil in the surface. So it just assumed a full property scrape of two feet
and again added another $100,000. So again, they're unknown, but they're common.
So total, you had $206,000 for the underground storage tanks, hydraulic lift, soil remediation, an additional $76,000 for the ACT-II monitoring, and then you put an additional contingency for the surface soils to get to about $382,000. Is that correct?
that's correct and i didn't include some other things that that should be minor but uh should
be included there's still risk with um any kind of excavation uh the so it could be a little less
but it could be a little more i guess that's correct that's correct so if you're counseling
your client um with um residential and a park adjacent playground um would would you um recommend
against remediation or going through act two well i no i i would never recommend against a cleanup
and i i believe um again the groundwater condition is a reportable release and and would be
um possibly within act 32 or or other acts other than act two so uh that that's a legal question
um but no i would i would definitely want my client to achieve compliance and the uh as you
mentioned i think before i think anyone lending the money or any stakeholders in a property like
this would want them to have oversight from the dep and clean this up to make sure everyone's safe
and so even if it was um a ca1 use a medical use a restaurant use or a multi-family use
you would recommend the same procedures?
Yeah, the data exceeds the non-residential standard as well.
So I think either is required
and would be prudent to address in a similar fashion.
And your experience,
in order to get financing on something like this,
you're going to have to go through this process.
Objection to financing as his area of expertise.
So noted.
I don't think he's saying that's his area of expertise.
I'll just say you regularly provide your reports to lenders, and this is a requirement in your experience to lenders.
Yeah, for the record, I've worked for a lot of lenders.
I understand their requirements and their regulatory obligation.
obligation. Typically, at this point in time, you know, 30 some years after environmental
regulations have been put into place, the lenders are looking for a state regulatory agency to
approve the environmental on a site like this. Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
Thank you. Does the board have any questions? No. No. Is there anybody in the virtual
audience left to testify i have a quick uh just clarification question um mr buzan the the reports
Mr. Buzan, the reports that you reviewed, what kind of standard were they using to test the soil?
that you reviewed they were
Was it a residential or a commercial standard?
They evaluated both, I believe. I can check. And again, I know I evaluated both.
Did you visit the site?
No, I've only looked at it on this Google Earth.
fit. Okay. Did you conduct any tests of the soil? No. Did you prepare any reports?
I prepared a short summary. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Buzan, that's data. There's data in the
reports of what exists in the soil. Is that correct? Correct. So data is then applied to
residential or commercial standard of how it would be remediated is that correct correct so you you
basically say if there's a if there's a contaminant it's a part per million or part per whatever the
date is of what exists and then you from there um you determine what the um whether it's an
acceptable level or it's required to be cleaned up is that correct correct thank you okay we're
going to wrap this up the board has no questions all right planning commission yes i'm sorry we
have quite a few witnesses oh we still do okay we have um charles richardson from the council
person's office he can be he can unmute himself and speak great thank you miss sonkett
good morning madam chair hi how are you i'm well how about yourself great name and uh who you work
for charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass from 312 city hall
do you swear if i'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay you may proceed
in the strongest possible terms uh councilwoman bass is opposed to granting a variance for this
project. The East Mountain Area Neighbors RCO has held quite a number of Zoom-based meetings with
the developer over the past year regarding this project. In February, the developer indicated that
they would return to the community with possible changes to their design,
and the councilman had actually hoped that they would rethink what they were proposing and work
with the community to come up with a viable use that satisfy both their needs and the community's
interest. But in April, when the developer returned with the revised plan, it was with
essentially the same design as far as height was concerned and with the same footprint as well.
The community had requested that they change the footprint to allow more of a setback between the
proposed building's perimeter and the near neighbors. The councilwoman feels that this
proposal represents a gross overuse of the land, especially in proximity to the playground.
She feels the proposed number of apartments at 33 is still overly dense and the traffic
generated by this building will likely dramatically affect the youth traveling to and from the
playground and the surrounding community as well. The community has continually rejected
this developer's proposed use of this property and as such she's requesting that the board
deny this variance. Thank you very much. Okay Madam Chair we also have available Kelly O'Day
please unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
I'm unmuted.
Hi, can you put your name and address on the record, spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Thank you.
It's Kelly O'Day, old apostrophe D-A-Y.
I live at 301 East Durham Street in East Mount Airy.
I'd like to talk about the recent testimony we just heard on the excavation requirements as a
retired environmental engineer I'd like to point out there will be major excavation of the site to
put in the new building. Part of what must be considered here is the change in cost
if, in fact, the remediation is done versus what would be the normal excavation of that site.
Because in looking at it, you'll see that the oil underground storage tanks were all in the area.
I'd like to object to this witness.
By the site.
And so there is a cost for the remediation, but there's also the normal excavation.
And so what needs to be done here is a careful comparison of what it would cost, additionally, over and above a normal excavation for that site.
Okay, sir, are you opposed to this or supporting it?
I am definitely opposed to the project because of its impact on the park, and there's simply no unnecessary hardship.
unnecessary hardship. Okay, thank you for your testimony. Thanks for taking the time.
Okay, thank you for your testimony.
Thanks for listening.
Chair, we do have Cole available to unmute and testify. And again, Chair, if you would not mind,
I would like to also, again, repeat, do not testify in the Q&A. If you wish to testify,
please raise your hand to be recognized by the Madam Chair. Thank you kindly, Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Selkett. Next witness.
Cole Olson.
Hi, sir. Can you put your name on the record and spell your name and I'll spur you in?
Cole Olson, O-S-I-N, 270 Slocum Street, 19119.
Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. May proceed.
My concerns with the building of the property being dense, we already have absolutely no parking around here.
We park pretty much around the lot right now.
And there's going to be nowhere for anybody to park 33 more cars.
In addition to that, my son goes to the local school district.
Both the schools in the area have 50 to 60 kids in the classroom.
There's no way if these people have kids in the buildings, where are they going to go to school at?
Where are they going to park? Where are they going to go to school at?
Where resources are limited around here when it comes to those two things.
And those are the biggest things that we need to be worried about.
If we can't teach the kids or whoever's going to be there, then they can't be there.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Next witness.
Madam Chair, Matthew Ward.
Please unmute, Mr. Ward.
They're not playing with that shit.
Yes, can you hear me?
yes can you put your name and address on the record and spell your name
and i'll swear you in uh matthew ward 429 slocum street vote fepa 19119
do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you you may proceed thank you i'd like to just uh register my opposition
to the proposed residential construction and variance.
I am a father, neighbor,
and I also am speaking on behalf of Mount Airy Baseball,
where I'm a coach.
We use that field and do a good deal of stewardship
at the park there, at the baseball field.
My main opposition is based on just bad
uh placement for such density um in east mount airy um which is not manhattan this is not hong
kong um a 30 plus apartment building four stories tall literally less than 100 feet
from a cot lot and a public pool i think is is is very poor taste and um not in the best
in the interest of the playground or the community.
Thank you very much.
Ms. Sunkett, more witnesses?
Yes, Chair, we have quite a few more.
Natalia, you can state your name
and wait to be sworn in by the Chair.
Sure, it's Natalia Cereco.
Hi, can you please state your name and spell it, and then I will swear you in.
Sure, it's Natalia Sereko, it's N-A-T-A-L-I-A, last name S-E-R-E-G-A-K-O, and I'm the executive
director of East and Out Your Neighbors.
Thank you.
Do you swear for me to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, proceed, please.
Sure, so I just wanted to put on record Eman's opposition to this development.
The neighbors were working really hard with the applicant to work on something that the community
and the applicant could be happy with that would serve the community in the space that it's in
because it is a public, it's right next to a public space and a space that is used by the
youth in our neighborhood. With all of the, with how big the construction is, you know,
We don't think that it's the least possible modification that's possible on that lot.
on that lot. We don't see an unnecessary hardship. This would impair adequate light
We don't see an unnecessary hardship.
supply. It would also affect the pool that would be in the back of the property.
And another concern that we have is the reports that have been going on
in the City of Philadelphia about construction and environmental
pollution based off of that construction on playgrounds so how would that how would
construction in that area affect the children that would be playing on the playground
thank you
Janet next
Janet unmute yourself please
Hi can you hear me
Yes I can can you put your name on the record
Spell your name and I'll swear you in
Okay I'm sorry
I must have clicked it twice
I'm sorry who's speaking
This is Janet
a mills okay thank you yes uh once again janet a mills uh my home address is 309 east vernon
roge my property is adjacent to the construction of of the uh proposed apartment building
um i am on record opposed the uh variance of this plan i'm sorry i don't i don't thank you
can you hear me miss mills i believe she didn't get sworn into oh i'm sorry do you swear from
to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth absolutely i'm a woman of faith thank you
for the record. You're welcome. Thank you, Your Honor. I just want to go on record. I
am dismayed with some of the issues that was stated by the developer. And one thing I'm
very concerned about is the fencing of the property to the property line for those who
live on Vernon Road. That's just one thing I'm concerned about is the fencing. I currently have
and what is the second thing you're concerned about? Pest control and sanitation.
okay so you're opposed to this project absolutely okay thank you so much Jacqueline also
Jacqueline is next year thank you
Jacqueline
hi this is jack can you hear me yes name and address please and spell your name and i will
swear you in yes ma'am um my name is jacqueline king and i it's spelled j-a-c-q-u-e-l-i-n-e
and i uh live on the 448 brandon row thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do and can you tell us what reason you are opposed to this um yes i
am opposed and basically i've lived in a community for about 26 years now i'm about a block and a
half away from the location of the structure and my child is grown but again i do live in an area
and i drive by often my concerns basically are two concerns one is the safety of children uh
Right now, before the structure even, before it even goes into place, not all children are driven to this location.
I understand that the pool is seasonal and maybe even the playground is seasonal, but the rec center is year round.
And again, not all children are driven to this location.
And I witness on a daily basis children that are just simply trying to cross the street at Chew Avenue.
And that's without the added number of cars and so forth that this structure would bring on board.
So that's my first concern is just their safety. And then secondly, I do have concerns about
just the fact that a lack of privacy. So you have children at the pool during the time that it is
open and you just never know in this day and age, you know, who's looking. And I know that that's
basically the situation everywhere. But with having that particular proximity, it just gives
them a microscope. I don't know. I just don't think that it's really cool to have them so
really cool to have them um so close to one another and basically that's really all I wanted
close to one another. And basically, that's really all I wanted to say.
to say um okay thank you very much next up is Gina Chihar
yes yes ma'am can you put your name on the record and your address spell your last name and I'll
swear you in Gina Hubbard h-u-b-b-a-r-d I live at 407 East Gorgas Lane
do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do
you may proceed i'm here today just to show support for the near neighbors um on vernon
and on chew avenue um one i oppose the development of this project because there are so many
apartment complexes that exist in this community that are not currently occupied so there is
not a need for this project there's not a need for another apartment building my second um reason for
disagreeing with moving forward with this project is that it is too close to the property line
of the neighbors uh the gentleman that spoke earlier i think on vernon road it is too close
to their yard um we need more green space not less green space i think the the company has not done
enough to meet with this community to make changes to it to the project so that it would be
something that would be agreeable to all parties. I think it definitely needs to be
lower in height and less apartments in the building. I think that our community needs
more families, and I think they should consider building one or two family homes there, single
family homes. That's what we need, two to three-story single family homes. Thank you.
Thank you. Next, we have DeAnda. Please unmute yourself.
yes can you hear me yes can you put your name and address on the record and i'll swear you in
spell your name as well deanda wilson first name d-e-a-n-d-a last name w-i-l-s-o-n
my address is 416 east pleasant street philadelphia pa19119
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Thank you. You may proceed. I want to express my opposition to this project.
I live about a block away from the proposed site and I want to express my support for the near
neighbors whose lives will be irrevocably changed for the worse by if this building
is able to proceed as planned. I also want to express how appalled I was at the last hearing
when the attorneys for the developer described the near neighbors as quote-unquote aggressive
in their opposition to this project when they're just trying to ensure that they have continued
use and enjoyment of their homes and their community as they've had since they have lived
here um in in a community that is um in a part of the community that is mostly african-american
i think his tone and um his uh i'm sorry if i could respond to that has nothing to do
So can we please stick to zoning?
I'm going to respond to that.
Okay, I'll stick to zoning.
I'll stick to zoning.
Thank you.
I'm going to respond to it, though, if I may.
Okay, can I finish my testimony?
No, you made an accusation.
That language came out of a letter that someone else presented.
That was not my language.
So I just want to be clear.
And people know me from the zoning board and know how I interact with all communities,
um even if even if i have uh have to be a lawyer sometimes with counsel i try to be as respectable
as possible to the neighbors um so that that was a letter that was read into the record so thank
you but i appreciate your concern and i and i am sensitive to those issues thank you okay
you can unmute again and please have all testimony presented be regarding zoning thank you very
Okay, I apologize. I wanted to also express how the design of the building is completely
inappropriate and not in alignment with the surrounding community. I think that that does
pertain to zoning and um it it shows that the developer and the um the architect uh don't
understand this community and and don't seem to um have any interest in contributing
seem to, um, have any interest in contributing with this project. And so I, I'll close by just
saying that that is, um, you know, this, this building is inappropriate and I hope that the,
the variance is not granted. Thank you. Thank you.
Lastly, Chair, we have Nina. Nina, you can unmute yourself.
yes hi can you hear me yes can you put your name and address on the record spell your name
and i will swear you in sure my name is nina curlett n-i-n-a-c-u-r-l-e-t-t i live at 236
east springer street 19119 do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth
Yes, I do.
Okay, you may proceed.
I am opposed to this variance.
I'm opposed to this building.
I wanted to state that the applicant said that no commercial use was viable here.
I have to point out that the applicant is telling us not to believe our own eyes.
The truth and reality is that commercial use works and is popular on CHU.
Not only are there currently very active convenience store, laundry, funeral home, and restaurants, but there are now two new restaurants coming.
One is a coffee shop right almost directly across the street from this site.
And another is a new soul food restaurant a block down that should be opening sometime soon.
They've been working on it recently on the interior with their sign up.
So I just have to point out that it seems to be contrary to the actual fact that commercial could not be used.
And we haven't seen any evidence.
In fact, the evidence of reality shows us differently.
Can I ask are those new ground-up construction uses?
I'm sorry, I didn't hear your question.
That new ground-up construction?
Is it new ground-up construction, did you say?
Yes, or the conversions of existing spaces.
One is a full rehabilitation of a building, and the other is a, I don't know how you would describe it, I guess it would be the retrofitting and existing space.
So existing buildings, thank you.
Does the board have any questions?
Are there any other?
Excuse me, Chair, this is the court reporter.
I apologize for the interruption. I need one minute to address a battery issue on my backup.
If I could just ask for a pause.
You got it.
Thank you.
thank you chair okay well where were we uh chair you were ready to ask planning commission planning
planning commission thank you madam chair ian hegarty with the philadelphia city planning
commission members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from ca1 to
RM1 multifamily zoning at this location. The proposed use and building height are consistent
with the proposed zoning district in the adopted comprehensive plan. The growth strategy in the
comprehensive plan recommends that two factors determine suitability for multifamily housing
growth, wide streets and good transit access. Chew Avenue is an 80-foot wide right-of-way,
one of the widest in East Mount Airy. The site's also within a 10-minute walk of regional rail
and a five minute walk of frequent buses.
Given the consistency with both the growth strategy
of the comprehensive plan
and the recommended zoning specific to the site,
the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the variance.
May I just have a brief close?
Yes, you may.
yeah thank you um so i appreciate um the concerns we heard today and i just want to remind the board
Yeah, thank you.
So I appreciate the concerns we heard today.
that we met with the community on more than three occasions um the response and i think what you've
heard today the response has been um overwhelmingly no development um the concerns that were raised
were um not about um you know how you can make a ca1 use work um they were not about um you know
whether it's how a residential building would impact them.
They were based on dimensional issues,
which are not a variance for you.
So the question is really use, safety of the children,
privacy where the entire park is surrounded
by residential uses with windows looking into it.
This is typical of most playgrounds
in the urban fabric of Philadelphia.
We have an apartment complex directly across the street.
This is a consistent use.
um we did uh remind me we did reduce the number of units um from 37 to 33 we did include three
affordable um units we did um uh contributor make an offer to contribute um six thousand dollars a
year um to to the park um we did um uh offer to move the dumpster into the interior remove any
traffic from the street where it was on Slocum Street and put all of our traffic on the Chew
Avenue and you did hear evidence that any CA1 use would have much greater impact on traffic.
The plan is consistent with RM1 use as the Planning Commission just testified
um and in terms of the hardship um and the costs um uh council um mentioned the marshall case but
the scott case from the commonwealth court makes it very clear that uh environmental cleanup costs
are indeed a hardship um and can be calculated the economic hardship of the property and what
you heard from the testimony was the ca1 use is not viable they talk about commercial spaces
on Chu Avenue. You have historic CMX2 style buildings with maybe a ground floor cafe and
apartments above that are supporting that use. You have, to the admission of the witness,
that there are no ground up new commercial that's viable in this corridor. So essentially,
the opposition to the variance is really opposition to developing this parcel. It means that this
parcel sits vacant forever for the foreseeable future in this environment. And I think that
is not what zoning is about. The goal here is to get this project cleaned up, which you heard
from the expert that that is a concern, and put this back on the city rolls and make this a
contributing building. The building meets the RM1 dimensional standards. My clients worked
really hard to meet with the community, and the answer was always do a park, do a hydroponic
garden, do something that doesn't work. So, you know, we respectfully request the grant of the
variance because this is, we believe, a legit hardship. There is no project that can be
developed and you heard testimony from mr thomas in compliance with ca1 as a result i respectfully
request the grant of the variance and if the board's inclined we do have revised plans showing
the changes that we made uh as a result of our community engagement okay is there yeah is there
anyone else here who wants to justify yes we do have a request from the councilwoman to testify
if that's allowable, we can unmute Mr. Richardson's mic so she can do so. Okay.
Hi, hold for just one second, please. Okay.
hi uh i'm putting you on i'm putting you on right now all right i'm ready go ahead okay can you put
your can you put your name on the record and spell it and i'll see you in okay okay go ahead
I think she can hear you now.
Councilwoman, are you there?
Can she hear me?
Can you hear me?
I can hear you now. Yes. Can you put your name on the record, spell it, and I'll swear you in?
I can hear you now, yes.
Can you put your name on the record, spell it, and I'll swear you in?
Say again?
Can you put your name on the record, spell it, and I will swear you in?
Certainly. My name is Cindy Bass, C-I-N-D-Y-B-A-S-S.
I am the 8th District Councilperson, and I am here to give testimony on the project on 2 Avenue, 6717 2 Avenue.
I believe that's the address.
okay do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do okay thank you you may proceed
well i wanted to weigh in on this project uh for a number of different reasons um number one this
is a project that is near and dear to my heart as a former member of the pleasant playground
advisory council and as the uh former uh president of the community association east
Mount Airy neighbors that represents that area. And as a resident who uses that neighborhood
recreation center, this is my recreation center in my neighborhood, where I go with my daughter
to use the pool and use the other amenities at the playground. I wanted to weigh in and feel,
I'll let you know that I felt very, very strongly in opposition to this project. With all due
respect to the property owner who purchased this parcel of land. This is not the right project
for this site. Cramming in this number of units into this site, I think, is detrimental to the
quality of life of the residents who live and have lived in this neighborhood for a very long
time, most of them. And the idea behind this is purely profit-driven. Generally, there's nothing
wrong with that. I'm not opposed to people, you know, making a living or, you know, this is how
they earn their income. That's perfectly fine. However, I think there's a lot of things that
we need to take into consideration when looking at this particular site. Number one, it's already
in a very dense neighborhood. So adding additional units, adding the parking that's going to
undoubtedly come as parking congestion in the neighborhood, I think we have to think about that.
I think we have to think about number two, that we're adding a considerable number of people to a neighborhood that's already, again, very well populated.
That's also a consideration.
And number three, this property will be backed up essentially against a swimming pool where residents of this unit would have the ability to overlook onto the pool deck,
onto the pool um and and essentially watch um in my opinion young children families whoever in
swimsuits out um you know enjoying themselves having a good time but i am i do have a safety
concern about the ability for whoever may be living in that apartment building to uh to to
have this opportunity to view in the privacy of their home i have a great amount of concern about
that as well. And I just don't think that this is the right location for this type of project.
We have, as a community, looked at a number of different things. At one point, there was someone
from the community who was interested in purchasing the lot and turning it over to the community as
sort of like green space and community lands and, you know, a place where people could sit,
meditate this is much more appropriate for something like that and i am uh you know i
have to say that you know we support development uh we want to see growth in the city but we want
to see growth that makes sense and that will make a positive change in the neighborhood and i don't
believe that this will do that um we feel very very strongly that this is not going to be a
positive project for this neighborhood. It is not going to have a positive impact for this
neighborhood. And so we certainly hope that the ZBA hears the concerns, the cries, the experiences
of the people who live in this neighborhood, myself included. And we know this neighborhood
like the back of our hands. You know, we know this community. We know what works, what doesn't
work and we are absolutely certain that this is not something that's going to be a positive for
this community this is not going to be uh something that is well received and uh we certainly hope
that the the vote today will be reflected uh to support the community at large and of course
um our office which represents this community and is on the ground day in and day out attending
marching meetings uh you know talking to folks on social media you know zoom meetings whatever
it may need to be so that people can share information and that we can work together
so that people can share information and that we can work together to let people know that this is
to let people know
not something that this community wants i have heard probably um from 100 200 people directly
and i would say i've only heard from less than five less than five people who have personally
approached me and said that they wanted this and when i say less than five i actually mean
like the two I can think of right now it's probably more like two but I have been contacted
spoken to been in meetings with like I said probably over 200 people over the course of
this process so we feel very very strongly that this should not proceed. Okay chair that's all
thank you thank you is the board ready to vote
madam chair i have a question for the uh yes but i have a question for the uh council
for the applicant um light of all the opposition do you think that
your architect could design a site that could be by right
i i do not believe a ca1 by right use i do not believe that i could get a user and i could
lease this and i think we had testimony earlier that we spoke to urgent cares and others and there
is no there was not demand for a ca1 user and even a one-story building would not with the
up costs and with the demo etc would not justify um a rent that would meet all the site improvement
costs so i do not believe i could do a buy right ca1 use thank you thank you so is the board ready
to vote i just wanted to say one last thing that um there i was aware that there was discussion
about parks and rec taking this before my client bought the property but um they were not interested
in in taking this land and maybe that's what caused um some of the opposition that there was
a hope that this would be a park but i think probably because of the environmental cost and
just the cost that wasn't possible thank you thank you calendar number 1862 6717 chew avenue
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is no
Can we, can I just amend that because we have revised plans that are two pages?
Calendar number 1862, 6717 Chew Avenue, my vote is yes, with revised plans consisting of two pages.
Yes, for proviso.
Yes, for proviso.
Mine is consistent with no.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, everyone.
Calendar number 1010, 6747 Castor Avenue has been continued.
Calendar number 2703, 802 North 63rd Street.
The attorney is Christopher Kaufman.
Mr. Kaufman has been promoted to panelist.
Mr. Kaufman, can you hear me?
Yes, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon.
How are you?
Name and address on the record and spell your last name, and then I'll swear you in and
ask a few questions.
Yes, ma'am.
Chris Kaufman, last name is K-A-U-F-M-A-N-N, 1420 Walnut Street, Suite 1216, Philadelphia
PA, 19102.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes ma'am. Do you also 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
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 Madam Chair. Thank you. You may proceed.
Madam Chair, this application comes on behalf of my client.
They currently own a building at 802 North 63rd Street.
That's a six unit.
And they're asking to make it a seven unit building.
They already made this application back on, it's like January of 2017, where they did appear in front of the ZBA.
Same application, exactly the same, was approved.
unfortunately the owner she's in Singapore her dad was here handling the
project and failed to obtain the certificate of occupancy in time so
um so that's kind of why we're here today i had two meetings with the neighbors of overbook
that's kind of why we're here today I had two meetings with the
association uh the first meeting i took questions i wasn't able to put everybody on notice in time
so we scheduled another meeting for the end of january and as you can see there was multiple
questions asked uh related to garbage and things like that they were answered and you could see
we received the letter of non-opposition we do have that supportive any questions
no is there anybody in the virtual audience thanks guys is there anybody in the virtual
audience with questions no hands at this time madam chair planning commission
Thank you, Madam Chair, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
With regard to 63rd Street, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to RTA
1 to family zoning at this location.
It appears the applicant has a legal non-conforming use containing six dwelling units, and so
don't feel that there's a reason that having a seventh unit presents a hardship sorry that not
having a seventh unit presents a hardship in any way clearly the property can continue to be used
as a six unit multi-family building and so the city planning commission would recommend that
the board deny the variance thank you calendar number 2703 802 north 63rd street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
Calendar number 0980, 9998, Frankfurt Avenue.
The attorney is Al Foscaldo.
We have a letter from the Civic Association of Support
and a letter of support from Councilman Brian O'Neill.
Mr. Foscaldo, can you hear me yet?
I can, yes.
Name and address. Please spell your last name, and I will swear you in, and then I ask a few questions.
Thank you.
Alfred Fiscaldo, F as in Frank, U, S as in Sam, C-A-L, D as in David O, 613, Patriot Lane, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and not think about the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or
referral photos 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 i do and i have yes okay you may proceed thank you madam
chair i'm going to share my screen as this is loading um i represent uh mhp torsdale llc
They are a subsidiary of Marion Health Partners, which is the exclusive franchisee of the American Family Care Urgent Care franchise in Philadelphia and Montgomery counties.
AFC has over 260 urgent care facilities across the United States, and this is an application to permit an AFC urgent care use at 9998 Frankfurt Avenue.
My client has executed a lease with the property owner.
The building is under construction.
It's previously been approved by the city.
There will be two tenants at the building.
The AFC will occupy approximately 3,000 square feet,
and the other 2,100 square feet will be a Citizens Bank branch.
The urgent care use falls under the health practitioner group use category under the zoning code.
it's a broad use category the use is permitted by right in the ca2 district in which the property
sits although it is not permitted in the far northeast overlay which also surrounds the
property we provided an exhibit package of 10 exhibits to uh to the board uh including uh the
lease of the notice of refusal i'm just going to page through this to get to where i need to get to
um project information uh form and pictures of posting apologies let me just page through this
get to it quickly i know the board has had a long day
half a long day half a long day exactly um pictures of posting this is the site under
construction. It's adjacent to Dunkin Donuts. And you get to the site map. So here's a plan of the
the plan of the property you'll see the urgent cares to the right side of the screen the citizens
property. You'll see the urgent care. So the right side of the screen, the Citizens Bank is all
bank is on the left side of the screen um we met with the uh the civic association the west
torresdale moral park civic association we met in person which was nice uh it was heavily
attended meeting um and they overwhelmingly uh uh uh it was overwhelmingly supported and well
received um they said that this is a use that the community uh very much wants and needs uh they
issued a letter of support, which is in the exhibit package as Exhibit 8. There were three
conditions which they attached to that letter of support, all of which we agreed to abide
by should the Board grant this variance, those being that the grant of a variance is limited
to permitting an urgent care facility use only at the premises, that no narcotics be
dispensed or prescribed at the premises, and that the premises not be used as a drug treatment
or drug rehabilitation facility,
and those are all fine with my client.
We also received yesterday a letter of non-opposition
from Councilman O'Neill's office.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Ms. Saleta, with those requested provisos?
You cannot add a proviso saying that a drug treatment
will take place at the facility.
Okay, that's what I thought.
Okay, does the board have any questions?
no no is there anyone in the virtual audience who has questions or would like to testify
i'm sure i have a person with a hand raised whose number ends in 6680 i can speak if you wish
caller please unmute yourself hello my name is gertrude sullivan and i am calling excuse me
excuse me can you can you please spell your last name and then i will swear you in
Yes. My last name is spelled S-U-L-L-I-V-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I most definitely do.
Okay. And can you give me your address, please?
3364 Chesterfield Road, Philadelphia, PA, 19114.
Is that in Morrell Park?
It is in West Tarsdale.
Okay. Thank you. You may proceed.
I am here to testify against the West, the prejudice that was displayed by the RCO and
Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. All I want to know is why are you opposed to the project?
I am opposed to the project because we have more than enough urgent care centers in this area.
We also have Jefferson University Hospital, whose urgent care was put in a different location, and we wanted to discuss this openly at the RCO meeting.
Okay, well, the RCO meeting was about this project.
Yes, about the urgent care.
Right, so why are you opposed to it? Because there are too many in the area?
it is a very congested area and it is not the best location okay thank you very much we wanted to
discuss go ahead chair you can move forward in efforts of time madam chair if i could um just
call my uh call my my one witness matt mayorino he's the uh the owner of of the applicant and
founder of the applicant just to accept my testimony as his own absolutely absolutely
matt could you raise your hand for the board he's been allowed to speak sir madam chair uh yes
hi sir can you put your name uh and address on the record and i'll swear you in yes uh my name
is Matthew, M-A-T-T-H-E-W, Mayerino, M-A-I-O-R-I-N-O, 710 Glengarry Road, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
19118. Thank you. Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Fiscaldo. Mr. Mayerino, are you the managing member of MHP
toursdale llc the applicant yes and were you present for uh my presentation to the board this
afternoon yes and was my representation were my representations true and correct and do you accept
those representations as your own testimony yes i do and could you do briefly just in response to
the last caller um could you just briefly advise the board as to uh how uh the number of urgent
the number of urgent cares in the vicinity
care is in the vicinity.
and whether this truly is a need in the community
as the RCO represented?
We met with the RCO.
The RCO voted overwhelmingly in favor
of having this use in the community.
And that's mainly due to the fact
that we do purposely locate next to hospitals.
we are seen as a substantial discount to going to the ER. We can perform the vast majority of
what an ER can perform in terms of anything that's not life-threatening. If something is
life-threatening, we would suggest someone go to the ER. However, UCA, Urgent Care Association of
America Studies, would suggest that we can perform as much as 80% of what an ER can do
at a fraction of the cost. So the average cost of a visit to an ER is roughly $1,354.
The average cost of coming to an urgent care is typically no more than $150. Our average is $135.
And oftentimes people would only have a small copay to pay, you know, towards that amount
that's due. So people see this as a tremendous value. We're also roughly a 10-minute drive in
this location to Roosevelt Boulevard. Roosevelt Boulevard is where all of the competing urgent
cares have chosen to locate. The Urgent Care Association of America would also tell you that
urgent care is typically, you know, people are seeking it, you know, within a 10-minute drive
due to the urgency of their needs. So with that in mind, we're actually roughly 10 minutes
from the nearest urgent care. And in addition to that, our goal here was to bring urgent
care to the neighborhood and make it a convenience to the folks in in these neighborhoods nearby.
Thank you. Thank you.
Planning Commission. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia
the City Planning Commission. Madam Chair, this property is within the far northeast overlay
district which prohibits a wide variety of common community serving uses. Group medical practitioner
uses are typically permitted in the CA1 zoning district. City Planning Commission recommended
against adoption of this provision of the overlay because it arbitrarily restricts establishment of
several classes of low-impact businesses even in commercial areas and so the City Planning
Commission recommends that the board grant this variance. Thank you, Ian. Calendar number
0980-9998, Frankfurt Avenue. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you
very much. Sure. Thank you. That concludes the 930 hearings. Good job. Yes, Chair. See
you back at two. All righty. Take care. Okay.
You're recording. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Confessor Plaza and I'll be the acting
chair of this afternoon zoning hearing. Along with me are board members Thomas Holloman and
James Snell. Also participating, it's board administrator Tanya Sunkit and board attorney
Sharon Saleta. Before we begin, I'd like to note the following changes related to the virtual
format. First, please be advised that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Second, for the benefit of anyone
participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking
or testifying. Therefore, anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to unmute yourself. Before calling the first case,
I will read out a list of continuance for today's cases.
calendar number mi 2021-000177-1423 grace ferry avenue is being continued
calendar number MI 2021-001-317-3837 Wallace Street. It's being continued.
3837 Wallace Street. It's being continued. Calendar number MI 2021-001-260-3843 Wallace
Street. I believe they're all together. Also calendar number MI 2021-001-314-3841 Wallace
Street, calendar number MI 2021-001-315, 3839 Wall Street, and calendar number 2021-001-259-3845
Wall Street also will be continued. Are there anyone else that is requesting a continuance?
excuse me chair um we did have two third party requests for continuance swamp poodle neighborhood
organization has um requested that number five on your list 28 29 north 23rd street be continued
if we could ask mr sklaroff if he is present and if anyone from swamp poodle is present to
Well, we'd like Mr. Skaroff to say whether he opposes the continuance.
For calendar number MI 2021-000-958-2829 North 23rd Street, there's been a third party request.
Mr. Skaroff, can you please come forward?
Yes, sir. Can I be heard?
Yes. Can you please identify yourself for the record?
Certainly. My name is Neil Sklaroff with the address of 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E,
Philadelphia 19102 with the firm Dilworth Paxson LLP.
So are you starting to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth?
Yes I do.
And excuse me, before you begin Mr. Sklaroff, could we also ask if there's anyone present from
the Swampoodle RCO since they've made the request.
And could I also ask, I'm sorry, Mr. Sklaroff, if you could spell your name for the record?
Thank you.
Absolutely.
N-E-I-L-S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F.
Thank you.
And I represent the School District of Philadelphia with its Project TM Pierce School.
We oppose any continuous. We could outline all the community contact we have at this time, or we can wait until the president we present our case and our exhibits. But we intend to go forward and think we have complied appropriately and with great respect to Swampoodle.
this is Sharon if I could add that we have also today received a letter in support from
Councilwoman Bass on this project we do have Tina Marie Russell she can unmute herself and
wait to be sworn in Tina please identify yourself for the record please
tina unmute yourself please
okay chair no answer we can continue okay we will proceed with this case mr scurv
where you're turning we'll call you up thank you sir
You're welcome.
Anyone else?
Mr. Plaza, we also have a request, another one that came in today, for number four on your list, 2246 North 21st Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
It is the RCO that is requesting the continuance.
Calendar number MI2021-001278, 2246 North 21st Street.
Mr. Nockamson, please come forward.
Yes, good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Yes, Alan Nockamson, N as in Nancy, O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Thank you.
You're sort of fine to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
I think there was a third-party request to continue this case?
Yes, in the spirit of compromise, we have no objection to the request.
Yes, in the spirit of compromise, we have no objection to the request.
The only thing we ask is that this should be, the next listing should be, must be heard.
Okay, will do.
So for this case, calendar number MI 2021-001-278-2246 North 21st Street.
This will be continued, must be heard.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Okay. Sharon, is that it?
Yes, it is, except that as we discussed, Mr. Plaza, since there are only three members
present, I think the add-ons listed with the exception of number two, which is fairly
straightforward, should be continued an additional week.
Yep. Okay. So for that, it'll be one, what is it, one, three, four, five, right? Is
that correct?
Yes, that's correct.
So for calendar number MI-2021-001-0004204 Parkside Avenue, along with MI-2021-000999-4206
Parkside Avenue, we will continue this case for one more week.
also calendar number three yes 2020-000730 30 west highland uh avenue or street
we will continue this case till next week
calendar number mi 2020-003174 4701 king sesson avenue we will uh continue this till next week
and mi 2021-000994 1201 west gerrard avenue we will continue this case until next week
thank you you're welcome uh is there anyone else that would like to uh request a uh continuance
i see no further hands at this time mr chair thank you we can proceed uh
MI 2021-000166-5727-27, Windsor Street.
Sharon, this record is closed, correct? We got the letter.
The record is closed. We were waiting only for a letter from the RCO.
um they wanted to discuss which which um provisos would be enforceable we have had emails back and
forth and they found acceptable the board adding two provisos one maximum for residents and the
other no bedrooms in basement okay is there anyone that want to speak to this or should we bring
anybody up or we're good to go yes i think you um there really wasn't going to be any discussion it
It was only a matter of them submitting a letter
with the agreed upon provisor.
Thank you, Sharon.
Did Planning Commission weigh in on this already or?
I believe they did.
I do not have the recommendation in front of me.
All right, is Planning Commission available?
Yes, Chair Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
Excuse me though, I'm sorry,
because we did say that it would be only the letter
at this point. Right, I just wanted to find out if they did. Okay. Yes, thank you. I just, okay,
thank you. All right, so calendar number MI 2021-000166-5727 Windsor Street. My vote is yes
with proviso maximum for residents, no bedroom and basement. Yes, with proviso. Yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Okay, so we're going on number two, calendar number MI-2021-001-231-1918-22 East Hagrid
Street.
Mr. Hercules Griegos has been promoted to Panama, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Grieger, as I urge the board, I ask Hercules Grieger's, 1835 Market
1835 Market Street. I'd ask that this case be heard together with the following case, which is
Street, I'd ask that this case.
1929 East York Street. Yep, so calendar number MI 2021-001-232, 1929-45 East York Street.
Mr. Grigos, can you please spell your name for the scenographer? Great, it's Hercules,
his last name G-R-I-G-O-S.
This is at 1835 Market Street,
Philadelphia, PA,
representing York Partners OZ, LLC,
owner of the property
is located at 1929-45 East York,
as well as 1918-22 East Haggard Street.
Thank you, sir.
Affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth for nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Also, have you...
have you uh emailed uh required documents proof of ownership tax compliance copy of the refusal
or referral photos and plans five days prior to this uh listening hearing we have um you met with
the rco and have a letter and there's a letter included in the packet thank you please proceed
Thanks. And just while we're getting the housekeeping out of the way, we did, because we changed one parking space as part of our discussion with the community, we have, and some other changes as well, we have requested an amended refusal.
I spoke with Attorney Saleta about hearing the case, and then, you know, depending on the decision of the board, if they're inclined to approve with the amended plans, they would just vote it in the future when we submit our amended refusal.
with the um excuse me this is sharon and my understanding is that the changes shown in
the amended application were presented to the neighbors that is correct and we would only be
waiting for this will be presented today so they would only be waiting for the amended
refusal in order to reference it in any decision that is correct um so with that i'll just proceed
and if I may share my screen
and orient everybody with the project.
That's not it.
Apologies.
Okay, can everyone see my screen here now? Yep. Okay, so
these are two sister buildings that were previously approved at the corner of Haggard and
Emerald and York. And so this is one building at East Haggard, Emerald and Boston. This is
Haggard Street building and this is the building at Emerald and East York Street. Projects were
previously approved in 2019. As of right, York Street building was approximately 106 dwelling
units, 12 artist studios on the ground floor, 17 parking spaces, loading zone, etc. Haggard Street
was 168 units, artist studios, garage parking. My clients were not the owners at the time, did not
take the project through entitlement nor did I another firm was involved my clients bought into
the project and as they were you know value engineering designing it you know it was
represented to them that the ground floor artist lofts were essentially live work units you know
as as I got involved I explained that you know true live work does not exist is not an artist
studio in order to studio you cannot is not a dwelling unit um so um with that my clients look
to um revise the building plans to really make it functional um i'll note that since that time we do
we have a building permit and they commenced on foundations um just to keep with the timeline
and their financing but we're here today to talk about the ground floor conditions and the ground
floor use and our applications essentially for a ground floor plan um to change basically the
artist lofts to a mix of retail, one true live work, and dwelling units. So all in all, it's an
increase of about 19 dwelling units, about 1,500 square feet of retail amenity space, and it's been
reconfigured and reshuffled. We initially, I think we had three meetings with the community. We had
two meetings with the committee, maybe three meetings with the committee, and we, of the
And we, of the East Kensington Neighbors Association, and we really, you know, wanted to dive into how we make this project better.
the East Kensington Neighbors Association.
There was concerns all along of the procedure and the process, which we acknowledged, you know, wasn't the best, considering it was a buy-write plan, and here we are now changing the ground floor.
But we weren't part of that process, and we aspired to try to respond to the community's concerns.
I don't know if I mentioned, I have Jennifer Van Blarkham, Brandon Alviano, and Deirdre Descanis.
Jennifer and Brandon are with the owner, and Deirdre is the project architect from JKRP Architects.
So we really spent a lot of time trying to figure out how we can improve the building,
added balconies, really studied the ground floor commercial spaces.
and where we ended up was the desire from the community was this corner that you're looking at
here, which is kind of a gateway into these Kensington neighborhood from the commercial
corridor along Front Street and the L stop. It was really important that we activate that corner.
The original approval just had an artist loft and our experience was that was really not going to
be sufficient to activate that corner and we're questioning you know what kind of you know rents
that can generate so in the discussion with the community it was they really wanted to see a
commercial space there and we wanted to really figure out a commercial space that was functional
so we reached out to metro commercial and try to say how do we get a commercial space that works
that functions that is not going to end up vacant and they they recommended um you know in today's
environment with in this neighborhood um about you know 15 to 1600 square feet would be optimal
be optimal for a restaurant so um that's what we did we added that and then on the following
the adjacent um piece that's this corner right here so the pink as you can see and on the adjacent
piece we made an actual true live work which will have sort of storefront windows um direct access
to the street and something that can be a real live work artist studio. The remaining interior
units here are going to be residential, lobbying amenity space on Emerald, and then on the Haggard
Street building, we move some of our amenity space. We have an amenity cafe and a bunch of
amenity space here really to continue to activate that corner, and our hope is that as the neighborhood
matures and evolves, that could easily be converted to public retail space as well if there is
demand for that. As I said, the zoning is IRMX. Here's a close-up of Boston and Emerald and the
Haggard Street building, and really I think the intention was from an architectural standpoint
that the buildings would communicate with one another along Boston Street, but we wanted to
sure that we respected um the um here's the the uh the boss street the lobby we wanted to make
sure we respected this uh streetscape along uh emerald um and really came down we also added
additional balconies um additional um uh screening to the parking street trees this landscaped area
which we see is the potential for a community garden this was all new as sort of part of our
discussions um here's some elevations and then here's the um the ground floor plans this is the
amenity space that is sort of a cafe as part of an amenity which we think at some point um this
would be an easy conversion when when there's demand for a retail space uh open to the public
um this is um the garage area and the side of the haggard street building and then this is
um the york street lobby as the project goes down uh emerald street and you can see the corner
um commercial entry into um this what we think will be a restaurant space we hope retail commercial
space um again we added the balconies up here to to just have more activity on the street
this is our letter from metro commercial um and as you can see you know they they suggested you
know the ideal footprints about 1500 to 1600 square feet um is where we could really that's
probably the maximum that we think is leaseable and in this type of building um these are the
refusals where basically in irmx as you know a industrial commercial use is required for uh 50
percent of the ground floor um here we're we're probably below we're we're below that um and we're
also, but we are putting some commercial, some amenity space. So really, we met with the community
Um, so really, um, we met with the community and, you know, uh, I think that we worked
and, you know.
really hard and I think it was appreciated.
Um, you know, there was demand for more commercial space and we believe that, um, in the future
that's probably possible, but right now we think it's served better as amenity space.
Um, if you note that the, um, the opposition at the community was 14 against and 12 in
support. And I think with, you know, just some of the way the project, the way that the so we have 14 in support, and actually 13, one non opposition. So it's really a 14 to 13 vote. And I think that was a result of, you know, the hard work that Jennifer
for Brandon and Deirdre did in really trying to respond.
We went through numerous iterations of the plan
and really the goal was the buy right condition,
whether that was done right or whether that procedure
left a lot to be desired to the neighbors.
I think my client's coming in
and sort of inheriting that condition
and trying to really improve the condition of the property.
um i also have a couple letters of support from some neighbors that were not able to attend the
meeting but um did um submit um some support and obviously if they had attended the meeting
um the vote would have been different but i'm sure that could go either way but um we also
uh spoke with councilwoman's office and um obviously she's um you know wants to support
neighbors but what we've committed to is continuing to work with her she is working on a
commercial corridor improvement and we've committed to being a partner in that and trying to
be at the table with the various stakeholders that take shape to improve the commercial corridor on
Front Street, which we think will also benefit the community. With that, I'd just like to put
Jennifer Van Blarkam on to affirm my testimony if she's out there.
And then I'll leave it to the board for any questions.
Thank you.
Just been allowed to speak, sir.
Hello?
Yes, Jennifer, please identify yourself for the record. Spell your first and last name.
Sure. My name is Jennifer Van Blarkum, J-E-N-N-I-F-E-R, V-A-N-B-L-A-R-C-O-M, and I am the Architectural and Design Manager for Saxon Real Estate.
You are sort of trying to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Jennifer, you heard my testimony with regard to the changes to the building and the procedure and the meetings. Do you affirm it and adopt it as your own?
Absolutely, yes.
and i'll just have jennifer available for any questions from the board
thank you does the board have any questions no no okay uh is there anyone else here that
would like to speak in this matter
mr plaza um mr sloan folks has his hand raised i will not speak this time thank you
good afternoon chairman plaza and zba board good afternoon mr folks please uh identify
yourself for the record yes sir my name is sloan folks s-l-o-a-n-e-f as in fire o-l-k-s
office of councilwoman maria community sanchez room 508 city hall thank you so are firm to
tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth i do sir thank you um the councilwoman
agrees with the community that the development is different than what was zoned or committed to the
neighborhood. While the revised plan is better, as seen by the closed vote, it doesn't include
affordability and as much commercial opportunity. The developer has agreed that they need to be a
better partner in supporting local business development and corridor support. This is a
high-impact development, and she is disappointed that it's almost built limiting the change
opportunity. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, anyone else?
Sir, Ms. Salina Higgins has a hand raised, so I'll speak at this time. Thank you.
Hello, I'm Salina Higgins. Yes, good afternoon, ma'am. Please identify yourself for the record.
Yes, so my name is Selena Higgins, S-E-L-E-N-A-H-I-G-G-I-N-S. I am a resident at 2017 East York Street, Philadelphia, PA 19125.
2017 east york street philadelphia pa 19125 you serve from to tell the truth the whole
truth for nothing but the truth i do please proceed um so as a uh resident just on the
street from these developments um i i wanted to say that while i am very strongly in support of
development, and we're excited about having the area developed. There are two main and primary
issues with this. First is the lack of commercial space for the footprint of the building. The area
does not have enough commercial space to support the number of residential units that are being
added um and then second with the 19 additional residential units um there is uh it's a bit
short-sighted um for them to not accommodate the parking situation and just add those residential
units um without at you know thinking about how that is going to be impacting the local community
okay thank you anyone else
hello yes john theobald from east kensington neighbors association uh chair of the zoning
committee please identify uh okay you saw our firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth? Yes, sir. Can you please spell your first and last name? J-O-H-N-T-H-E-O-B-A-L-D.
Thank you. Please proceed. So this project had previously proceeded by right
through East Kensington Neighbors Association. The site had originally been subject to remapping
and rezoning based on extensive public input from the community that culminated in a community plan
that ultimately informed the remapping that was executed by a bill through Councilman Sanchez,
Quinonez Sanchez. The community supported high density residential on this site,
but also understood acutely that maintaining the character of our community meant active
ground floor uses, meant maintaining maker space, and also meant having daytime uses in addition
to just being a bedroom community. That was the reason for remapping these particular parcels to
IRMX. They were historic factory sites that were home to large mills.
And the hope was to bring the high density residential that we need adjacent to transit.
This is a block from NL station, but also keep both makerspace and active uses in the community
during the day the original project that proceeded by right through the community through the
civic design review process and through this eba was presented as having ground floors with
a multitude of artisan industrial spaces i believe it was clear to everybody at the time that those
spaces were effectively residential spaces that were being presented as industrial spaces they
were the same size and configuration as the residential spaces above at the
first time they were presented to the community they had the residential
kitchens in them as a result of that some serious design deficiencies in the
overall project proceeded with no input or no ability for input from the community
or from the Civic Design Review the building defies our community plan by
turning its back to York Street and having all of the loading access and
parking on York Street, which is our primary pedestrian path to transit, and a link to a
number of community businesses, instead facing onto Boston Street, which is really more of a
backstreet. That was something that was raised at the Civic Design Review meeting, was raised in the
original RCO community meeting. However, because the project proceeded through all of this process
by right, there was no potential for making modifications. So now that we're presented with
a project that eliminates 24 light industrial spaces spaces we never expected to see come to
fruition because they were clearly not designed to be light industrial spaces they have never been
marketed no attempt has been made to make them real or even build them converting all that space
to residential space and moving commercial space to the corner the community discussion at the
neighborhood meeting for this project centered around understanding the modifications to what
was presented, understanding clearly where we were in the process, that we weren't at this
point having the opportunity to re-question or talk about the entire building because that
talk about the entire building because that already has building permits.
already has building permits.
Our committee met several times with the applicant.
Their first effort at showing something was incredibly weak, taking one small unit and
converting it to commercial use and nothing else. We asked them to come back with something more
realistic. This is what they presented. This is what they presented ultimately to the community.
i think in general the community appreciates the direction that this is better than nothing
better than converting all of the space to residential space we understand that the
original project did not make a lot of sense and was never going to happen the inclusion
of a commercial space on the corner of york and emerald is the location where that would be desired
and had been also indicated in previous applications we've seen for this site
think the split vote in the neighborhood was based on the fact that you know 24 units of
light industrial space were removed and only two units were really given back as commercial space
and the sense was it just wasn't significant enough um along with the sense that there's
you know no affordability in here which had this come for a variance um and gone through
the civic design review process originally as it should have um we may have had more leverage as a
community as a city and instead all of the time spent reviewing this project by the planning
commission by the councilwoman's office by the civic design review board and by the community
was sort of wasted um and now we're here with a less than ideal solution
if i can respond i appreciate that and you know i i will say that i agree the process stunk
We weren't part of it, but I do agree that, you know, when you talk about artists, it's really a question of square footage.
And I think that we do have, you know, especially on New York Street, a good amount of square footage that we've added here and really tried to improve the building into kind of what we bought into.
We came into this and bought into a project and sort of took control of this project as the owner.
we weren't part of the original development and yeah we're really we're trying to make it better
and um and i think that we um and the community saw that i think we've been responsive to that
and sure would we like to have more commercial space we you know our experts tell us that it's
not um you know it's not leasable so we're trying to balance that um to make the best um corner and
best usable commercial space and with the commitment that on the haggard street building
that amenity space that we have at the corner um is easily convertible to commercial space
and additionally the commitment that we made to the council continue to work um with the neighborhood
with the councilwoman on improvement of the commercial corridor where i think that there is
certainly more opportunity desire and demand or more retail and commercial space um and um and
just to respond to the other comments.
And the project does comply with the parking
and we are transit oriented and we're blocking the else.
But I appreciate everyone's comments.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
No further hand at this time, sir.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
You serve a friend to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Just for the record, my last name is spelled B as in boy, A as in apple, R as in Roger, N as in Nancy, A as in apple, R as in Roger, D as in dog.
Thank you.
This property is indicated for industrial commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
The proposal that was presented to Civic Design Review Committee included 50% ground floor artist studios.
The developer has proposed revised plans with additional residential units and commercial space, but no light industrial use.
We feel the developer has failed to demonstrate sufficient hardship.
Accordingly, we oppose the granting of the variant.
Okay. Thank you.
So for calendar number MI 2021-001-231-1918-22 East Haggard Street, and MI 2021-001-232-1929-45 East Georgia.
Excuse me, Chair, I don't mean, oh, I'm sorry.
I just wanted to remind you that it both,
that we're only waiting for the amended refusal.
Thank you.
I apologize.
this record is now closed and we will hold this vote for 30 days pending the submission of the
This record is now closed and we will hold this vote
for 30 days pending.
what was it sharon for the the revised refusal revised refusal there we go thank you thank you
All right, calendar number MI-2021-000-958-2829-North-23rd Street.
Mr. Sklaroff will be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Good afternoon, Mr. Sklarov.
Please identify yourself again.
Thank you.
I'm Neil Sklarov, an attorney with Dilworth-Axon, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Philadelphia 19102. Thank you. Can you please spell your name, please? N-E-I-L-S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F.
Thank you. And you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And can you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of
ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, overflow, photos, and plans five days
prior to this, Aaron? Yes, I did. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we do.
Thank you. Please proceed. May I share my screen? Yes, you may. And I hope I get this correct.
As I stated earlier, we're here on the new TM Pierce Elementary School at 2829 North
23rd Street. I'm going to rely on section 14-303-14F and ask if there's no objections and there is
agreement. The statements I make will be considered to be statements of the school district and its
experts and a proper basis for findings of fact. If there are no objections, I will proceed.
Joining me today are Kevin Blackney and Troy Hill, principals with the architectural firm of Blackney Hayes, the project architect, Chantel Francis with JMT Architecture, Richard Burrow with KS Engineers, and Nicole Ward with the School District of Philadelphia.
here is our list of exhibits our certificate of tax clearance
and our deeds now there are a number of deeds here the parcels were acquired in 1908
and 1909 the original school opened in 1916 and we would suggest since this building is smaller
and the use is the same that this is a lawful pre-existing non-conforming use
and therefore the Department of Licenses and Inspections could have approved this
as of right. It's an assemblage of a number of properties that are considered by L and I
to be a single zoning lot. Now the parcel is, I'll go through these Ds quickly,
certainly wasn't weren't quickly reviewed by me they're very difficult to read
the property is bordered by 23rd street north krosky street and west cambria street
they were posted appropriately with both the notice of referral and refusal as well as the
zoning notice. This is the 23rd Street, this is Cambria Street, and this is North Krosky Street
at the time of the posting. As you may have noticed, the building, which is a four-story building
and comprised 85,000 square feet, is in the process of being demolished. And we propose to
erect a modern building. This here is the photographs of the existing community and the
existing building. This is a key plan showing from where each of the pictures were taken.
Our next exhibit is the site plan that was submitted.
Our next exhibit is the site plan that was submitted. The white area here is where the building will be, and this gray area is where the playground will be, and we'll get into some detail as we go forward.
this is our refusal as we stated in clearly in our letter to the community
this is an rs5 zoning district which does not permit
which does permit educational use but by special exception
and therefore it is permitted and the decision has been made that this is appropriate
for residential community as I've mentioned to the board many times before
in times past we we built schools in residential neighborhoods so kids could walk to school
and we we continue with that in part and here is an example of where we're going to build a new
school right where the old school was we also have been refused for maximum height
As a residential community, the maximum height is 38 feet. However, portions of our building,
and you'll see it when we get to the site plans, rises to 66 feet. But that's just an
architectural embellishment for our sign. The building is actually 44 feet in some spaces and
32 feet in others. All of that being shorter than the existing building was. It also requires
were 75 parking spaces. Well, there weren't any parking spaces before, and we don't have the room
to provide any parking spaces. So again, it's a lawful non-conforming use. We think we don't need
to provide these, but if we do, we ask there to be a variance because we couldn't build the school
and have that many parking spaces. Also, there's a requirement for eight bicycle spaces. We've
only shown four on the plan. We will have at least eight, but we didn't think it was
worth everybody's time to redraw new plans and have them reviewed. So we'll ask for
variance here, understanding that we'll put at least eight spaces on the area surrounding
the school. This is our application for appeal and our project information form. Here are
artist renderings of the new school building. This is the main entrance, this one marked one,
which will be here at the corner. And that's the main public entrance where one would see
a receptionist and administrative offices. Here down Krosky Street is where the pre-K
and kindergarten students will be left off and brought into the building, and that would be here.
And lastly, this is from 23rd Street, and this shows a portion of the playground and the
gymatorium and cafeteria, and I'll show that to you in greater detail in a moment.
Again, this is just the artist rendering, you know, in a broader sense to get the understanding
of the materials here.
Here are renderings, you'll notice on the bottom one to the right, there's this, what
is shown here in orange is a flange, this will actually have the name of the school
on it. T.M. Pierce. And that's why we're up to 66 feet. Another set of renderings.
This is a bird's eye view. You'll see the three-story portion of the building here
in the playground. And this would be the auditorium in the cafeteria, which is a lower roof line.
This is the playground. Painted and soft surfaces, opportunities for planning, different kinds of
playground activities. There's some musical instruments that are stationary here. You'll
see the lion's head inset. And this is designed with great care. I should say this design
is a result of more than 10 community meetings held between March and I think it was October
of 2020. It included the architectural team, administrators.
It included the architectural team, administrators, school district administrators, as well as schools administrators, members of the community, teachers, and an accumulation of the T.M. Pierce community.
And they worked very hard and they came up with a very exciting plan.
This is a rendering of the gymnasium as I said it's also an auditorium. You'll see there's a stage
to one side as well as seating that could be available if needed. This is the ground floor
again showing the gymnatorium. This is the cafeteria here and the playground space that
we saw some details of. The reception area is to the upper left in pink, and the pre-K
and kindergarten classrooms are shown. On the second floor, we have first and second grade
classrooms, as well as some amenity rooms and some special rooms. There's a miscellaneous room,
art room, music rooms. Here we see the art room on the third floor where the fourth and fifth
graders will have their classrooms as well as special classroom spaces.
This is a view of one floor of the interior, modern, wide, well lit, attractive,
and what we would hope to have in our modern school buildings.
Our next exhibit is the letter we sent to the three community groups, the RCOs,
The Planning Commission advised us that Allegheny West Civic Association was to be the coordinating RCO.
We have a project description as well as the summary of refusal, which as I explained it to you folks.
Then we sent a letter to 225 neighbors about a virtual public meeting.
Again, we have a summary of the project, a summary of the refusal, and instructions how to join that meeting.
That meeting took place on May 4th, and we recently received this form from Allegheny West Civic Association, which shows no opposition and 43 meeting attendees in favor.
the date of the meeting being May 4th we also have a support letter and it's a robust support
level in favor of the project and it is accompanied by a petition that was taken after the meeting
and there are approximately 100 names and most of these names are on the nearby streets
That completes our presentation. I haven't seen the letter that was sent to Ms. Saluda asking for a continuance, but we would object to that as we have not seen it.
Certainly the author is not available for cross, and we do not believe that accurately would put forth what occurred with the community.
I'll say in closing that we heard from Swamp Doodle neighbors.
We responded before the community meeting and provided them with an even broader range of materials.
All of those you've seen here are most of those that you've seen here, as well as some additional renderings.
we received another
on April 30th
I sent a letter
to Swan Poodle
they appeared to want to have
more control over the process
but they are not the coordinating
and so unless there are questions
that completes our presentation
thank you
does the board have any questions
I'm sorry this is
from Captain Wilco
Sharon, you're breaking up bad.
I'm sorry.
I have dogs inside and outside I break up.
I just said that we today also received a letter in support from Councilwoman Bass.
We thank the council.
Thank you.
Anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter?
Also, I have a call-in user with a hand raised.
Also, I have a call-in user with a hand raised. I will allow them to speak at this time.
I will now...
Thank you.
Oh wait, that person just put their hand down.
Okay. Anyone else?
No, there's no one else at this time, sir.
Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for single-family residential in the comprehensive plan.
the proposal is to replace an existing facility with a similar one that meets the needs of future
students. Accordingly, we support the granting of the variance. Thank you. Calendar number.
Mr. Paus, I'm sorry. That person I said before, I guess I put the hand back up to another one to speak.
Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Caller Newser, please unmute yourself and please wait to be sworn in.
Hello?
Yes, please identify yourself.
Yes, this is Adrienne Fernandez.
My last name is spelled F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z,
Swampoodle Neighborhood Parcels Association, RCO.
I did submit written testimony.
Are you sure to affirm the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
I did submit written testimony requesting a continuance.
All RCO meetings or public meetings have the RCO coordinator solely to schedule the meeting
in consultation with the other RCOs that are affected within the boundaries.
All RCOs are equal, so the RCO coordinator does not control any project, and there are
multiple RCOs for this address, multiple affected RCOs for this address.
The meeting was interrupted by the RCO coordinator because Swampood RCO was attempting to poll the participants to determine how many of the 225 affected neighbors were at the meeting.
There were 20 people who called in by phone because most of them were elders, and they did not have computers or did not know how to use them on the phone or on the computer, and they were not even acknowledged to comment.
So, therefore, a significant percentage of the participants were silenced.
They could not comment, and they could not ask questions.
When Swampoodoo, as always, attempted to pull the blocks that were present, the number of affected addresses present at the meeting, the president, Ron Hinton, that's R-O-N, last name H-I-N-T-O-N, president of Allegheny West Foundation, who was acting as the RCO coordinator only to plan the meeting,
um he began to violently scream and curse um profusely and continuously
hold on adrian please understand that um we are only taking testimony regarding the zoning
of this property that's correct yep i'm talking about the public meeting
the public meeting is part of the zoning of the property is that correct
adrian so uh so you're in opposition of this um we're asking for a continuance um when when the
outbreak happened by the rco coordinator they're not allowed to control what people say they're
not allowed to silence people and they're definitely not allowed to disrespect curse
and scream and we had children on the line some of them who were helping people to use the zoom
who had not used it before but they had comments there's a lot of questions in the neighborhood
bit about this project. The 10 meetings that Mrs. Starloff referred to were educational
meetings. And because we're not part of the educational body, we do have a right to the
zoning meeting per the zoning code. And that's what we were trying to participate in. And
we were stopped from doing that by the RCO coordinator. I'm sorry, Chair. Again, if I
put, I'm not trying to be difficult at all as it relates to Mrs. Fernandez's concerns.
However, the zoning board only has the right to listen to the testimony regarding the zoning, not the zoning proceedings at an RCO meeting.
That's correct.
Please understand.
That's all I'm saying, Ms. Fernandez.
Thank you kindly.
Thank you.
Anyone else here that would like to speak in this manner?
I'm not finished.
Anyone else?
There's no one else with a hand raised, Mr. Favreau.
Thank you.
Calendar number MI 2021-000
Calendar number MI 2021-000-958-2829 North 23rd Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Good luck.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
That completes our business before the board today.
Thank you.
Good luck.
Calendar number MI 2021-001-321-4623, Samson Street.
Rachel.
Rachel has been promoted to panelists, sir.
Thank you, Rachel.
Good afternoon.
Please identify yourself.
Good afternoon.
good afternoon 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 thank you rachel you saw our firm to tell the truth the whole truth from
nothing but the truth yes and do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy yes also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof
of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral folders and plans
five days prior to this hearing? Yes. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes.
Thank you. Please proceed. I'm going to share my screen. This is 4623 Sansom Street.
This is the refusal. As you can see, the application is for a multi-family household
living, four dwelling units, and an existing structure. This property is an attached two-story
row home on the northwest corner of Sampson Street and Farragut Street. It's owned RSA5,
but has a land area of 2,000 square feet. It currently consists of two apartments that were
already legalized, and there was a beauty salon on the ground floor, so we are looking to add two
units in the ground level. And so that's what we're here for today. And obviously because it's
RSA 5, we were automatically sent a refusal. This is the deed. Tax clearance.
More of the deed. So this is the property right here on the corner. As you can see,
it's a large 2,000 square foot RSA 5 property. This is an aerial view of the property.
and then zoning posters. Again, it's this property over here on the corner.
Let me just get to the side. So as you can see, it already has two existing apartments
on the top floor and on the first floor. There's actually a separate door here,
so this is almost like considered a lower level if you were a first floor above grade,
where we're looking to propose two additional new apartments where the entrance would be on
Farragut Street. There was, again, a previous beauty salon there as well. So the building has
functioned as commercial mixed use and doesn't really make sense in this climate. And given the
residential area for it to be a beauty shop, it's been vacant for quite some time. This is just the
trash area just to show that we already have an outside trash area where trash can be stored
in consideration for the extra units, parts of the code. And as you can see, it has been a
two-family building since the 60s, so it was never a single-family home. It was actually
granted a variance. We met with the Walnut Hill Community Association back on May 3rd,
and they sent us a letter of support, five in favor, one against, but a letter of support
for the variants um and that was provided to the board as well yep we got it yep so um also from
one of the adjacent rcos um the affected rcos they also sent a letter of support which we sent
to the board as well proof of mail additional letters of support as well and um i just want
to have our architect quickly go through the plans if that's all right i think we don't need
Tom, you want to see the planes you go with?
It's not necessary.
Thank you.
Then I would either like to, as a member of the bar, be able to, and in this court, be able to have my client swear my testimony, or if the board will allow me as a member of the court to be able to...
Bring him up. Is he available?
Thank you. Elijah Clark?
Clark are you available yes I'm available can you hear me yes yes Elijah please identify
yourself for the record spell your first and last name Elijah E-L-I-J-A-H last name is Clark C-L-A-R-C
Elijah, E-L-I-J-A-H, last name is Clark, C-L-A-R-K.
You saw our friend to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you. Elijah, have you heard my testimonies today in front of the board?
Yes, I have.
Do you deem it to be true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, and do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Thank you. Board has any questions?
no is there anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter
no other hands at this time mr change thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
sorry this property was indicated for single family residential
in the comprehensive plan and was rezoned as part of a community-led remapping
in 2017. We feel the proposal represents an overuse, has failed to demonstrate sufficient
hardship, and is not the minimum necessary variance. Accordingly, we oppose granting the
variance. Just want to comment on that, that this is an existing building with two units already
previously approved, and to make this to a single-family home, we would have to demolish
the entire interior of this building, which I believe is more of a hardship. Just want to put
that on the record. Thank you. Calendar number MI 2021-001-321-4623 Samson Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Good luck. Thank you. Welcome. MI 2021-001-276-5100 Lebanon Avenue.
Mr. Plaza, Ms. Augusta O'Neill has been promoted to Panamist.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, can everyone hear me?
Good afternoon, ma'am.
Yes, we can.
Can you please identify yourself for the record?
My name is Augusta O'Neill.
I'm an attorney with the law firm of Clara Harrison Harvey Brandsburg.
Thank you.
Can you spell your first and last name?
My first name is spelled A-U-G-U-S-T-A.
Last name is O-N-E-I-L-L.
Thank you.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
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?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you.
have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you so much.
I'm just going to share my screen. This property is zoned RSA 5. I'm here this afternoon. Let me
back up. I'm here this afternoon representing SBT property for the property at 5100 Lebanon Avenue.
is currently zoned RSA 5. This property has been at its current location for a very long time.
The zoning records on this property date all the way back to 1955. The current owner of the property
is Woodward Properties, and my client has entered into a partnership with Woodward
as of February of 2021. So as part of my client's entrance into the partnership,
it's currently doing the work of just making some improvements to the property,
cleaning up the city records, and cleaning up of the city records is actually what
brings us here today. Let me just pull up the
records. As you can see, these are the, this is the most recent use permit that's on the city's
records, and it lists the building as having 104 apartments. In actuality, there are 106
units in the building. So my client just became aware of this discrepancy with the city's
records. And so because of this, the zoning is currently doesn't permit the multifamily
use. And so we've had to go through the variance process, even though it's a fairly simple
change. The building, as I said, has 106 units, but we're only we only found city records
404 the city couldn't find anything that showed the actual number of units so there won't actually
be any changes to the building envelope or any construction at the property this application
is purely just to update the zoning records we did meet with the RCO for this property the
Winfield Residents Association we met with them back on April 20th and we did receive their
We met with them back on April 20th and we did receive their support. We explained to them the
support we explained to them
circumstances and why we're making the application that we are. A copy of their letter of non-opposition
is included with the exhibit package that I provided to the ZBA. And just with that, I'm
going to call forward April Dotarive from SBT just to affirm my testimony. So April, if you could just
raise your hand so that you could be sworn in. Hello. Ma'am, please identify yourself for the
record. April Deltrieve. Spell your last name. D as in David. A-U-T-E-R-I-V-E. Thank you. So
are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. Thank you.
Please proceed. April, have you had a chance to hear my testimony this afternoon?
Yes, I have.
And was everything that I said true and accurate?
And is there anything that you would like to add?
Do you adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Anyone else that would like to speak in this matter?
No further answer this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Board has any questions?
Chair Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for single-family residential in the comprehensive plan.
We feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship and the variance is the minimum necessary.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
calendar number mi 2021-001276 5100 lebanon avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote
is yes thank you thank you everyone look mi 2021-001275 6742 through 46 north fifth street
Mr. Plaza, in the notes that you have, it says that we did not receive an RCO letter.
We did receive one today.
It's in support with a number of provisos, but the provisos aren't enforceable and would
be better included in a private agreement.
Awesome.
Thank you.
is this a girl miss a boss the tune is you and mr gussel miss augusta o'neill has her hand
to raise again yes thank you mother of the panelists again
miss o'neill you're coming back as a panelist
sorry i shouldn't have jumped off so quickly um uh do you need me to repeat the spelling of my
name again yes please sure the first name is augusta a-u-g-u-s-t-a last name is spelled o
apostrophe n-e-i-l-l thank you and you still on the roof uh do you agree to wait the reading of
its refusal and stipulate to accuracy? I do. And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the
required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, overfill,
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing? Yes, to all of the above. Thank you. And we did
receive the letter of the RCO. Please proceed. Sure. Thank you again. I'm here this afternoon
on this application representing SEMA's sign company. We were actually here a few weeks ago
on a similar application just because Rite Aid has been updating the signage that they have on
stores in the city from the old blue and white signage that most of us are probably familiar with
to the more modern design for signage which is green blue and white. I'll just share my screen
so that you can see what I'm referring to. So this is kind of this is what the old kind of color
scheme for the Rated signage looks like. Here's the updated modern signage. From the zoning history,
it appears that this particular store has been in its location since about 1974. The property
has always been zoned residential. It's now zoned RSA 2, so we're very limited with the amount of
signage that we can actually have in this district. We're only permitted 15 square feet on each
frontage and we're proposing 131.5 square feet along each frontage. The signage that was the
subject of the refusal can be seen in your packages at pages 24 and 26.
And 26. So this just shows one of the elevations of the store. And on the opposite elevation, it's the exact same change. It's just, again, updating that older looking signage to something more modern and, you know, cleaning up the building.
So this just shows the one of the elevations.
We did meet with the RCO for this property, the Oak Lane Community Action Association.
We met with them back on April 19th of 2021. And at the time of that meeting,
we didn't hear any complaints or critiques necessarily about the signage, but the neighbors
did raise some concerns related to landscaping and store cleanliness. So even though the concerns
that we received weren't related to the zoning application that we were presenting to them,
We did take a lot of time in the past two and a half months to speak to the RCO and members of their committees to address the landscaping issues.
We've had numerous phone calls with Ms. Freda Williams of the RCO to, again, discuss the concerns that she had related to some staffing at the store, cleanliness, some trash issues.
and we've made some significant improvements to the landscaping at the store. As I mentioned
earlier, the members of the beautification committee met with a representative from Rite Aid
and they toured the property. And Rite Aid has spent quite a bit of money to update that
landscaping. We were presented with an agreement from the RCO that they had asked us to enter into
regarding some of the employment concerns that they had at the store, but we explained to them
as a publicly traded corporation, it wasn't going to be possible for Rite Aid to enter into an
agreement with some of the requests that were being made in that agreement that was presented
to us by OLCA. I don't want to take up any more of the board's time discussing the non-zoning
related issues that were involved in this case, but I would like to call forward my client at
this time to just, um, adopt my testimony. So Jerry Canavan, could you raise your hand?
I'm about to speak. Thank you. Okay. Uh, sir, can you please identify yourself?
Yeah, the name is Jerry Canavan.
I work with SEMA Network.
Can you spell your first and last name?
Yeah, first name J-E-R-R-Y.
Last name C-A-N-A-V, as in Victor, A-N.
You serve from itself the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
uh mr canavan had have you had a chance to hear my testimony this afternoon i did yes and was
everything that i represented to the board true and accurate uh yes and did you have anything that
you wanted to add um no no no no okay yeah the only thing i would add uh you know with uh the uh
the large warnings that you know were prevalent at this type of right aid store you know throughout
Philadelphia, you know, they're being taken down. The signs that are being put up are a lot less
massive. They do not illuminate as brightly at night. You know, it's a much more conservative
look. And all the testimony that I previously gave to the board, would you like to adopt it
as your own? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I would just like to reserve if there's some time after,
I think there's some members of the community that wanted to speak, so if there's anything
that they raise, I would like just to be given the opportunity to address it.
Does the board have any questions?
Thank you.
Anyone else that would like to speak in this matter?
Mr. Closet, there's a Hillary Anderson.
Your hand is raised.
I will allow to speak at this time.
Thank you.
uh good afternoon mr chair members of the board
you kind of broke up uh the beginning of your person last name sure sorry this is hillary
emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle parker first name is h-i-l-a-r-y last name is e-m-e-r-s-o-n
Thank you, sir, for telling the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
Okay, thank you.
So I just want to start by thanking the counsel for the applicant for acknowledging that there were concerns raised at the RCO meeting regarding the cleanliness and maintenance.
at the RCO meeting regarding the cleanliness and maintenance of the exterior of the Rite Aid.
Neighbors were pretty adamant at the meeting about the issues that they saw in the parking
lot, the landscaping, the trash perceptible by the entrance to the building. The councilwoman
does not have an objection to the variants requested for the signage at this location.
However, she would like to see a continued commitment by Rite Aid to maintaining the
exterior of the property. We understand that some improvements have been made, but I just
got an email from a community member who said she was there today and the trash cans were
overflowing again. So we think it's important that Rite Aid do commit ideally in writing to
maintaining the property and also to ensuring that the community organization has a way to reach
the manager once the new manager is appointed for the store. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?
sir we have a uh a caller whose number is ending in 8568 i can allow them to speak at this time
thank you
phone caller unmute yourself hello yes please identify yourself okay my name is sandra camacho
S-A-N-D-R-A
Last name Camacho
C-A-M-A-C-H-O
Your address?
517 West Shelton
C-H-E-L-T-E-N
Avenue
You saw
our firm tell the truth
about the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Yes. My concern
is again about
the trash can that's outside
the door that is
filled to the brim
and bees
and all kind of insects
are over this trash
And at our last meeting, we asked that they at least put a larger receptor, you know, trash can out there. All they did was move the trash can from one area to slightly now in front of the door.
so we still want a larger trash can and we want it moved away from the door because
you know for people can get a bee sting or anything like that the trash needs to be
moved away from the door and we need a larger trash can place there
Ms. Camacho a larger trash can has been ordered as a result of the community meeting that we had
I don't know that it's been installed at the store yet, but the construction manager for Rite Aid was actually at the store this afternoon at 2 o'clock, and it's my understanding that the trash can was empty at that time.
Okay, but the trash can has not been replaced. It's still a smaller one.
Right. It was ordered very recently, and a new trash can will be at the store.
Thank you. Anyone else?
No further hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan and has
not yet been remapped.
The proposal is to replace existing signage with new branding for a long-standing use.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. Calendar number MI 2021-001-275-6742-46 North 5th Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
Thank you so much.
Thank you. Calendar number MI 2021-002-090-1642 Pine Street.
Mr. Laver has been promoted to panelists.
and promoted to panelists.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Adam, and members of the board.
Adam Laver of Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square, L-A-V as in Victor, E-R.
Thank you.
You so are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Can you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral folders and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we have a letter of non-opposition from the Center City Residents Association
and many, many letters of support from your neighbors.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I'm here this afternoon on behalf of Deborah and Robert Fleischman, the owners of 1642 Pine Street.
You can see the front of their property on the screen before you with the zoning poster refusals on the green door.
Mr. and Mrs. Fleischman have lived in Center City for their adult lives.
They moved from another Center City residence to 1642 Pine Street in 1998, and they raised their three children at this location.
The single-family property fronts on Pine, and it runs through to Waverly at the rear or the south.
here's another photograph of pine street here is uh the rear uh elevation existing with the
white garage door along waverly it is somewhat ironic um and uh chilling actually to be presenting
this case to you today in the midst of the awful tragedy in Florida with the condominium residents
that we all know about. Why do I bring this up? On March 7th of 2020, thankfully, Debbie and Bob
were not at home when part of their property collapsed. And it collapsed due to excavation
and construction next door at 1640 Pine Street.
You can see the scaffolding actually along Waverly
here in the photograph to the right or to the east.
At that time, as I mentioned,
thankfully they were not home.
None of their adult children were home.
They have been out of the property since that time.
And allow me to move on for a moment.
There are some additional photographs, but I'd like to bring you back, and this will be the reason why we're here today.
This is the cover of an engineering report about the work necessary to make their home habitable again.
The zoning refusal itself is only for one issue.
The property is owned CMX1. It did not, at the time of the collapse, meet the required open area. It was non-conformant.
And when Debbie and Bob were involuntarily kicked out of their home, they realized that this was an opportunity for them to age in place.
And so they seek to fill in a little bit more of their first floor area, which isn't even seen from the public right of way,
with some additional structure that will allow an elevator for them over the years
as they hopefully can live in their reconstructed property.
That is the one issue before the zoning board.
We appeared before Center City Residents Association.
The letter is up before you of non-opposition.
Debbie and Bob are fixtures in their neighborhood.
There are many, many letters of support, only letters of support from numerous neighbors.
I've shared all of this with Ms. Saleta, and I won't go through all of it now, but there
are something like 16 pages of support.
What I will get to, and I'll go through this quickly, is to move to the plans.
We do have here today Marty Rosenblum, who is Bob and Debbie's architect.
He's here if the board needs.
But as you'll see, there is...
But as you'll see, there is a very small central courtyard in the property.
Again, not seen from Waverly, not seen from Pine Street.
I highlighted the proposed one-story addition to allow Debbie and Bob to have an elevator installed for the future.
The rest of the plans and the photos simply show Marty Rosenblum's proposed updates to allow for that one-story edition, which has been reviewed by Center City Residents Association and others.
In the interest of time, I actually think that I would pause at this moment, Mr. Chair and members of the board, and say that we have also discussed this matter with Councilman Johnson, who was very sympathetic to the Fleischmann's issue with the collapse.
And once again, we are only aware of full support for this project.
Mr. Rosenblum is here, and Debbie Fleischman is prepared, should the board wish, to adopt and affirm.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mrs. Fleischman, if you would kindly raise your virtual hand so that Chairman Plaza may square you in.
I don't have to speak.
Mrs. Fleischman, would you kindly state and spell your name and address for the record
and then Chairman Plaza will ask you a couple of questions.
Hey, Tico.
Hey, Frank.
Oh, it's going okay.
Can you hear me?
Can you mute yourself?
Am I muted or not?
No, you're good.
Debbie, please proceed.
Okay, Debbie.
Please identify yourself.
Debbie Fleischman.
Fleishman, F-L-E-I-S-C-H-M-A-N, 1642 Pine Street in Philadelphia.
You swear to affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Mrs. Fleishman, have you been present for the entirety of my presentation to the zoning board?
Yes, I have.
And would you adopt and affirm it as your own?
Yes, I would.
Thank you.
with that mr plaza i believe that we've presented a a full record of support for this project we
have described the nature of the non-conforming issue before the board and the grounds to allow
this dedicated philadelphia family to remain in the home that they love for years to come
and i would respectfully request that the board grant the requested variance relief in this matter
Thank you. Does the board have any questions?
Is there anyone else here in this matter that would like to speak?
Mr. Plaza, France Pierre has his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time, sir.
Thank you.
Hello.
Good afternoon, Mr. Pierre. Can you please identify yourself for the record?
Yes, that's France Pierre.
That's F-R-N-C-Z
That's P-I-E-R-R-E
Councilmember Johnson's office
You sorrowful to tell the truth
The whole truth for nothing but the truth
I certainly do
Thank you, please proceed
Good afternoon fellow board members
Councilmember Johnson
Joins the coordinating
RCO Center City
Residence Association in their non-opposition to the appeal.
Thank you. Anyone else?
No further hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Board, any questions?
Thank you. Planning Commissioner.
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Board.
this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan we have no objection
to the modest increase in occupied area accordingly we have no objection to the granting of variance
thank you
you're muted sorry about that there with me one second kind of lost this am i let's see here
MI 2021-00
I can read it if you'd like.
I got it. I'm sorry. MI 2021-002090, 1642 Pine Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
have a good afternoon. Likewise. I believe that concludes the two o'clock hearings. Is there
anyone else that feels that we might have forgot to call up a case?
I see no one. Okay, thank you. We'll take a 10 minute break. Is that all right,
board or anyone else? That's fine. Yes. Can we do 15 cheer? 15. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome.
See you guys soon. All righty. Thank you.
Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Confessor Plaza and I'll be the acting chair for this
afternoon's zoning hearing. Along with me are board members Thomas Holloman and James Snell.
Also participating are board administrators Tanya Sunkit and board attorney Sharon Saleta.
Before we begin, I'd like to note the following changes that are related to the virtual format.
First, please be advised that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you
acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Second, for the benefit of anyone participating
by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand
by hitting star nine, then star six to unmute yourself.
Before calling the first case, I will call out some of the continuances for today's 330 hearings.
Calendar number MI-2020-002744-1507 Spring Garden Street is continued.
And calendar number MI-2021-000979-2003 North 9th Street.
Is there anyone else here that would like to continue a case?
Please come forward now.
No answer this time, sir.
Thank you.
MI 2020-002-607-1713, Cybert Street.
mr plaza we've received um opposition letters both from the councilman's office councilman
clark's office and from um beach company's rco which is i understand the coordinating rco for
project. Thank you. Is Alan Nockamson available? He's just been promoted to panelist, sir. Thank
you. Mr. Nockamson, please identify yourself for the record. I saw your first and last name.
Oh, yes. Good afternoon, members of the board. My name is Alan Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N,
with Nockamson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Do you swear a 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?
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? I have. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Well, I say we have a letter.
I don't know if we met with the RCO and that's, you know, part of our presentation. But for
purposes of, you know, this form, we have technically met with the RCO. Thank you. Please
a seat. Oh, yes. May I share my screen? Okay. So I'm here to present 1713 Cybert Street.
So I'm here to present 1713 Cybert Street.
I've been in front of this board on many occasions regarding the 1700 block of Cybert Street,
being last summer at 1705 Cybert Street.
And on each occasion, both the community and this board have supported the project.
So you'll see in my packet of materials, the deed to the property,
certificate of tax clearance showing that my client is it yes can you uh maximize a little
bit yeah sure just tell me can you see that now or is it a little more been a little more okay
how about like that yeah that's fine Tom is that good for me
I think that's fine okay great yeah so you'll see the deed to the property
certificate of tax clearance and notice of refusal. All the other instances where this
board and this community has supported a project of similar type on the 1700 block of Cyber Street
or application for appeal for this matter. The maps of the area, photographs of the property
as well as the surrounding area, plans and drawings. And I have two letters, the first
of which was from that Beach Community Services sent last week regarding this project. And
And then a similar letter that the Beach Community Services sent regarding 1705 Seabird Street.
The only difference is the letter that they sent, actually I think it was Monday, or I
think it is, they sent saying that the community was in opposition to multifamily.
We never met with the community.
After eight months from the time we filed the zoning appeal up until today, we've been
trying desperately to meet with this community. And we finally had an opportunity last week
to meet with the community via a Zoom session. And unfortunately, we were never able to meet
with them because the coordinating RCO, which I don't hold against, was unable to actually
access their own Zoom account. So we were supposed to meet at a certain time. We were
finally able to get access one hour later. And at that point, they said, well, we're
an hour late. We noted that this community has supported projects in the past, including
this coordinating RCO at 1705 Seabrook Street. And the community representative indicated
that if there was an issue, that they would let us know and that we would have maybe a
meeting that Monday. They would fly her in the neighborhood. We didn't meet with them.
The only thing we got was that letter, but you'll see from the correspondence from last year, last time we presented in front of this community with Beach Community Services as coordinating our RCO for exactly the same project, the community unanimously supported this project, and Beach Community Services also supported this project.
So, the deed to the property shows that Philadelphia City Properties is the owner of the property of 1713 Cyber Street.
After that, you will see our tax clearance. I'm just going to make it a little smaller
so it's just easier so you can see the whole page, if you don't mind. And then we'll obviously
enlarge for the drawings. But you'll see that Philadelphia City Properties is in good standing
with the state of Philadelphia. The notice of refusal. So this is an RSA 5 property.
We're on the 1700 block of Seabird Street. Seabird Street is between Thompson and Master
essentially between 17th and 18th Street in the Kabat section of Philadelphia. So we're
just off a broad, not that far off of Broad Street. And this is an RSA 5 property. And
on several other occasions, this board has reviewed similar type of projects where we're
looking to put a two-family household living. And we'll also have issues with regards to the
open area and the rear yard depth. So before this hearing, I actually looked at all the other
projects our office has handled. And these are all projects our office has handled. 1705 Seber
Street, 1707 Seber Street, 1709 Seber Street, 1711 Seber Street, 1719 Seber Street, 1721 Seber
Street, 1728 Sieber Street, and 1742 Sieber Street. I looked at each of the refusals and for each of
these properties, the lot size actually of our lot is actually the largest of all of them at 674
square feet. But the same type of refusals for depth of the rear yard, all of them are like five
feet. A couple were like five feet, like eight inches or something. In the open area, all the
THE REFUSALS WERE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME. AND IN EACH INSTANCE, THE COMMUNITY AND THIS
And in each instance, the community and this board supported the approval of the requested variances.
BOARD SUPPORTED THE APPROVAL OF THE REFUSALS.
And I think it would be helpful to look from a map standpoint of where we are. So again,
we're 1713 Cuber Street, that's this project. 1705, 7, 9, 11, all approved by this EBA.
We're 13. Down the street, 1719 and 1721. Then across the street, 1728 and 1742.
All approved by the CBA under similar circumstances.
Here's our application for appeal for 1713 Ciber Street. Again,
noted that we filed this appeal in October of 2020. We did not get the opportunity to present
into the to the community until last week and through no fault of our own we were unable to
present to the community even though we've done a continuance in the past but we in good faith
sent notice to the community I don't know if anyone was on you know that initially that virtual
meeting but we were not able to present to the community we're not afforded that opportunity
to present to the community so then there's maps of the area again just to reiterate we're between
17th and 18th and Thompson and then masters up here we actually back up into Ingersoll
and then just to do some more background from a google map perspective of where we are
photographs of the property it's a vacant lot you know properties to the right of the property
property on Siebert, property sold left on the property on Siebert. And then just examples
of Philadelphia City properties. They self-manage their properties and they also obviously build
their own properties. They take great pride in the craftsmanship and workmanship and these
are just interior examples of some of their similarly situated properties. And then our
plans and drawings. I'm just going to kind of zoom out a little bit. Again, this is a three-story
structure, a brick facade. You know, we have a lower level unit and an upper level unit. What I
like to highlight is that similar to the project at 1705 Siebert Street, which this board approved,
They have come with a design where there's a separate garbage room in the entryway. So you walk into an open area, a vestibule area, and they create a garbage room actually in the front of their property so that there's appropriate and responsible garbage storage for both of the units, not just a lower level unit in the backyard, but both of the units.
BECAUSE THERE'S A GARBAGE ROOM TOWARDS THE FRONT, ALSO BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD BE FORCED
TO PULL THEIR GARBAGE THROUGHOUT THEIR UNIT. AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED BACK
IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR FOR 1705 SEVERT STREET. AND THEN HERE'S THE LETTER THAT THIS BOARD
just received in opposition. As you can see, there were no votes, and it just state number
of attendees for due to technical difficulties on Beach Community Services, and there were
no residents on the community meeting. BCS, which is Beach Community Services, reach out
to the Community Land Trust Corp. and Friends of the 47th Ward. Both representatives noted
that their community residents are only supportive of single-family household living, not multi-household
living. So I actually spoke to Vivian Van Story of Community Land Trust because we've
done a lot of projects in this neighborhood. I reached out to her and asked her, is she
only in support of single family? And she stated no, that she cannot support a variance
project without the input of the community. And because there was technically no community
meeting, she couldn't vote for it. Even though last time, this board and this community and
Ms. Van Story and Beach Interplex supported this five to zero. Same exact circumstances
for 1705 Sieber Street. They supported it unanimously when they did have a community meeting.
And if you notice, one of the provisos dealt with the control trash room, which is the same
same configuration that we have for this project. So one of the provisos was to put a trash
storage inside in the front, just like this project.
JUST LIKE THIS PROJECT. SO UNDER SAME CIRCUMSTANCES WITH A COMMUNITY MEETING, THIS COMMUNITY ACTUALLY
SUPPORTED IT. SO THE INDICATION FROM THAT LETTER IS NOT CORRECT. THIS COMMUNITY HAS SUPPORTED
THIS PROJECT AS LATE AS AUGUST OF LAST YEAR AND SUPPORTED SIMILAR PROJECTS ON THIS BLOCK
OVER THE YEARS. HERE'S JUST PROOF OF OUR MAILING OF THE COMMUNITY NOTICE FOR JUNE 24TH AT 530
PM. We sent it to 162 addresses as noted by the City Planning Commission. And then the rest of
it is just the addresses that we sent it to. So with that being said, I'd be more than happy to
take any questions. But before that, I have the owner's representative. Steve, can you just
virtually raise your hand so you can adopt my testimony? NEW SPEAKERS WELLS,
to speak, sir. Yes, can you hear me? Yes, sir, can you please identify yourself for the records
by your first and last name? Yes, my name is Steve Shklovsky, S-T-E-V-E-S-H-K-L-O-V-S-K-Y
at 1626 Fitzwater Street, 19146. Thank you, sir, for understanding the truth, the whole truth,
for nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Yes, Steve, you heard everything I stated
today. I did. And is it true and correct? It is. And do you adopt it as your own testimony? I do.
Okay. So with that being said, just another point is that, you know, what frustrates me is that we've
probably sent over in excess of at least 20 emails over the course of eight months to plan
a community meeting we attended a community meeting in good faith and through no fault of
our own that community meeting did not happen and under yes and under similar circumstances
this community and this board has been supportive of this project now for all those reasons we
believe that the board would should grant this this variance request excuse me council yes
do you have uh bedrooms in the basement we have an open floor plan in the basement i will
hold on and this is the same floor plans that were for 1705 as well
i just know that because this is you know this from recent memory but hold on let me just uh
so hold on let me just make sure
Here, 50%.
Trying to tell me some technical difficulties here.
Sorry about that.
Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Chairman?
I would like to request
no bedrooms in the basement proviso.
All right.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter?
I see no other hand, sir.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for single-family residential use
in the city plan this lot is smaller than the new RSA 6 zoning which has a minimum lot size of 720
square feet and only allows for single-family homes this proposal is for multi-family the
applicant has not demonstrated necessary hardship regarding the requirements of the code the
application represents an inappropriate overuse and is not consistent with with our adopted plan
Accordingly, we oppose the granting of the variance.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. Calendar number MI 2020-002-607-1713 Syberg Street. This record will be closed.
we will vote this matter in the next uh in 30 days for some internal discussion okay
thank you you're welcome good luck all right have a great day you too calendar number mi 2020
dash zero zero two six zero five twenty seven twenty one west cabot street
Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to panelists.
Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to campus.
Excuse me, this is Sharon.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
We have received opposition letters from the RCO and from Councilman Clark.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Leo Mulvihill here today on behalf of the applicant.
Spelling my name is M-U-L, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
Address, 213 Green Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
1-9-1-2-3. Thank you. And you swear
to affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth? I do. Do you agree
to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do.
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? I have. Thank you. Please
proceed. So good afternoon, members of the board. Leo Mulvihill again on behalf of
xeon real estate that's z as in zebra e-o-n llc uh up on the screen now is my presentation
packet for this matter we have the refusal appeal and project information form of page one
zoning map at seven deed at nine commercial activity license at 13 tax clearance at 14.
zoning notification letter to the community at 16. rco letter you see three asterisks i
received the letter only after i submitted my zoning packet but i have included it in this
packet for purposes of today's presentation photos of the property are at 19 plans are at page 58
now members of the board this is a proposal for a new three family dwelling on a deacon lot
at 2721 west kabbat street on the brewery town shardsworth area of the city this property is
directly next to a property that's been previously permitted uh for purposes of today's hearing
I'll call it 2719 Cabot Street.
The lot itself is a little bit irregular and goes through to Thompson,
but it's been being subdivided and a new multifamily building is being built there.
We'll see that in the drawings when I present them to everybody,
but that's just to alleviate anyone's concerns going forward when you see both of those buildings next to one another.
So we're proposing today to build one new structure with three units.
We received refusals from multifamily in the single-family district and an open area refusal.
We have a similar open area to the existing properties on the block, which puts us at 15.97% versus the 25% that's required under code.
One moment, members of the board.
Let me just pull out my sidebar here.
There we go.
So here's our area zoning map.
Members of the board, we're here on Cabot Street.
Thompson's here 28th and 7th and this is a lot that I'm talking about this is
the lot that would be next door to what a lot that we're discussing where
there's already been a multi-family building that's permitted we have some
RM1 I believe this is 15 separate condos we have some condos across the street
located here as well and there is a more multi-family that's been permitted as
you go north in the area but generally speaking it's RSA 5 with some RM1 in the
area it's an overhead view again this is our parcel here
you'll see when we have pictures is a big tree in the middle of the parcel
and this is the parcel where there has been a previously permitted new
structure that's going to be built as well permits are currently on the fence
in front of the building it's the same applicant
here's our deed commercial activity license
is our tax clearance information showing zero balance too again the tax compliance certificate
app was not giving me the necessary required certificate itself but i was able to get this
information for purposes of showing the board this is our zoning notification that went out
to the community group along with our copy of our refusal and our proof of mailing we did just
received this letter from Broomytown Sharswood. Our meeting was held some time ago back in,
if I recall correctly, March. And ultimately, after discussion with the neighbors,
there was a vote that was held. I was not present for the vote. There were five votes in support,
17 in opposition, four in non-opposition. So community was a little bit concerned about
the ultimate, pardon me, about the multi-family use here. The reason that we're seeking multi-family
has generally to do with the prices of construction these days, allowing for pricing of the units
themselves to be a little bit less expensive than if you were to build one single family
home, and continuity with the previously approved structure that's being built next door at
2719 which we'll see in a moment this is a zoning poster this is our existing lot this is the tree
that i was discussing earlier this is the parcel whereby the new construction will be built as
This is the parcel whereby the new construction will be built as previously permitted.
can produce a permanent, you'll see those.
You'll see those permits posted on the fence in a second.
This is looking down Cabot Street to the east.
We have a commercial garage across the street.
Westbound on the street.
It is largely a two-story and some three-story single-family homes.
As I noted, there are condos directly across the street.
One faces north and one faces south.
We have a third-story, three-story home with a setback back here as well.
This is rotating again, now looking east.
New construction looking to the south.
Then again, completing that 360-degree view of the lot.
This is that permit for next door, again, 2719 West Cabot Street,
which goes through, again, as I stated, the 2720 Thompson Street, the street directly to the north.
this is just photographs that were taken previously across the street which we used
in our zoning presentation to the neighbors pass those
so members of the board here's our rendering so these are these renderings here represent the
existing houses they're not entirely accurate but they're about as close as our guys could get
this is the new building that's been previously permitted this is to the left is our proposed
structure um it's three stories with the mezzanine um although it appears to be four here it does
not exceed the 38 foot maximum height and then this is us again usually mostly a red brick facade
in the front this just goes on to our elevation so again this structure this is the existing two
story single family home that's next door 2723 this is us the proposed structure 2721 this is
previously permitted structure at 2719 West Navarre Street, which is not yet being built
appropriately. As you can see, we have our rear yard. It's nine foot six, apartment three eighths
inches deep. The glasses are a little foggy. So it's a significantly deep yard. It's just
not quite deep enough to meet the open area requirement under the code.
And we'll get into the layout of the three units in a moment. Backyard is open to the first floor
unit page 59 in my packet for purposes of the record just looking to the left because that's
the structure that we're discussing today the building to the right is the one that's been
previously permitted so this is the basement so for purposes of this building we have mechanicals
common area storage for all of the units a b and c and then we have a trash and recycling
room down here because we always know there are community concerns regarding the trash and
recycling, but there's a common area for that, and it's going to be vented.
With respect to the first floor, you come in through the front step. We have our meters tucked
away in a nice little entryway. Come in through a vestibule, and then going to the right, you get
into unit one. Unit one's a one-bedroom, one-bath unit. It's about 732 square feet, a decent amount
of size. Living area to the front, dining in the middle. Kitchen, and then across you have your
washer, dryer, mechanicals, and your bath. And then to the rear, you have the bedroom
and the rear access door to allow you to get into the rear yard.
Now, if you wish to come in through the foyer, you can go down these stairs, and that's
down to the common area of basement for trash storage or storage of personal effects and
other items as well. You go up these stairs.
Then bring you down to this hallway, and you go to the front for unit B and to the back
for Unit C. As I said, these units have a mezzanine, so we'll get to that in a second
for the purposes of the location of the bedrooms. So to get into Unit B, you hang that right,
come through this door, you have living and dining here, kitchen area. Unit C, same thing,
living and dining, kitchen area. Bathroom back in here in Unit C. And bathroom back here
for Unit B. So more or less, they're near images of one another.
Now, once you've gone up, we have our sleeping area for each of the units, bedrooms in the
front, bedrooms in the rear, large bath, washer, dryer, mechanicals, and same thing here as
Then, with these spiral stairs, that's how you'll be getting up to the roof deck, which
going to be for outdoor space for both units B and C.
Here's our mezzanine. Then here's our roof deck which is set back both from the back
pardon me and from the front and that allows for sufficient space for each
unit to essentially have their own private outdoor space, both in the ground stories
unit to essentially have their own private outdoor space both in the ground stories and on the
and on the upper units as well.
Again, just for the purpose of the record, members of the board, unit B, pardon me,
unit A is 732 square feet, it's one bedroom, one bath.
Unit B is 902 square feet, one bath, pardon me, one bedroom,
one and a half bath. Unit C, 835 square feet, one bedroom,
1.5 baths the hardship again in this instance being construction costs materials looking to
keep the price of rents down a little bit lower versus a new construction single-family home
the fact that we have a previously permitted structure directly to the right
to the right also known as the east of us and that would be permit number 626712
excuse me council yes finances is not a zoning issue do you have another reason for the hardship
that's a that's a substantial reason for the for the desire to build the three family dwelling
in addition to the fact that we have a previously permitted existing
multi-family structure at uh pardon me two previously permitted to be built multi-family
structure that exists shortly over at 2719 like i said which is being permitted at 626712
but but each case is judged separately i understand that we can't consider those
other uh two cases what is the reason for the possible over crowding of a residential
So two-story single-family block.
Respectfully, Mr. Holloman, in this case, we wouldn't consider it overcrowding.
If we were to build a new three-story or four-story single-family home, we would have the same number of bedrooms, if not more.
The number of baths would be essentially the same.
more or less we're looking to have what would otherwise be a pretty sizable
three-story three-bedroom house just broken up into three separate units to allow for greater
affordability for people moving in that's essentially it we can do the the third story
by right by virtue of the fact that there was a vacant lot which has now been permitted here off
the right at 2719 and those are respectfully uh i respectfully submit on the hardships we're facing
in this matter are you still using finances for a hardship that's the that is essentially the
hardship in this case uh mr holliman and seeking to provide a greater level of affordability to
the community well affordability you're not beating them for low income are you no that's
that's true so it's really not affordable well it would be more affordable than for example a new
three-story single-family home in terms of a mortgage or for purposes of renting
that's what we were looking at with respect to this parcel chair uh mr holland but you could do
a two-story single family? In theory, one could build a two-story single family. They tend,
in my experience, and as you may see these days, often not be as in demand as a three-story home.
Just due to the virtue of the lot size, in this instance, we're looking at a lot of approximately
1,050 square feet. Do you have a realtor survey about the demand?
I do not have a realtor survey for this project, no.
Thank you.
Yes. Now, I understand that my client may be on the line as well.
Otar Koscivili, are you on the line, sir? Or Nina?
Would he be under your name?
I hope not
are you present sir
or Nina
please raise your hand if you're in the virtual audience
someone had their hand up
at Leo's name or something
I'm not sure
I'm not sure why anyone else is under my name at this point
either but i'm hi the individual who's labeled as leo movahill please unmute yourself and speak
to as to whether you're his client hello please unmute yourself
are you there yeah otar kosashvili there we go otar can you do me a favor please state your name
spell your last name and then give your address for the record please sure otar is o-t-a-r
and last name K-O-S-A-S-H-V-I-L-I.
Otar Kosashvili.
Now, Otar, they're going to swear you in.
Just wait for one second, all right?
Sir, you swear from the truth, the whole truth,
from nothing but the truth?
Okay, please proceed.
Otar, you've heard my testimony today
with respect to this project?
Yes, what would you like to add at this time?
The only thing which I would like to add
is that we try to do all our best
to make the city more beautiful, more livable, and more presentable for everybody, all communities, all neighbors.
Now, Otar, with respect, you heard Mr. Holloman's questioning with respect to a two-story dwelling, or for a single family.
What's the reason that you're not doing a two-story single-family dwelling here?
The only reason that I'm just walking around the city and I see how the city becomes beautiful
and how the city is growing and we try to enter, we try to bring something new, something more new
visual approach to the city. The old city is like two-story dwelling is my understanding that
it's a little bit already like past time that we're trying to uh to bring some new uh vision
of the cities now otar if you were to build a single family home here would it be a three
or four bedroom home three bedroom room there's three uh three bedroom home okay i'm sorry let
me make sure i'm clear if you were to build a single family home here instead of this building
would it have three bedrooms, four bedrooms? How many bedrooms would it have?
Four bedrooms. And if you were to build a single family home here, would it be
two stories or more than two stories? No, it should be more than two stories,
but it will be too big. Okay, what's the reason for building more than two stories?
Because we try to reach the possible height which the city is allowed to us.
And that's 38 feet, correct?
Yes, correct.
Now, the structure that we proposed today, that does not exceed 38 feet, correct?
We are completely on requirements.
And the number of bedrooms we propose in here would be the same as were fewer than if you build a new single-family home here, correct?
Yes, correct.
And are these units going to be rentals or condoms?
this is the uh we not decided yet but this is can be very good for the rental and definitely for the
uh neighbors for sales also okay thank you very much yeah it will be very very i mean the
affordable for all kind of the demand is it fair to say that this would be more affordable than if
you were to build a single family home and rent that out for sure definitely okay otar
do you adopt your my testimony as your own as you've heard it today in front of the zoning
hearing yeah is there anything else you'd like to add at this time
no okay thank you very much members of the board i'm happy to entertain any other questions you
may have at this time yes yes council i have another uh question yes i'm i'm looking at
your rendering
and it's show
four stories which is over
38 feet
I'm going to go to
the elevation
and I'll clear that up so it's
not four stories it's three stories and a
mezzanine Mr. Holloman
which brings us to 38 feet
to the roof line plus our parapet wall
and then we have the roof deck
pilot house access structure on top of that
so I understand it appears that it looks like
it's over 38 feet but it is not over
38 feet. But that's not what you're rendering show go back to your rendering.
Yes, this would be the mezzanine that we were discussing earlier.
Mr. Holloman. But you have it at the front elevation.
Correct. And that's what we have here as well. It's just this these are just a matter of where
the windows are located and I'll show you as well just to get back to for purposes of that
so these are where we have that mezzanine area just for purpose of the record we're looking at
page 63 these are the second set of windows you were discussing I believe
on the mezzanine area to allow us to get up to that roof deck area
then going down so that's so that's four stories it's technically three stories
then going down so that's so that's four stories
theories.
uh mr well three stories and a mezzoline a mezzoline is a floor
for purposes of this zoning hearing we're not exceeding the 38 foot height limit i mean i i
think that was the question you had but that's not what we're doing we're not exceeding the 38
for a height limit. So your mezzoline is how high? One moment, please.
What's the floor height of your mezzoline? Let's see.
Mr. Holloman, I don't happen to have that measurement in my elevation, it seems, unfortunately.
is it livable space the space itself no it's not essentially livable space let me get back to the
your measuring plan shows livable space it's it's enough space to put not a bed not a bed or
anything along those lines perhaps a satay or something along those lines as well but it's
not terribly large as you can see here it's more or less access to get to um you can put a chair
here perhaps a small table and then you can get to the so you have a ceiling height of eight feet
over 38 feet i'm not sure i understand your question mr holliman i'm sorry three stories
you say is 38 feet but then you add a mesoline the mesoline has an eight foot ceiling height
so it's over 38 no mr holliman the way that it's broken up on the inside it's not over 38 feet
this proposed structure is not over 38 feet we did not receive a refusal for that
this is the breakdown of the structure 38 foot this is our roof line here this is our parapet
wall and this is our just indicating with my cursor our pilot house access structure
what's the square footage on your pilot house
one moment please
so between the two pilot houses 60 it is uh 60 square feet per pilot house
okay thank you yes thank you and just for purpose of the record that was page
68 where that was located mr hall thank you anyone else that would like to speak
is jack lucen on the line he'd be our architect
I have a Jack Holtz with his hand.
Yes, Jack Holtz.
Jack, would you please unmute yourself?
Or ask to be unmuted as you raise your hand?
Good afternoon. This is Jack. Please identify yourself for the record. Jack Holtz, architect.
Jack, please spell your last name and give your address for the record.
H-O-L-Z, 103 Apache Lane, Limerick, Pennsylvania, 19468.
Sir, you swear to affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I wanted to clarify the questions about the mezzanine.
Yes. Jack, just hold on for one second.
Let me just guide you through that with some questions, all right?
So, Jack, you've heard my testimony today with respect to this project, correct?
I have.
And you've heard Mr. Holliman's questions with respect to the mezzanine specifically with respect to this project, correct?
Yes, I have.
Let's talk about that.
I'm showing you now what's been marked as page, for the purpose of the record, 58 on my zoning packet.
Do you see this on the line?
Are you on your computer, sir?
Yes, I see it.
So this is the proposed elevation.
What's the overall height for this structure, including the mezzanine area that we've discussed earlier?
It's what's shown on the drawings.
It's 38 feet.
It is maxed out to 38 feet.
So let's end this first.
Just a minute, Counselor. The architect says it's 38 feet. You're looking at that elevation
that you have up there, proposed front elevation.
The top roof line, not the mezzoline line, but the roof line. What is the distance of that?
This roof, this is the roof line.
No, that's the mezzoline line.
No, that's the mezzanine line.
No, that's the roof line.
No, that's the roof line.
This is the roof line, Mr. Holloman. I'm sorry.
This is the roof line, Mr. Holliman.
So what is in back of that?
This would be the pilot house access structure.
Which is...
Yes, the pilot house is beyond.
This is not the mezzanine.
I think that might be the confusion that we have here, Mr. Holloman.
This is not the mezzanine here that I'm indicating with my cursor.
This is the pilot house access structure.
because there's one the way that comes to the front.
So you have three floors and a mezzanine
or two floors and a mezzanine?
Mr. Holtz,
will you please clarify for Mr. Holloman
at this point?
If you need me to go to a different page,
let me know.
No, that's fine.
It is three floors and a mezzanine.
And Leo, if you can just draw your cursor
across the sliding door
with the French balcony above that.
That is the line of the mezzanine
above that.
And the window above the French balcony is on the high wall in a high ceiling on the third floor.
The mezzoline doesn't come to the front of the building.
Would you agree with me that a mezzoline is between two floors?
Would you agree to that?
Yes, it is.
So you have a first floor?
Second floor?
Right.
and a mezzanine yes a mezzanine technically by the code if it is uh 50 percent of the room
open to below is not to be counted as space but you're allowed to have it so it cannot be enclosed
and it is not. It is basically a one less than one-half of the room below and it's
a stopping-off spot to continue on the spiral stair up to the pilot house. So
if you have that open space you really could redesign it to give you yard space
if you have that additional space in the building.
The yard space,
I don't understand how I would get more yard space
from reducing a third floor.
No, eliminate the mezzanine.
But the mezzanine isn't part of the footprint.
So just for purpose of the record,
Jack and Mr. Holloman,
I've gone to page 63,
which shows the mezzanine plan. So, Jack, just taking a look at this, for purposes of the
questioning that I believe Mr. Holliman is asking you, so this mezzanine area is actually over
what is essentially here, this bathroom, washer, dryer, utilities, closet, etc., correct?
That's correct.
So, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Holliman, you're suggesting that by eliminating
this, we could allow for greater outdoor access? Is that what you're suggesting?
By eliminating that, I'm suggesting the building can be smaller,
and then you can have real yard space.
Okay, so Jack, let's discuss that for a moment. Do we gain anything from eliminating this
mezzanine area, which is just essentially over top of our bath and stairs?
Leo, I think the correct question, follow-up, would be, would he be amenable to three families if we reduce the length of the building by five feet?
That's what we would have to do.
Right now, the length of this building is 49 feet.
If we reduce it to 44 feet, it would be five feet shorter than the permitted building next to it, but we would have the required rear yard open area.
And the plan itself would remain the same.
Some of the spaces would be reduced to accommodate the smaller footprint.
thank you
all right jack you have anything else you'd like to add at this point
thank you anyone else that would like to speak
i see no further answer this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the property is indicated for single-family residential and the comprehensive plan the
the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship regarding the requirements of the code
applicant has not demonstrated a hardship regarding the requirements of the code the application
the application represents an inappropriate overuse and is not consistent with our adopted
district plan accordingly we oppose the granting of the variance thank you all right MI 2020-002605
2721 West Cabot Street. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no.
Thank you members of the board. You have a good evening. Likewise. Calendar number MI 2020-002583-3959
Lancaster Avenue.
Mr. Plaza, the
attorney for the applicant in this case
is Richard Pressman.
Richard DeMarco is representing
Sam Development LLC and a
budding neighbour.
Okay. Thank you.
Both gentlemen have been promoted to panellists, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Pressman, please identify yourself for the record.
Richard Pressman, I'm the attorney for the applicant, Chosen 300 Ministries, Inc., located at 3959 Lancaster Avenue.
Thank you. Can you please spell your last name?
Pressman, P-R-E-S-S-M-A-N.
Do you still affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Do you agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tact compliance, copy of the refusal, or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have, Your Honor.
Thank you. Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
The applicant met with the RCO, and I believe they have submitted a letter.
I did not get a copy of it until yesterday, so it is not in my package, but it was sent to Chairman Tachika.
Thank you. Please proceed.
If it pleases members of the board, we have a proposal for variants to permit group living under CMX2 to permit overnight housing for homeless guests at the existing Mission Church, Chosen 300 Ministries, Inc., located at 3959 Lancaster Avenue.
If I may share my screen, I can bring up my package to go through the materials.
I mean, I see the letter from the RCO.
I've been asking for that, Mr. Chairman.
Never received a copy.
Sharon, do we have that letter?
We can forward Mr. DeMarco.
Mr. DeMarco, can you please identify yourself for the record?
Sorry, yes.
Richard DeMarco, 2005 Market Street, 16th floor, Philadelphia PA 19103.
I'm here on behalf of a protestant and budding neighbor, Sam DeBelder.
Thank you.
Sir, do you want to tell the truth, the whole truth from nothing but the truth?
I did receive the applicants' exhibits, but I've been asking for the coordinating RCO's
letter from the meeting, and I have not received it.
Thank you.
I am going to look for that right now and try to forward it to you, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Mr. President, please proceed.
Are you able to see the exhibit?
second there there we go um this part of the package in the first section is a deed
to the uh property dated uh november 8th 2010 um attached is uh is uh on page two uh section two
I apologize.
There's a tax clearance certificate as required and A3 is the refusal which we waived the
reading of.
I would just like to call the attention, there's two refusals.
One was dated prior that had to be amended.
The initial request was provide group housing, living, under personal care.
That's been amended to the one in May of 2021 for just group living.
We acknowledge that this is not a permitted use under CMX2, and the relief, therefore, is required to be in the form of variance.
the uh the next um we have the uh the plans which i'll go through uh with my uh my client we have
the application for the appeal that follows um under um a4 and then the floor plans are in a5
and we can go to a6 which
the four plans i'll go through with my uh client um mr jenkins when he testifies
this is the zoning plan uh zoning map showing the the property um if that's big enough then
the front picture of the building it was uh constructed as a bank the best we can tell is
at the turn of the century or the first 20 years of the 1920s.
It became a church in 1964 and has continued in that capacity
with the mission taking over in 2010.
The aerial view is under, I mean, this is a street view
showing the corner of Haverford and Lancaster.
The building's straight on with the large columns.
To the left is a restaurant, and to the left of that is an apartment building.
The applicant has a letter of support from the adjacent property owner there that says Texas Wieners.
That's included in the packet.
Going down further is the aerial view.
You'll be able to see the building right here, and it goes through with a vacant lot all the way through to the back of West Mount Vernon Street.
And we have letters of support in the form of petition attached in A9 to this package, and this is it here.
we also have letters of support if you come across the street from other property owners,
including a funeral home, James Morris Funeral Home at 4000 Harford Avenue.
And these are the letters of support
that are attached
from the properties we just referred to,
the funeral home.
And we had an initial letter of support
from Ward 24 that was given in March of 2020.
It's my understanding,
based on the subsequent submission
by Mr. DeMarco's office,
that they have changed their position
based upon the fact that they wanted more details
to the proposed services that are going to be offered,
which Mr. Jenkins will be testifying to,
and he put together a plan and submitted it yesterday
to the Councilwoman Gautier.
Also in March of 2020, we got a letter of support
from Wes Powlton, and same story.
Recently as this week or last week,
we received letters in opposition from this group
without an explanation with regards to how the vote came about,
but they did submit an updated letter to the council
and also to the board here.
Also, we have a petition for support as we went mostly on Mount Vernon
that shows the residents on that street are, for the most part,
supportive that we were able to get a hold of
to give overnight group living for homeless persons and persons in need.
We also have in the package that's been submitted pictures of the improvements that were made.
There was an application made back in 2020 for zoning relief.
back in 2020 for zoning relief, and they had to be withdrawn because there were certain
improvements that had to be made for safety purposes, and the mission went forward and
expended the resources to get these done before filing a renewed application for relief.
In here, you'll see a grade on the floor level, I mean, I'm sorry, on the street level
that gives access, emergency access out of the building from the lower level,
um that was a requirement uh this is the latch at the lower level that opens up to give you
access to the street and if you look here this picture here will show you uh the ladder that
gives people access out through that window well out to the street level for emergency access
counselor can i ask you a question yes sir that window well does it have a drain at the bottom of
Yes, it does. And it was an existing drain. It's my client has conveyed to me.
It still operates?
Yes, it does.
Thank you.
And then A11 is the required project information form submitted with the appeal. And A12 and
related is to the community notice that was submitted as well as well as the proof of
mailing that was done by the client showing the payment and the notice of mailing the
U.S. Postal Service. With that, I would like to turn it over to asking questions directly
to the applicant um mr jenkins is here with me so i would like to have him sworn in and go through
his testimony with regards to the request for this variance yes sir please uh identify yourself
for the record yes my name is reverend baron jenkins i'm the executive director of chosen
300 ministries spell your name b-r-i-a-n excuse me i'm an initial c last name jenkins j-e-n
K-I-N-S. Thank you. You sort of affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth from nothing but the
truth? I affirm. Mr. Chairman, I'm certainly going to let the applicant make his presentation. I just
want to note that I still have not seen, there's been a statement that the coordinating RCO has
done a letter. I don't see it. It was not part of the applicant's presentation. So I'm a little
bit confused as to whether there's an RCO letter or not. The letter I saw was in opposition.
Sharon's working on it. Thank you. I just found it, Mr. DeMarco. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. This is the letter in opposition.
In opposition? Thank you. Yes, the original letter was in support. I believe the more recent one is in opposition.
No, hold on one second.
Ms. Saleta, do you have this letter?
I literally just got this yesterday.
I apologize.
I'm now having trouble opening the attachment.
it's it's going to take me a few minutes i thought that the original that there were
originally letters in support from both the coordinating rco and from the i believe the
24th ward and that they subsequently changed their position if i have the timing of that wrong i will
um i will take that back i just need to be able to go through
the documents it will take me a few minutes i apologize
us. I'm under the understanding that the coordinating RCO is PBC. But Richard, I mean,
I don't want to stop the proceeding here now to email this to you. Are you able to read it on the
screen? I appreciate that. This looks to be a letter dated the date of the RCO meeting.
It does not reflect the vote that was taken.
This looks like an old letter to me.
I'll let you make your presentation, but note my objection, Mr. Chairman.
This does not appear to be a letter reflecting the meeting that was held on June 14th.
And I know that it's dated for June 14th.
So how could they have done the letter the day of the meeting, which was held in the evening?
And the vote was tied.
So I'm baffled by this letter and what's represented on it, and this really does.
This letter and what's represented on it, and this really does dovetail with my objections to the process that I included in my letter, which was sent last week, the RCO is a homeless advocacy group, and they're chairing and holding as a coordinating RCO a meeting based on an application for a homeless shelter.
So you see why I raise these issues. Listen, I'll wait till my turn to go. I'll let Mr. President make his presentation. But this kind of confirms my objections to the RCO in this matter.
And this is Sharon again. I don't know whether I'm going to make this more or less complicated. I'm looking at a letter from West Palton Saunders Park RCO. It's dated June 28th, and it is in opposition. I will send that to you.
I believe we have those. Mr. DeMarco forwarded those last week or Monday.
Mr. Brown, I believe, is on this hearing, and he can speak to the letter that he authored.
So I note Mr. DeMarco's objection, and hopefully he'll have the opportunity to hear Mr. Brown speak.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. Jenkins, can you please state your full name for the record and address?
Sure. Brian Jenkins, Executive Director of Chosen 300, 3959 Lancaster Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19904.
Thank you. And you had the opportunity to hear what I presented on behalf of the applicant prior to your testimony today.
And do you believe that was true and correct and you adopt that as your own testimony?
Can you state to the board what your current profession is?
I am the executive director and pastor of Chosen 300 Ministries.
And can you tell us what Chosen 300 Ministries' mission is?
Chosen 300 is a mission church where you started back in 1996.
We distribute meals and services to those that are homeless and dealing with food insufficiency.
The organization distributes about 150,000 meals a year throughout the Philadelphia region, including West Philadelphia, Center City, and Pottstown as well.
We also do job training, computer labs.
We have expungement services.
We have barbershops.
We have job training.
We've recently done clinics for COVID-19 for vaccinations to ensure that the population
that we serve are vaccinated.
So we provide a spectrum of services to be able to move people towards self-sufficiency
out of homelessness.
And can you explain to me, to the board briefly, what the proposed use is for the request for
this variance?
So the proposed use is for what we identify as a personal care facility. I know there was some confusion for the first refusal that came from L&I that they indicated personal care home, but we never requested for personal care home.
We requested for personal care facility for group living, and it is an overnight care facility in which we will have 20 bunk beds with 40 adult men to be able to provide a place of transition for them to move towards self-sufficiency.
They will be provided with wraparound services, including case management, job placement, job training, and expungement services, and just a consortium of services to move them towards self-sufficiency.
The goal is to be able to provide a six-month program for them to be able to get up, which would include a savings plan, so that way they'll be able to get their own apartment and afford their own first-month rent security deposit.
Now, do you believe this is a natural extension of the services that Chosen 300 currently provides?
Absolutely. It's been always the long-term vision to be able to provide the transitional piece that is necessary to get people ahead.
We've been very successful in the services that we provide.
However, there is a barrier to a lot of folks who are experiencing homelessness that once they get a job, they don't have a place at night to lay their head, and they don't have that next step to be able to move forward and to be able to get their own place because they're trying to figure out where I'm going to lay my head down at night.
and they're also don't have the case management that walks alongside of them and so although
we're able to provide it you know touch and base when they come in when they're in a six-month
program they're able to be more dedicated to the process and be able to make sure that they're
moving towards self-sufficiency and reaching their goals. Is there a need for this in West
Is there a need for this in West Philadelphia?
Philadelphia? Oh, absolutely.
Oh, absolutely.
On the
The homeless population is actually growing in West Philadelphia, but also we're dealing with other factors that are about to come on the horizon with the elimination of the additional unemployment.
In addition, the moratoriums on evictions are about to end.
And so we anticipate there's going to be a large amount of folks that are going to be moving into the homeless population or losing their homes and just needing a hand up to be able to get back on their feet.
Now, the target population, a lot of these individuals currently receiving services from Chosen 300?
Absolutely. So we serve upwards of about 120 persons per evening when we serve our meal and also the various services we have during the course of the week.
And so we've developed relationships with these folks so that way that we can kind of target, okay, who is ready for this next step.
This is not an open wide program where anybody can just drop in.
This is not a drop in service.
This is a program to design to transition people and they have to follow a program in order to maintain the program.
We're not accepting people that are chronic drug addicts.
We do not have the services for that.
There's programs for that where they can go to a drug treatment center, and then hopefully maybe after they become sober or things like that, and they've shown a track record that they're interested in moving ahead, then maybe they can become eligible, but not dealing with a chronic drug addict or dealing with people that are chronically mentally ill.
We do not have the capacity for that.
This is not for that program.
This program is for people who are at that point of readiness, that I'm ready to accept
employment, I'm ready to move ahead, and I'm ready to move to the next step.
And within that six months, while we're getting them gainful employment, we can transition
to them where they can have the savings plan and get ready to get their own apartment.
Very recently, we had several job fairs, one of them with UPS, which is one of our major
contributors, and we were able to get 20 people hired and move towards a job at $19 an hour. So
those are the type of things that we're going to be working on to making sure these folks move
towards self-sufficiency. And do you have a plan that you put together to address the screening
that's necessary to make sure you have the right applicants? Absolutely. There's two parts of the
screening. One, as I mentioned earlier, a lot of the folks that will be entering this program are
people that we already deal with. And so we would have a chance to assess over a long-term period of
time, you know, or at least a reasonable amount of time, their behavior, you know, their interest
in moving ahead and things like that. But also we are going to outsource the intake process as far
as from a mechanical standpoint or a technical standpoint, rather. For instance, programs such
as Bethesda or Project Home, we have not determined which route we're going to take. We do, we cannot
really apply until we actually get a zoning and a place for them to be able to stay. However,
the intake process is important because it allows us to be able to track, did a person do something
violent at another facility? Did, you know, did they get pushed out of facility for a certain
reason that caused harm to other people? So we don't want to accept that kind of person
into this facility. We want to try to accept people that are ready to move ahead.
let's say that person can't have a past from 20 years ago something happened in their lives
they've shown the track record where they haven't had a problem then we're able to address that
and do you have staff with chosen 300 to launch this program that have experience in the services
that you're going to be providing to these individuals absolutely you have several folks
that are actually engaged on first of all alicia thomas who is one of our special events coordinator
She actually has previously worked for Old First Church, which is actually a fourth in race.
Well, I think it's fourth in race. It's actually an old city.
And so that's just a perfect example of how this type of facility can intermingle with the community and be very successful and also help the community relieve the plight of homelessness within the community and also give people a leg up.
But she's worked for several years with that organization, but then she came over to Chosen 300.
She has worked with us and has worked with the population as well.
We also have Sharika Douglas, who is a nationally certified food and safety specialist and OSHA specialist and also has a background in toxicology and infectious diseases.
She has really put a lot of our safety plans in place to make sure people are being screened properly, especially during the COVID and post-COVID environment as we transition out.
I mean, we're still dealing with COVID and even with the rise of the Delta virus, a version of the virus is coming out.
We have to be ever so careful to make sure that we're not being a hub for the COVID virus.
So we have screening procedures where they have to be checked for temperature when they come in,
they're questioned when they come in every night.
And this is something that we do with our volunteers currently now to make sure people remain safe.
currently now uh to make sure people remain safe um so uh those are those folks you have also have
So those are.
several ministers on staff um to provide counseling um to provide aid and to make sure that they're
going the right direction we also partner with an organization called set together west philadelphia
that provides case management services we partner with christian legal centers of philadelphia which
provides attorneys that provides expungement services so if a person comes in and they do
have a background like there's a misdemeanor that's you know pretty frivolous um there was
one lady that came to us that was 72 years old, had a larceny charge for stealing an egg in 1972
because she didn't pay for an egg that was undercooked and she couldn't get a job. And so
that's the kind of things that folks go through that prevents them from getting employment and
can wind them up in a state of homelessness. You mentioned COVID-19. Has that impacted your
mission and the services you're able to provide? Absolutely tremendously. You know, as is shown in
the media that actually one-fifth of all churches actually now have closed down completely. Some
are struggling to get back, and we're no different. We're a missing church, but we
depend upon the volunteer base tremendously to be able to use our building effectively,
and right now at the West Philadelphia location alone, we're used to having about 100 volunteers
pass through in the week. We're now getting like 10 to 20 pass through in the week, and so we
haven't been able to have indoor dining since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis. We're hoping at
some point that we can start that back up again. But the ability to be able to function as an
organization has been truly affected by the COVID-19 virus and has prevented us from being able
to use our facility in full because of the fact that there's not a lot that we can do inside the
facility. Most of the things that we are doing outside, even our Sunday morning worship right
now, since March of last year, we have not had one Sunday morning service in that building.
All of our Sunday services have been occurring in Love Park at Center City, Philadelphia.
Speaking of the personal care facility specifically, that's going to be the lower level?
That is correct. That is the lower level.
And has lower level been effectively been able to be used by the admission since you bought it
in 2010? Actually we have had no use for the lower level since 2010. Once we had a COVID vaccine
center down there but very rarely do we and you know once in a while there's an event but it's
very hard to you know to do things at that lower level. Mostly everything occurs on the main floor
particularly our worship service and our dining services that happen on a regular basis. Are you
aware of whether or not this board is given zoning relief in the form of the use variants
due to hardship related to COVID?
Absolutely.
There's a property in the corner,
which is at 3965 Lancaster
that is zoned by, I believe,
a Sam Realty or something of that nature.
They actually requested a variance
because of the fact that-
Well, I'm going to object to relevance.
Why are we talking about my client's property?
We're actually talking about the zoning board
and a previous approval that occurred
because of the fact that they applied for a variance.
To oppose.
Now, I don't know.
Mr. Chairman, I don't know why this is relevant.
I mean, they opposed to by crime.
With an offer of proof, Chairman, I'd be happy to explain why it's relevant.
There was a use.
That's a multifamily property.
It's a completely different case.
It was, but they had a requirement of retail or commercial on the first floor,
and they asked for a relief for use of the first floor to be converted to residences,
which was granted by this board, I believe, in February of 2021.
And the argument presented at that hearing was due to...
Right, but your client opposed it, and it's completely different.
Look, note my objections, Mr. Chair.
I don't know why we need to...
Exception, nobody?
Please proceed.
Thank you so much.
Excuse me, counsel.
Excuse me.
Just excuse me.
While you're having this discussion, can you put up on the desk the floor plans?
We were going to get to that, but I'll do that right now.
Thank you, Tom.
This is the wrong file.
Can you enlarge it?
Can you enlarge it?
I just did.
I just did.
Does that help, Mr. Homer?
Yes. Let me ask, who prepared the plans?
The plans were prepared by Livingston Group Architects.
Thank you.
So can you please describe to the board what the lower level is showing here with regards to the
proposed use? Sure. So over to the right there, that is the actual room where the residents would
be staying. There's 20 bunk beds, which would accommodate 40 persons. They are strategically
marked at six foot apart. So that way that it does provide ample space for people to be able
to get around, but also to decrease any potential for, you know, spread of the virus and things of
that nature. As we progress, I'm sure things will be more sufficient when it comes to the virus
itself. However, it does provide six feet of space in between each bed. Over to the, as we go out of
the door over here, we have an open area and there is a storage room, which actually used to be the
old bolt to the bank. And then there is a shower bathroom area there. And then going through that
door, there is a laundry room there. And then out the, there's a door that's there off the laundry
room that goes up the steps and goes out the back towards Mount Vernon Street. And then there's a
utility room, which people don't go in, of course, it's the boiler room where you have the heater
and the hot water heater and things of that nature.
If we come back to the room itself,
over here where the cursor is,
there is a window there.
It was an old window that was already there
with an existing window well.
It was covered up with a plywood
and two pieces of plywood with some cement in between.
We had a window person replace the window.
and then also cleared out any debris that was in the window well, and then, you know, replaced the grate.
There was an old grate that was below the cement that we pulled out and then replaced the grate with a smaller one,
but that was within, you know, the requirements of the 36 inches wide.
Excuse me. Excuse me, Pastor.
What percentage of the building is in the ground?
so um when you have the lower lower level um there is about maybe about about two feet that
is above the ground and then the uh rest is uh below the ground i think the total height of that
room is about um at nine feet in some places they have columns that go down so some places
is eight feet some places is nine feet a bit um it seems to me that the original building was a bank
and the bank building is usually a secured building which means that it's difficult to
get in and to get out well actually let me uh if you don't mind the reuse may not be the best
i'm sorry i didn't i didn't hear the last part of your question i apologize
The reuse, the occupancy reuse may not be the best for that particular building.
So if I can answer there, we actually did already get approved for occupancy previously for actually a capacity of 100 people below here, but we never used it because there was really couldn't come up with the use for it.
However, there is actually four ways of exit, and if I can just re-point those out to you real quickly.
There's the window well that we mentioned here that we've, you know, installed the ladder, and that with a grate that does open.
It's actually hard aluminum, so it's very light, so people can easily open it and get out.
Over to the right of that, there's a stairwell that actually goes upstairs to the front door,
and there's also a window in that stairwell that people can you know go through as well
so you have that there for the emergency as well and then there's a second stairwell over to
the left there which they can go upstairs and either they can go out the back door on the
first floor they can go out the front door on the first floor and then we have our fourth exit there
where's the exit where that goes out to Vernon Street if it's possible one of my representatives
is actually at the facility right now.
And she is prepared on camera
to be able to do just a virtual tour real quick.
So you can actually see the setup of the room
um the uh setup of the room and also um the exits and all of that if it pleases uh the
and also the exits and all of that.
If they please just.
board i would love to be able to do that it's important to mr chairman i would object to that
mr chairman i mean uh uh that's the hard to authenticate it's the well what's up to the
board. I mean, okay. No, my objection. I'm not sure that that's something that you know.
Do you want us to continue or do you want us to reach out to the person for the visual tour?
Mr. Chairman, please proceed. You say you're calling somebody to work?
You are there. There's a what my assistant there is at the building now. She's actually
ready waiting her name is Claire Hoppin
she's actually on now
and we can have her raise her
hand and you can grab her and
she can take a give you a quick virtual
tour. I don't think we
I don't think we need that
does the board want to see it or
well I think I can understand a
bank building being
an architect myself. I think
we okay with it thank you. I'm okay
thanks
anything else
counsel
Yes. Do you believe that this use is appropriate for this area of the building?
Absolutely, because it provides, there's plenty of ventilation, there's plenty of light.
I'm going to object. He's not an expert. It looks like he's giving architectural testimony.
So noted.
it yeah okay um as far as the uh use it keeps them separated from uh the main worship hall and
allows them to have uh you know a reasonable amount of privacy but also allows us to be able
to provide uh the group instruction um we can also um make sure that we provide effective case
management and really get people moving ahead so it is the best place for it it's really hard to
put beds up in the worship area um the worship area um you know it has uh in the music equipment
and those kinds of things and then also the uh uh we have dining uh during the week when we can get
back ever we get back into the building um and then uh in addition the upstairs is offices so
it is the only place um where uh we could effectively carry out um what the purpose of
our mission is um will the variance if granted adversity impact the public health safety or
general welfare um absolutely objection same objection so noted you know the i'm not sure
what the objection is but i am an expert in homelessness i've been providing services more
than 25 years if the objection is to giving zoning and planning testimony as from a non-planner
do you believe sir in your experience in providing services to the community
right that the uh this would be a benefit to the community uh absolutely so uh as i mentioned
earlier the amount of homeless people that are in the west philadelphia community now we're serving
about 120 but as we continue to see uh the decrease of unemployment the elimination of
moratoriums on evictions we're going to see a growth in folks that are going to in need of
these services so what happens is that if we have 120 people that are currently coming in to have a
meal. We release those folks out to the street after the meal. The reality is now is that we
would actually be able to keep 40 of them inside in a control program to be able to move them
towards self-sufficiency, but also close the back door, you know, open the back door up for
homelessness where they can actually get out of it. There's plenty of people coming into
homelessness, but not a lot of back doors for them to get out. The other thing is that if we
are approved we will be the one of the only um male uh facilities in the west philadelphia
community there is a few services that are already being provided for women and children
um but there has been a true neglect for uh the homeless men in the community and that's
why we're seeing growth so this is going to provide a tremendous relief to the community
and also uh give them an opportunity to get off the streets excuse me just one more question on
basement is that basement currently sprinkled it is not a sprinkles there is fire uh fire alarms um
in the basement right now um but no but no sprinkler there's no sprinkler service thank you
and uh one of the variances was also for uh parking um is the the type of uh guests that's
coming here typically going to be driving to a homeless shelter no they're they're homeless people
they're pretty much folks that are living on the street so they would have no need for parking
so would not increase in the need for parking in the community
And we addressed the letters of support.
and we uh we address the uh letters
Did you want to address the response to the letters in opposition while you're testifying
of what the change from the RCOs sent to the recent letters, Palton and the...
Absolutely.
So in the last RCO meeting with the People's Emergency Center, who was the coordinating
RCO. We re-explained what the project was and went over everything in detail. There were a few people
that raised a question that it should have been a that we presented as a six-month program
and not a year-round program and the six months language came from where we presented that
we intended that people that were in the program would be able to transition
in a six-month period so it would be like a rotating um a door where as people come in
we get them better we get them into our programs get them into their own place and then more people
would come in they were under the oppression uh that it was um only supposed to be a six-month
seasonal program which was not the case um however um and we had agreed to um a provisio i believe
it's called provisor where we would agree to make it a seasonal if that's what the community would
be acceptable to but that was the change with a few of the RCOs we also they also were concerned
about a plan and we have presented this plan now at four different RCO meetings before the
zoning board previously what the plan was what the intake process was how we intended to proceed
forth. And we even mentioned about air conditioning. And so I know that it was not just a six-month
program because, you know, we mentioned that our intention was to make sure that we put air
conditioning before the summer season came about. But we did respond to all the concerns. There was
also concern about safety. And, you know, we assured the community the steps that we take as
far as the intake process. But also, I think one of the challenges is that there is a tremendous
amount of fear and stigmatism when it comes to homelessness. And it often points to the idea is
that all homeless people are criminals, they're violent, they're drug addicts. And it's the same
kind of stigmatism that we put on Muslims, same stigmatism that we put on people with
alternative sexual lifestyles, same positions that we put on people of color. These are the
same stigmatism that we put on people in general anytime people don't look like us or have what we
have. Just because people are poor does not make them violent. Just because people are down on
their luck doesn't mean that they're going to be a problem to society. I know rich people that are
problems to society. So it doesn't based upon what your status is. It's based upon the individual.
But we are working to make sure that people who want a leg up and want to make sure that they can
get out of their circumstance, we can provide them with that avenue and that transition.
You mentioned the proviso. Are you willing to limit the services from a seasonal basis from
October through April? Absolutely. I mean, our goal is to work with the community. And we've
been in the community now, actually, since 2008, we actually started at the Mill Creek Baptist Church.
And then in 2010, we purchased a building in West Philadelphia, finally opened it in 2015.
but we've been in the West Philadelphia community since 2008 and we've been a positive force of the
community. This year during even during the pandemic we distributed over 112,000 boxes of
food to people that were dealing with food insufficiency so we have worked with the community
constantly and did our best to make sure that we remain the positive impact and not a negative.
you're aware that Mr. DeMarco had submitted a letter June 24th raising objections to the PEC
letter of support are you are you aware of that yes I am can you address what what happened at
that meeting were you present at that meeting I was present at that you presented that meeting
I did and what what happened at that meeting regarding the voting well there's two things
One is that the PEC actually is the coordinating RCO.
They called the meeting.
They presented on Zoom.
We did make it available where people could come into our building that did not have Zoom
or did not have the technology to be able to access the meeting where they could come
in and participate as well.
And they were residents of the community.
The vote was carried out on the Zoom.
And the people that were present in the building, they actually filled out a voting slip and
they signed it, include their address, and submitted that over.
and we submitted that over to PEC and scanned it um and so those people there were 23 people that
were present um in the room so um you know and uh and I know that
into the other room. So, you know, and I know that Mr. DeMarco has decided to laugh at that
point, but I think the challenge often is that people that are voting that are poor and of color
often are denied their vote and their participation in the process because of their status. However,
these people have the right and the ability to vote if they live in the community. And so that's
number one. The number two is that the other issue was that PEC's bias, and the reality is
that PEC does provide services to those that are needed in the community, but actually that would
not make them a bias. What that would make them as an expert to really evaluate the program to
determine if it's effective. However, one of the things that I was very proud of PEC, they actually
abstained from voting, which they could have voted with no problem, but they actually abstained from
voting to make sure that there was no concern or bias. And they conducted meeting in a very
professional manner and allowed everyone to speak and allowed everyone to stress their concerns.
There was also a concern raised about not identifying the operator of the screening
company at the time of the RCO meeting. And you've already testified to that, but I just
want to reiterate, you're unable to contract with someone until you have the actual use
approved that that is correct um so it's you can't request for a contract and you don't have a place
or um the use permit to be able to um carry out what you're trying to do you can't just kind of
put in the cart before the horse um you can't have a sign a contract for something that does not
exist as of yet um first we have to get the zoning um then we also have to go through license and
inspections um there's a lot of steps to get through to be able to get this done um at this
point in junction we're trying to get permission for the use. With that I have no further questions
from Mr. Jenkins. May I cross-examine Mr. Chairman? Yes you may. Thank you. Let me start with the last
bit of testimony. Am I to understand, Mr. Jenkins, that you had 23 people in your building that were
allowed to cast a vote in the Zoom meeting on behalf of the application? That is correct.
All right. So you brought people to your building. They were in your building, in the room where you
were present, and they casted votes in favor of this project? When you're saying that I brought
them um i provided flyers out to the community um just as i provided a flyer on the door of your
clients um that provided the information where they could either attend in person or they could
come on zoom um and uh the entire community was informed and also we just sent out 134 letters
or 35 letters to the community informing them of the meeting so anyone was welcome to come it was
not a closed door. Anybody was welcome to come in and be able to participate in the meeting. These
were residents in the community that have decided to come and cast their vote. Well, Mr. Jenkins,
how did the RCO know whether they were residents or not, if they were in your building, under your
control? They actually provided their address and phone number, and so the RCO could have, if they
liked to, to call every single person if they wanted to. I'm not sure exactly what they did.
However, same verification that they provided to other people that participated in the meeting, I'm sure they provided that same verification.
So you did not provide the addresses to the RCO, and the RCO counted them, even though you did not provide that information to the RCO, correct?
Actually, I did provide that information to the RCO.
The voting slip actually required them to put their address and phone number on it.
It was scanned.
All of that was sent to the RCO.
Well, the vote that I saw on the screen, that was conducted at the end of the meeting, showed a tie vote. So you added these individuals after the meeting, correct?
No, during the meeting, right at the end of the meeting, I mentioned in which you were on that meeting, so I'm not sure.
I was, and it was a tie vote.
I think you might have convenient amnesia, but what happened at the end of that meeting is that.
After the vote was cast, I informed Kevin Brown, who was conducting the meeting, that there was 23 people that were in the room.
I took the video and spanned the room so he could see everyone that was in the room, and they also cast their vote.
And he said to scan those over, and I scanned them over.
All right. Well, is Mr. Brown available to be cross-examined on this issue, Mr. Chairman?
because I'll save it for him.
Is he available to be cross-examined as a witness in this?
Mr. DeMarco, it's my understanding that he is a participant in today's...
Mr. DeMarco, it's my understanding that he is a participant in today's proceedings as somebody that's available.
I didn't call him as a witness. He's not on my list.
All right.
You can have him test. He can test.
All right. Well, what I'll do is, what I'll do is, Mr. Chairman, I'll show you after I'm after when I get my turn to present,
I'll show you the screenshot of the vote that was taken at the RCO meeting.
And it'll be clear, you know, what's going on here.
but I'll continue with my cross of Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Jenkins, you gave, you currently serve the
homeless at this location, correct? I do. Okay, and you serve them meals? Yes. Where's the kitchen
on your site plan? I don't see a kitchen. It is a warming area. Our food is actually provided,
prepared off-site. There's 115 churches that are part of our network. There's also several
companies that are involved with our organization.
The food is actually prepared offsite and brought in.
Less than 10% of the food is actually prepared on site,
which is actually the requirement
in order not to have a commercial.
All right, but the refusal that I have for this case
does not mention either service of hot or cold food
or prepared or pre-packaged food.
That's something that's been added, isn't that right?
We actually already provide pre-packaged
and prepared foods at the location.
So the folks that would be coming in to the program would be coming into the normal meal that's already been approved.
All right. Well, where on your plan is the food served?
The food served on the main level, and that is on the upstairs that already exists, that is on the dining level.
All right. And that's not provided to the board or in your exhibits, correct?
Well, yeah, exactly.
Because of the fact that the overall personal care facility, that is on the lower level,
they would be coming in as people in the community already do and to be able to receive a meal,
just like anybody else currently already sees a meal.
So we're not adding to any service in that particular area.
And that's why it's not included on the plan.
All right.
Well, let me ask you this.
This existing use is a house of worship, right?
That's what the refusal says.
do you agree? The existing use is a mission church. And so, and there's a-
But do you agree that, Mr. Jenkins, do you agree that the refusal states the existing use as a
house of worship? It is a house of worship, yes. All right. And you don't dispute that description,
correct? That is correct. All right. And there's accessory offices as well, correct? That is
correct. All right. So there is an existing use at this property that is being operated by you on,
So I guess the first and second floor, which is a house of worship and accessory offices, correct?
That is correct.
All right.
So this new use would be the residential component for the homeless individuals that you do provide services to already, right?
That is correct.
All right.
So, Mr. Chairman, if it's all right, I'd like to ask Mr. Presman to stop his screen share so I can screen share so I don't have to make him scroll through.
and I'll do it myself
so I don't have to bother him.
Let's go right ahead.
Mr. Jenkins,
are you able to see on your screen
what would be your petition of appeal
to the zoning board in this matter?
That is correct.
Oh, you do see it?
Okay, very good.
So I'm going to read you the answer
to the first question
in which the answer,
and I'm not sure that you actually prepared this,
but bear with me
and let's see if we can get through this.
It says zoning causes a hardship as it gives us the inability to provide personal care for homeless and less fortunate in the community.
Restricts us from raising additional revenues from overnight services.
Did you see that?
See that there?
All right.
So the need for the residential service is based on your request to receive additional revenue from the state.
Isn't that right for the residential services?
No, it's not just, I'm sorry, funds from the state.
The reality is that people have already invested in this program.
We actually have $30,000 of contributions.
One is from actually Whippus Bank to actually provide beds for the overnight facility.
Two additional funders also provided funding to make sure that the floors could be resurfaced
and the windows could be put in.
And so that way, if we did not be able to carry this out, those funds would have to be returned.
In addition, the reality is that our funders have contributed to this organization with the anticipation that we would begin an overnight setting to be able to transition people and provide additional services because there is a continual barrier for people who are in homelessness that if they do not have a bed, often they cannot progress easier than if they were just out on the streets.
In addition, the reality is that our funders have.
So therefore, the goal is to be able to transition people. The reality is that our revenues in general are based upon us carrying out the vision that has been proposed to our community.
So you have been raising money in anticipation of receiving this variance?
Absolutely.
All right. So you've been telling people that you need money from them in order to provide residential services to homeless, and you don't even have the variance yet. Isn't that right?
So let me provide some additional clarity to you.
If you remember at the last zoning...
Well, I think my question is clear, Mr. Jenkins.
You asked a question, I'm going to answer it, okay?
I hope so.
All right.
One at a time.
One at a time.
At the last zoning hearing, not the one where we had the continuance, but the previous one,
there were several requests for us to make sure that there was a window in.
There was also concern about the appearance of lower level.
We refurbished the floors.
We spent $23,000 on refurbishing the floors.
We put in the window.
And then again, like I said, we did secure funding to be able to get the beds.
The reality is that we anticipated that the zoning was going to be approved based upon
the hardship.
And as I stated before, there's no difference between the hardship that we have of not being
able to use our lower level than your client has about using the lower first floor. Mr. Jenkins,
you're seeking a variance today, not my client. You understand that? The board has already issued
a variance for your client for the lower level based upon the same concern that you do not have
the ability to use a portion of the building just as we do not have ability to use a portion of our
building so we're seeking for a variance just like mr jenkins mr jenkins do you understand
that you're requesting a variance today and not my client you understand that perfectly understand
all right you didn't answer my question did you will you admit that you've been raising money
in the anticipation of receiving a variance today absolutely all right answer that mr demarco very
Very well, thank you. Mr. Jenkins, you will get additional funding from some either state,
municipality, if you receive the variance today, right? That is correct. It's designed to be able
to provide the funding needed to provide staffing, to provide the services, to provide bedding, to
provide laundry services, and all the things that are needed to be able to transition these folks.
We are not in the business of making money.
We're in the business of being able to transition people's lives.
But also the reality of the hardship is the fact that the environment has changed completely where the worship services that we traditionally have, we haven't been able to have since the beginning of March.
And with the COVID-19 virus continuing and with the expansion of the Delta version, the reality is we do not see any light at the end of the tunnel of when we're going to be able to have full-blown worship services in our facility.
Mr. Jenkins, you're a church, right?
We are, again, a mission church, as I stated.
All right. Nothing prevents you from practicing your religion within your building. Is that right?
Actually, in all respect, we have not been able to provide worship in our building since March of 2020, since the beginning of the coronavirus.
Also, the other reality is that most people do not want to come to worship anymore because of the fact that they are still in fear of the virus.
One out of five churches in the United States have closed down, and most churches are operating at less than 30%.
And how is it that you're going to protect these individuals who are going to be a homeless population?
How are you going to protect them from the coronavirus?
Are you going to be testing everybody for COVID-19?
Are you going to let me talk now? Did you ask a question?
No, I'm going to make sure I ask a question and you understand it.
Are you going to test everybody for COVID-19?
Okay, you ready for me to answer?
Okay, all right.
So, as I mentioned earlier, we do have on our staff a person that has a background in toxicology and infectious diseases.
And they screen, just like we screen our volunteers when they come in, they are tested for temperature.
They are screened with questions.
But also, we have been a vaccination site to make sure that our population is vaccinated.
Now, we cannot force people to be vaccinated.
I want to make that clear.
However, we have been persuasive and the population that we served actually somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of all homeless people have actually been back.
actually somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of all homeless people have actually been vaccinated.
And so we're very positive to see that we can make safety precautions and we have taken much
precautions to make sure that people remain safe. All right, but you're able to conduct worship
services at your property now in light of the removal of the mask requirement and those
removal of all the restrictions. You can conduct your house of worship as of today, correct?
There's a difference between can and having the ability to.
Ken says that government has given you permission to be able to have worship.
The ability to do it is the reality is that most people will not come back to worship right now because of the fact that they are still afraid of the coronavirus.
So but the reality is our worship service occurs on the first level.
What we're applying for today is a variance for the lower level, similar to what your client applied for, a variance on the lower level of their building.
And so you have to understand is that because of the coronavirus, we have.
Mr. Jenkins. Yeah, I'm sorry. Mr. Jenkins, are you telling this zoning board that the request for a single residential apartment on the first floor is similar to a group living use for homeless individuals?
Is that the argument you're making to this board?
No, that's not the argument.
Well, he keeps mentioning it.
Can I say something, Richard, please?
What he's saying is that the relief requested for variants, the hardship sought on the owner of the 3965 Lancaster Avenue,
was hardship based on the inability to use the commercial space by renting it to a third party.
So therefore, they ask for relief in the form of a variance to convert that to a residential unit, which is not permitted in that zoning district.
And your client opposed that variance.
It doesn't matter whether you supported it or opposed it.
It's the same type of relief.
You're saying that there's hardship.
That's the analogy, not the number of units, right, and not the services.
Your client's doing it for profit, which he's completely entitled to do.
My clients do service to the community. Mr. Jenkins, will you be performing criminal background checks on the individuals who you intake into this?
You had mentioned, let me rephrase it. You had mentioned that you don't you're not going to be servicing individuals that you that have a history of problems, so to speak.
Is that correct? So as I mentioned, we are going to be doing, we're outsourcing our intake services
to either Bethesda or Project Home. They have an intake process where they evaluate the person
that is coming in to see if they've caused any other problems in any other facilities throughout
the Philadelphia region. But in addition to that, part of the job placement program is that they do
have to answer a questionnaire to see if they've had a criminal background. Then we also have
expungement services where we're able to pull their records. So we're not going to answer your
question. You're not, you keep testifying. I wish you would just listen to the question and answer
it. Would you please? My question was, and you answered yes. My question was, you don't plan
on accepting individuals who have a history of criminal behavior, right? We're not going to
access to people that have violent backgrounds that attended other facilities and the intake
process is all right so let's force mr demarco mr demarco i apologize for interrupting mr pressman
mr demarco how much time do you think you're going to be needing i'm not much more your honor
i'm not much more uh mr chairman okay uh mr pressman do you guys have any more witnesses you
guys got a percent or we have uh two uh witnesses um from chosen 300 uh the project uh coordinator
and uh the two witnesses yeah i think we ain't gonna have time to hear them today
in the interest of time we got more cases that we gotta uh uh here so more likely this case will
be continued okay so mr demarco you say you got a few more minutes or yeah i only have a few more
a few more questions for Mr. Jenkins. So the question, want me to continue? I'm sorry.
Go ahead. All right. So Mr. Jenkins, the people who don't, who have that history that you say
that you'll, you'll be checking for that and you're not, you don't plan on serving those
individuals, they will then be rejected from the program into the neighborhood. Isn't that right?
Well, these are people already in the neighborhood. So they're, you know, they're just going to be
rejected from the program they can still come to our evening meals they can still receive services
but as far as housing if they've been at another facility somewhere and just say worst case
scenarios it might staff someone okay we're not going to have them stay here especially if it
OK, we're not going to have them stay here, especially if it happened, you know, if something happened maybe 20 years ago, they haven't had any incidents since then.
happened you know if something happened
We don't know what really happened. That's one thing.
But if someone has been in the facility over the last few years and something has happened that has caused a violent incident to occur at another facility, we're not going to allow them to stay there.
OK, and then they'll just walk out and go into the neighborhood, right?
Well, the reality is we have 120 people that come for a meal during the evenings,
and they go right back into the neighborhood, and they're already in the neighborhood.
So they're just going back to where they already were.
Is that the same with individuals who would test for actively using drugs or alcohol?
That would be the same scenario, would it not?
That is correct.
If anybody is chronically active, but the thing is that it's not just releasing them out into the community.
it's then finding services that fit their need because there are drug treatment centers that
people can go to and we do have folks that we deal with and collaborate with to make sure that they
can be placed in those programs we also work very well with the city outstreet's team um in
philadelphia and uh and get which is through self-help and those folks are also um receive
placement as well so it's not like they we're not just dumping them out in the street you can't we
can't help you at all um no we're going to make sure that people get services if we can get them
there. Mr. Jenkins, I'm almost done. I thank you for your time. I'll put the site plan up on the
screen. You don't show the number of bathrooms or the number of shower stalls in your floor plan
for this use, correct? Sure. So the bathroom, there's a men's room off of the bedroom there
That does have two urinals and one bathroom stall.
And I want to emphasize, too, is that this...
So three total?
Three total?
Excuse me, Counselor.
That's a building code issue.
The number of bathrooms is a building code issue.
But he's asking you for variants.
I think you might want to know how many bathrooms there are going to be for 40 people.
Okay, that's fine.
Ellen, I will make sure of that.
All right, that might be it, Mr. Chairman.
Hold on, let me just.
Oh, is there going to be some security, Mr. Jenkins?
You're going to have cameras?
Yes, there are security cameras actually throughout the entire building.
We'll be adding four additional ones for that particular room.
And if there's a fire, how do these people get out of the basement?
Who's going to help people, make sure people get out safely?
Overnight, there's going to be a minimum two people that are there.
And then upon their entry, they have four staff members.
And also upon their exit, there's four staff members.
When I'm saying entry and exit, the time that they come, there will be four people there.
Time that they leave, there's four people there.
So during their waking hours, there's four staff.
During their sleeping hours, there's two staff.
but um well on your plan where where would these people be in this on their on your floor plan
i'm sorry to interrupt here but um if i could call time on this one we still have a couple cases to
hear all right and we're going beyond the time okay gosh thank you chair sorry to interrupt
thank you yes that was my last question mr chairman would be where the staff would be to
help people get out in the event of an emergency in a basement like this. Okay. So I don't see it
on the floor plan. You want me to answer that real quickly? Please. Okay, there's an open area there.
That is where the staff would be. All right, I'm finished. Thank you for it. Thank you.
Thank you. So, guys, calendar number, for this case here, calendar number MI2020-002583, 3959 Lancaster Avenue. We'll do a resumption hearing on August 3rd at 9.30 a.m. Okay? August 3rd at 9.30 a.m. Good luck.
9.30, thank you.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Calendar number MI 2020-00012, 7158 Charisdell Avenue.
mr young has been promoted to panelists thank you
Thank you.
Mr. Young, please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, members of the board.
My name is Jeffrey Young.
Here on behalf of the applicant, Pastor Jay Monbram, my address is 3900 Ford Road, Suite
B Philadelphia PA 19131. Can you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but
the truth? Yes I do. And Q do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I agree to waive the reading however I cannot stipulate to its accuracy which I will
get into in the presentation. Okay 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 has been emailed, but I don't believe it was five days.
I believe it was three days before.
Sharon, you...
Is he able to...
That is your call, Sharon.
Was you able to, Shannon was, is everything in the, in the FOB?
Yes, we have everything at this point.
Council
I believe
last time you was in front of us
I guess
you didn't submit the right timing
I'm going to let
we're going to proceed this time
but next time please try to have them
five days in advance okay
please proceed
mr chairman i believe he froze
i'm sorry can you guys hear me go ahead okay um i'm sorry i my uh it blacked out so i didn't hear
um anything okay so i was saying that the last time you came in front of this board
you have submitted your uh your documents late as well okay
so we're going to let you slide this time but next time try to have them on
just so we could have time to review them okay thank you
uh mr jeffrey young this is tanya sunkett if i could request that you stop your video
and maybe that might um have a bearing on your um sound because we keep losing you
um so you can stop your video and the chair has allowed you to proceed so you can share
your screen now thank you my um zoom webinar says not responding at the moment okay here
we go now i'm back um i will stop the video and i'll share my screen all righty
i apologize for the technical issues but my zoom webinar says not responding yeah i'm not getting
i'm trying to stop your video on my end as well and it's not working um so we're gonna push this
back one let's move into the next case if that's all right okay sounds good with me chair okay
calendar number mi2020-001-196-7424 reverie street how are you working this entire time
Um, wow, this is crazy.
Mr. Jeffrey Young, we still hear you.
So I'm suggesting that you disconnect and reconnect.
Raise your hand.
We'll promote you again and try again.
But when we promote you, if you could leave your video off, only use your audio.
Thank you.
Thank you, because it's stuck on our end as well.
I'm sorry chair you can continue. Okay calendar number MI 2020-001-196-7424
Reverie Street.
anyone else anyone here for this case mr jen's been a promoter to panelists
i'm sorry um i i actually raised my hand because i thought i was next for i'm sorry i'm sorry my
apologies i'm sorry jason the gentleman who should be going forward hand is raised
Mr. Zeng is the last case.
Yeah, sorry about that.
No worry.
Mr. Zeng, if you could sit tight, we're going to leave you there,
but please keep your video off and your audio off.
Thank you.
All right.
Mr. Zeng has been promoted to a panelist.
Please forgive the error.
Hello, sir.
Please identify yourself for the record for your first and last name.
hello yes please identify yourself for the record uh good afternoon i'm zong zang z-o-n-g
z-h-e-n-g uh 74 24 revere street philadelphia pennsylvania 19152 okay uh you swear a firm
to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth i do are you the owner yes uh
have you met with the RCO? I have. Okay. So, all right. So, 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? I have, but might be some missing
documents. I could not get a copy of the tax complaints. Okay. What else?
and and and the letter from the rco i i tried to request that several times but didn't get the
answer sharon was you able did we receive any rco letter i did not receive one but the applicant
really has no control over that i will um look up the tax records for the property okay but if he
did, if you can confirm that he met with the RCO. Sir, who was the community group you met with?
Mayfair Civic Association. Okay. This was back in, I believe, August. Okay, Chair, if you will allow,
I can have the ZBA staff please search our email box for any documents from Mayfair Civic
association or that address but share as you wish we can always move forward um once we get the
information from ms saleta yep okay sir please proceed okay um uh you want me to screen share
sir yes please you got any plans okay i'm sorry here i'm very new to this uh not sure what am i
doing here um no problem sir i'll walk you through if you look at the bottom of your screen are you
on the computer yes if you look at the green button that says share okay you're going to click
on that with your documents already open and thereafter click on the documents you wish to
share. Is it showing? Nope.
there you go okay okay before you go on chair i can um confirm that the property is tax compliant
thank you sir please proceed okay so uh i'm here to get a um approval to uh build this carport um
uh behind um uh 7424 revere street uh i have a refusal letter um if i pull it up here
okay so the reason of refusal because of the size of um where it meets my neighbors
where it meets my neighbors for the carport.
for the carport.
It's required to be eight feet in width.
But I only have 0.5 feet for where it meets my neighbor's property line.
Let's see if I can pull up the...
Excuse me, this is Sharon again.
And the RCO did not send the letter to me, but they did send it to the RCO ZBA mailbox, and the position was they opposed.
They opposed, okay. Thank you.
Can you show us the picture, sir?
The picture for the carport?
Is it Sonja?
Is that it?
Is it billed already or that's it?
It's as it is right now.
is it a carport or a garage it's a carport uh carports only have roof
no sides no sides okay roof is all a carport has okay yeah i was not uh aware of that
so this can i show you like the picture of uh what the dimension
so if i if i if i um don't
put a solid
sidewalls
is that
would that meet the requirement of
carport as like this
I don't know if you can see that
whose carport is that
oh I just googled it
this is what I was
my goal was
well you see the wall down to the ground
but you need more opening in the side walls okay
but i doesn't believe you are the five the eight foot distance from the property line
Yes, I don't see how I'm going to do an 8-foot from the properly line when I have only, let me see here, if I meet 8-foot from each of my neighbors from left and right, I'm only left with maybe a 5-foot carport.
um mr holliman that was the basis for the refusal there's one zoning refusal for extending into this
minimum side yard width required is eight feet as you mentioned and this is proposed to be 0.5 feet
thank you you're welcome
yeah so the the carport itself uh what i was aiming for was 20 feet wide but if i push it to
eight feet on each side to the for my neighbors i'm only left with
four feet carport and i won't be able to fit a car in there
what did the oh so the community opposed the right
yes they did thank you
You say, isn't it eight feet from one side?
You said two sides.
Isn't your property, isn't your building on one side?
So there's a 7424 on one side and 7426 on the other.
74 24 on one side and 74 26 on the other uh we have a uh backyard where we all meet together
uh so you need eight feet from the from the opposite you need eight feet from the other
property line from from your neighbor's property line right so you can you make it closer to your
building. I'm not aware of that. I think what they were saying is from each of the property
lines on the sides, but not towards where it's closer to my building. I think they wanted
narrower. They don't want it this wide. Yes, Tanya? I'm sorry, Chair. I hate to interrupt,
But if I could offer a suggestion for this applicant to maybe allow him a short continuance so that he can review and determine if he wishes to proceed, because I'm not sure if he understands exactly.
But it's totally your call, Chair.
I'm sorry.
From what I understand is why the refusal is too wide.
Not that it was too far from my house.
Yes, it's not too far from your house.
It's too far from the side property line.
Right.
If it's too close to the side property line, it needs to be eight feet.
It is 0.5 feet.
And that's the ground for the refusal.
So you need more time to get somebody to help you with this?
um to help me explain this or um chair i'm not sure that if there's anything else that can be
done it's fairly straightforward he is too close to the property lines the neighbors oppose it
yep i mean my my neighbor's rate uh 74 24 and 74 22 they have no uh no problem with this
all right is there anyone else here that would like to speak on this matter
i see no other hands mr or has any questions yes mr chairman i think he needs more time
to figure out what he's talking about okay uh he doesn't he doesn't understand
i don't know what he doesn't understand i i sir i really don't understand what what is sir are
you doing the job or you got a contractor doing it i am doing the job myself okay you might gonna
have to get a contract with somebody that will assist you with this okay uh sir all due respect
i i don't really want to go forward with this it's been a year okay okay let's just vote on it then
planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard planning commission
this property is indicated for single family residential use on the city plan
the applicant has not demonstrated the necessary hardship regarding the requirements of the code.
We recommend that the requested variance not be granted. Thank you. Calendar number MI 2020-001-196
7424 Reverie Street. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no. All right, good luck. Calendar
number MI 2020, we're doing Oxford Street, correct? Yes. Calendar number MI 2020-003-237-7345
Oxford Avenue. How happened to my video? I'm sorry about that. Some happened to my video
there. One second. Mr. Jhin, there you go. I allowed you to have your video back, Mr. Jhin.
I know. I'm saying I have a virtual background video of something that's not me. So I've tried
to, pardon me one second while I correct that. All right, and now I should be in. Thank you.
There you go. Please identify yourself for the record. Yes. Hi. Good afternoon. Zenjen Z-H-E-N
J-I-N 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103 here on behalf of the
Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the African.
Captain.
Are you sure a firm to sell the truth, the whole truth, from nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
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?
I have.
Thank you.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We have a letter from the council office in support, I believe based on the RCO's feedback to the council, the councilman's office, Councilman Brian O'Neill's office.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
If I may, I'm going to go ahead and share the screen.
i have before you the cover letter for our submission we sent in the refusal councilman's
non-opposition letter photos plans tax clearance and related documentation to the application
this is an application for a use that is rather unusual but is fitting for this particular
property. Well, this is a residential RCA3 zone property. It sits on Oxford Avenue at a location
in a format that makes it viable for the use that has been proposed, which is actually an Asian
cultural exhibit and library of Asian documentation of the immigrants that have come from China,
as well as documentation, art, and other exhibits from China. In essence, a small museum
for Asian background and Asian culture. So the idea here isn't to make any substantial changes
to this beautiful twin house you see in the photograph here. What is going to be done are
primarily restructuring the interior rooms into individual exhibit rooms, which will contain both
family history, Asian art, cultural items, as well as documentation of the experience of various
Asian immigrants coming to America. So it is a joint effort by both my client's organization,
as well as organizations in China, Chinese Americans here in the United States working
together to kind of put documentation of our culture into one location as a way to give
the community of that area a way to reach out and visit and see Asian culture and experience
Asian cultural items. So there will be no residential use of this property at all.
The idea is to run this space essentially as a small museum. This is only half of two cases,
actually. The two addresses are connected in this twin home, but unfortunately they were
filed as two separate cases. So I'll be back again before the board another time with the
other half for the same exact purpose, which is, again, converting the individual rooms into
exhibit rooms and presenting cultural items. The organization that is in charge will monitor
the property. It is only going to be open during those hours where exhibits are open to the public.
However, majority of the upper floor rooms are likely to be initially used as a documentary
storage and library for information and history. So not all of the space would be open to the
public, but most of it will be once exhibits are set up. The property, again, has a large lot
with the possibility of providing parking in the future in the back. A parking lot was discussed
with the community as part of the process that we were trying to move forward with.
But at the present, there's no actual plan to put additional parking in.
The community actually was quite positive with the idea of preserving this building.
This will allow the organization to put money into the building, preserving it on the exterior
while making use of the space on the interior for the purpose of display and documentation.
So while this is an unusual request for an RSA3 building,
I would submit that this is not a use that would give any negative impact to the neighborhood.
It would also allow this otherwise vacant building to be once again...
It would also allow this otherwise vacant building to be once again revitalized and used in a way that would benefit the community and not cause any negative harm to the community.
So I would ask the board for positive review of this request.
And again, we will be coming back soon with the other half of the building for the same exact purpose.
So the overall twin will both be used as an Asian cultural exhibit hall if the board approves and once renovations are complete.
I'm happy to try to answer any questions.
It's very cold in my basement, so I might be a little shaky in my presentation.
I'm sorry about that.
No problem.
Does the board have any questions?
Anyone that would like to speak?
I see no other hands Mr. Plaza. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon Chair, Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission. This property is indicated
for single-family residential in the comprehensive plan. We see, we feel that the applicant has
demonstrated sufficient hardship. We have no
objection to the grantee of the variance.
Thank you. Calendar number
MI 2020-003237
Oxford Avenue. My vote is
yes. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck. Thank you. Have a good evening.
Likewise.
Alright, we're back to number
6. MI 2020-
0-0, 0-1-2, 7158, Torresdale Avenue.
Yes, thank you, members of the board.
You got it.
Mr. Young, please identify yourself for the record.
Yes, again, Jeffrey Young, attorney for the applicant.
My address is 3900 Fort Road, Suite B, Philadelphia, PA, 19131.
I have on the line here is the applicant, Mr. Jay Monbram, and his wife, Mrs. Alvanna Monbram.
okay uh you swear a friend to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
yes you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
uh again i i agree to waive the rating however we can't stipulate to the accuracy
okay and have you emailed okay i guess we already addressed that uh please proceed
thank you uh may i share my screen
again thank you members of the board um jeffrey young here on behalf of the applicant
um here uh is the table of contents uh going through the packet of material uh we have the
tax clearance at page two uh deed at page three current use permits uh refusals area map
zoning map, the plans, zoning notification letter, an RCO letter, and also pictures of the property.
Here is a tax clearance for Mr. J. Monbram issued by the Department of Revenue.
Here is the deed to the property titled to Mr. J. Monbram and his wife, Silvana Monbram.
the next exhibit um here uh is the current use permit for the property um so currently the
property is used as a church and was granted this use in march of 2019 our application today
is for an accessory signage should be placed upon the church
here's also a use granted in 2019 for a daycare center at the property however the signage
is not associated with the daycare use and here is a copy of the refusal the refusal states for
the erection of one internally illuminated static accessory flat wall sign and for the erection of
one accessory flat wall side flat wall led message board sign this is the part of the
refusal that we cannot stipulate to its accuracy for the flat wall led message board it is not for
the erection it is for the legalization of the flat flat wall led message board this sign was
previously installed by the applicant and applicant hired an electrician.
Because the property is a church, he was misinformed that there needs to be a zoning permit
for the flat wall message board. And so we are here today to ask for its legalization.
And so we are here today to ask for its legalization.
And there are three refusals all associated with the LED animated message board.
Here is an area map.
You can see there's an arrow pointing to where the property is.
We are a block away from a playground.
As you note here on this map, there are a number of commercial properties in this area.
This area is along Torres St. Avenue is a mix of both commercial and residential uses.
As you can see here on the zoning map, our property is currently zoned CMX2, and along
with most properties on our side of Torres St. Avenue.
here is a copy of our zoning plans for the sign we're asking for permission to install a 39 by
60 led animated and illuminated message board on our property as well as a permitted sign
underneath our message board with the name of the church.
Our message board is approximately 12 feet,
four inches above grade.
So it does not have a blinding effect
on anyone walking past or driving past our property.
Here is the notice letters that were sent to the RCO.
As you can see, this appeal was filed in 2019, and due to COVID and other reasons, you know, this appeal has been pushed back to today.
However, they did meet with the Tocconi Civic Association, and a letter is attached.
Here, the letter from the Civic Association explains the property history, being a CMX2
building. It was previously a funeral parlor.
There was some miscommunication amongst the applicant and the community about the meeting.
However, those things were squared away and the Civic Association submitted a letter.
Here, as you see with the provisals, I'm asking that the lights be turned off by 10 p.m.,
which is something that we agree with.
And there are a few other non-zoning-related issues with the proviso.
There seems to be a mistake on this letter to the board where they could oppose.
However, if you look at the actual tally, there were three in opposition, and two of those in opposition were not immediate neighbors who were not affected by our project.
And there was a five with non-opposition for our signs, with four neighbors being directly impacted within a 250-feet radius.
There's a current picture of the church with the sign installed. Again, as you can see, it's over 12 feet high, so there's no impact on pedestrians and vehicles driving past.
This is commercial properties, which is our neighbor to our east. If you can see, they have illuminated signs and lighting in their property.
this is directly across the street from us it's all commercial properties with the pizza store
the beer deli and a few others all having led lighting on their properties in their windows
again this this is the west view again our neighbor is a commercial property
with a gas station further to the west
and this is a picture of that gas station with illuminated signage
this gives you a sense of what the block looks like again it's a mix of a residential
and commercial block in the area of towards the avenue
and this is the 7200 block of towards the avenue again just to show that there's a mix of
uh of commercial and residential uses um these are some single family homes uh next to a bus
depot on torsdale avenue and directly across the street uh from that bus depot again uh
and directly across the street from that bus depot, again, a strip of commercial stores
with the check cashing plates having illuminated signage and digital signage.
Here's a closer picture so you can get a look at their digital signage.
Also, there's a further gas station with more digital signage at the corner of Toursdown
common which is you know one block north of us uh and also across the street here uh saint hubert's
um has a digital signage um as well um these are just pictures of the community um you know members
of the community the church is very active up in the community and provides um you know food
book bags things of that nature to the community members um this was these pictures were of course
pre-COVID. However, the church would like to remain active in the community once things
are able to open up again. And with that, I conclude my presentation and ask if there
are any questions. Does the board have any questions? No. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else
that would like to speak there are no hands at this time thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan
animated led signs can be a distraction to drivers in a pedestrian area this applicant has not
demonstrated sufficient hardship regarding the signage requirements of the code. Accordingly,
we recommend the requested variances not be granted. Thank you. Calendar number MI 2020-00012-7158
Torres Stout Avenue. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Good luck. Thank you,
be able to abort. My big excuse. Yes, you may. Thank you. I believe that concludes. Is there
anyone that felt that we missed their case? I see no answer. All right. That concludes.
have a good one everyone good night everyone thank you great job professor
happy 4th of July that's right happy 4th of July everyone don't blow your
fingers off see you bye