Hi, Clementa.
Can you put your name and address on the record, and then I will swear you in and spell your
last name?
Of course.
Clementa, C-L-E-M-E-N-T-A, last name A-M-A-Z-A-N, address is 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600
800-191-09. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, in all respects.
Thank you, you may proceed.
Of course, Alan will actually be presenting this project.
As it turns out, I'm having better luck
when it comes to technical support.
So I'm just going to be sharing the screen
and he'll be presenting this.
Okay, great.
Mr. Nockamson.
something is going on yes he's coming in now there's a pan of it okay
it's just not letting me promote
uh can you hear me i can hear you mr notkinson
you're still under it all right yes I'm actually going to be sitting on Clementa's my computer is
all messed up so I do apologize for that uh so and for some reason I'm sorry we're not able to
promote you no there's something wacky going on with my computer and so if you wish you could
just speak through it if that's okay yeah exactly I'm going to go through Clementa's so I do
apologize so um i'm going to go through this i'm gonna let's see so 23
um i'm going to go through this let's see so 2339 north 10th street you're going to see uh
our table of contents which is the notice of refusal a letter of support from the 37th
ward executive democratic committee i would say that they unanimously supported this
uh permit uh for a nearby property with similar support and approval by this board maps of the
area photographs of the property in the surrounding area i would point out that we had a photograph
that we saw on google earth in 2007 or 8 which showed that the property even though this is a
cmx property it showed when it was a where there was a building structure it was full residential
and that's what we're trying to do here uh plans and drawings um our meeting notice showing that
we had our community meeting oops uh deed to the application for appeal deed to the property and
certificate of tax clearance. I also have Bill Archer on the line, the owner's representative,
who will adopt my testimony. So first things first is our notice of refusal. This is a CMX2
property. All we're looking to do is swap out the commercial component with the residential component.
Three units are allowed as of right, but one of them need to be commercial. This is not a commercial
part of town. At least this street, we're nearby a commercial corridor on Germantown Avenue,
and the neighborhood wants to create the density to help support that commercial corridor
by giving residential support. Our letter of support from the 37th Democratic Ward. As you
can see, six people attended that meeting, all in support of it, including their executive board.
so attendees as well as their executive board support this project permit of uh that shows that
2316 north 10th street which is not too far away received support from this board as well as the
community you can see a zoning permit has just been issued this is a cmx2 property which allowed
for five residential units and eliminated commercial component again north 10th street
Well, we've been told by this community is that they want residential solely and then to have Germantown as their commercial portland.
Oops, sorry.
Maps of the area showing that, you know, we're orange all around other than CMX2 here.
but again this is more of a commercial area so we believe that you know again it supports
the commercial corridor in germantown area google map showing where we are in relation to germantown
avenue and then photographs of the property it's a little bit smaller but you know we're baking lots
we are not on the corner we're just one off you can see north 10th to the right of the property
again residential nature north 10 to the left of the property a lot of vacant lots though
this is our property 2339 north 10th street in 2007 as you can see this is a three-story brick
facade we're trying to replicate that by you know with our um with our design so our plans and
drawings. So, as you can see here, we have a brick facade. We're looking to put three
units here. So, you come through the first floor, you have a vestibule where you can
go have the first floor unit which is the first floor and lower level you go up a flight of steps
the second floor it's its own unit
and then the third floor the fourth floor are bi-level
and this is just proof of our mailing of our notice
we sent out to community so we had a well-attended community meeting on october 18th at 5 p.m
and again we had unanimous support we sent that notice out to 172 residents
within a 250 square foot radius with that being said i mean we have a certificate of tax clearance
or PLRD to the property, I would like my client, Bill Archer, the owner's representative,
the owner's representative to adopt my testimony and then you know we can
to adopt my testimony, and then we can answer anything.
answer any questions the board may have. That sounds good.
Mr. Archer?
Or it could be Robert. Hi Mr. Archer.
I'm not seeing. It could be it could also be a Mr. Dewey as well.
And Mr. Dewey's, um.
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, can you put your name on the record and can you spell your last name and I'll swear you in.
Yes, it's Robert Dewey, D-E-W-E-Y.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Dewey, you heard everything I stated today.
yes i did and is it true and correct yes it is and do you adopt it as your own testament
i do thank you does the board have any questions no better no is there anyone in the virtual
audience with any comments questions
no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use at this location
we feel the proposal represents an overuse additionally there is no hardship for regularly
sized or shaped lots accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance
okay calendar number 3230-2339 north 10th street my vote is yes
confessor plaza my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
thank you calendar three two um mr de chico are you back
okay calendar number three two three four twenty five forty septiva street
alan knockamson uh yes that's me again okay again okay put your name and address on the
records. Fill your last name. You're still under oath. Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nochamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N,
123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA 19109. Thank you. Do you agree to wait the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of 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 uh yes we do in all respects okay thank you you may proceed all right i'm going to
share my screen if you do not mind and i'd like to put on the record that the old richmond civic
Association has sent in a letter of opposition and Councilman Squilla has sent in a letter of
opposition. That is correct. Although I would say that you'll see from our presentation materials
this is a rather benign property or project. We're not looking to increase density. We actually made
inroads with the people who would be most directly impacted on that block and the individuals that
did attend the meeting. We have made good faith efforts to reach them. And for whatever reason,
they have not reciprocated. I don't know if they're online, but we would like to find out
what their issues are, which I believe are non-zoning related. So we're 2540 Sephiva Street.
We're a two-story structure. And it's a single family, you know, RSA 5. All we're trying to do
is put a third story on and this is you know really a situation where we do have an undue
hardship because we're trying to put a third story structure um as as it pertains to this property
and we can't because if we had to comply with the code we would not have a functional floor
plan on the third floor so from this a legal standpoint we're asking the board for for zoning
bearings. You'll see in our table of contents, our notice of refusal, correspondence from Old
Richmond Civic Association, correspondence from Councilman Mark F. Squilla, our petition,
our letter of support from the nearby neighbor. So we actually have a letter from the nearby
neighbor at 2542. My understanding is that we, although we personally could not get a hold of
My understanding is that although we personally could not get a hold of 2538 from our conversations with 2542, it does not seem that 2538 has any opposition, but we have not heard from them directly.
And then correspondence from Anjali Patel, the owner's representative, showing that we have made good faith efforts to actually, you know, reach out to the three individuals who were at that community meeting to find out what issues we have to deal with.
So we have maps of the area, photographs of the properties around the area, showing that it's not two photos in particular showing it's not uncommon to have three-story structures in close proximity.
We have photographs of those three-story structures, plants and drawings, and we'll go through it with the architect, Kevin Ryan of 24-7 Design, proof of our meeting notice, our application for appeal, our DTIF property, and the certificate tax credits.
So first things first, our notice of refusal. Again, this is an RSA 5 property. We are not trying to increase density here. We're just trying to create a 21st century functional single-family home in this part of town.
The first refusal that we have here is that the proposed roof deck access structure is located at the rear of the property. It has no setback while five feet is required.
Again, as we'll go through the drawings and confirmed by the architect Kevin Ryan, you will see that because of the depth of the property, because of the width of the property, and because of where the stairs are located, we have no choice but to put the roof deck access structure at the extreme rear of the property.
Again, not uncommon in front of the board.
We've had these refusals before, which the board has supported in the past.
Second refusal has to do with the setback.
And again, not uncommon.
As you can see from our design, and we'll go through our design, even though it's not a mansard roof, it does look to the point where it's pitched, and we try to soften it with the change in materials.
We kept the roof line on the second floor, and then the third floor addition has a different set of materials to kind of, you know, break up the brick beside so it doesn't seem as tall as, you know, one may think.
And then the third refusal has to do with the open area.
Again, we're trying to square off the rear of the building, again, to give a functional layout throughout.
out. The individuals who would be most directly impacted, 2542, which would have a letter of
support, and 2538, even though we haven't talked to them directly, our understanding is they have
no opposition. And then you'll see the petition. Now, while they're in the letters from the
coordinating RCO saying that there were three individuals who were in the affected area who
were against this project, none of them are, my understanding, are directly next to us. And those
people who are are in support of our law. So the letter from Old Richmond, you will see that there
were four people who voted in the affected area. And three people voted in opposition and one person
voted in non-opposition. So that was a close vote. The part that like I think is a little bit
difficult to understand in a vacuum is that there are other individuals who were at that meeting
who voted, you know, who were not affected. And they overwhelmingly voted in opposition. I will
say that when I was at this meeting, there was another project that was very, very, very
controversial to the neighborhood. And I felt like that project, the people that attended that
project those individuals also voted not only against the project that was the controversial
project but they also voted against this project so when you look at the people who are affected
there were four people that are affected three did vote in opposition one voted in non-opposition
which was a close vote and then if you look at the letter that orca put it had all to do with
the fact that my client was you know she stayed instead of boarding up the windows on the top
floor they left the window they left that those openings open and anticipating that when they
you know when they start building the property they would put windows in um there was no issue
in terms of boarding up the windows we agreed to do that after the meeting there was also allegations
that you know there may be a you know an emphasis a pest infestation that may be our fault again
We reached out to the community members who were given email addresses to the people who attended.
Unfortunately, we could not start a dialogue with them, but I will say that the person to
But I will say that the person to the right of us and to the left of us are in support of this. So if there was a rat infestation or issues with the property, we would have known about it. And they would not have supported our project knowing that.
the right of us and to the left of us?
uh we do have a letter uh from councilman swilla again he is in opposition i will say
that the letter is not completely if you read the language in complete opposition
um they do recognize that we did have a petition it said the applicant did submit a petition of
support from some nearby neighbors we appreciated this effort but it was in it was not enough to
change our stance on supporting the community and their votes petition is attached for the
board's review so we did show them the petition we showed them the letter of support unfortunately
you know a lot of times it's who shows up at the community meeting we were really surprised that
there was such pushback because again none of the issues are zoning related we're just taking rsa 5
property adding a third story addition which you know did not seem controversial i think that
there were several individuals for whatever reason were upset with this project um but i think they
had to, it was more so that they were dealing with another project, and they just voted against
this one as well, essentially. So our petition, again, I tell all my clients, you know, when you
do a petition, like, just make this a little small, you know, just don't get, you know, anyone,
get the people who are going to be most directly impacted. So if you look at it, 2551 CEPFIVA,
25-48 Cepheva, 25-67 Cepheva, 25-65 Cepheva. And then we're adjacent to Hazard, 24-75 East
Hazard, 25-46 Cepheva, 25-20 Cepheva, 25-22 Cepheva. We're next to Sergeant, 22-10 East Sergeant,
2208 East Sergeant, Rainier Tulip, 2540 Tulip, 2218 Hazard, and 2173 East Fur.
Most importantly, we did make direct communication with the owner of 2542 CEPVIVA, and they're
in support of this project.
and then you'll see the email that my client sent that copied individuals we received these
email addresses from the coordinating rco we indicated to them they were surprised about
allegations regarding the condition of property and we felt honestly bad if anything that caused
issues with these nearby neighbors so we reached out to them i originally reached out to them via
email. And after receiving those addresses, I received no response to that email. I did email
one of them the night of, and I said, you know, I indicated to one individual we would like to
meet with them, never heard back from them. I did follow up by getting their email addresses
straight from the coordinating RCO, and these are the alleged affected property owners. Did not
receive any response my client took it upon herself to personally respond you know to my
email and copy them on it to indicate that we would like to work with them that if there are
non-zoning related issues we like to deal with them personally and you know that email is is in
front of you right now um but you know um but she's like i stated she stated i truly do love
the neighborhood which is why we chose it i know new development can seem daunting but i really
think it's a positive sign of stability and security and that she wants to personally work
with them if there was any construction related issues. Madam Chair just to let you know I've
been listening to this case so I'll be participating. Oh great you know what just why don't you just
continue. Thank you. Me? Yeah. Okay I'm sorry Mr. Nockamson what is the height of the proposed
building uh i can look at that right now i i believe it's in the low 30s let me take a look
it doesn't exceed 38 feet oh it's nowhere near that no we don't have a height variance at all
all right i just wanted to make sure that all right yeah and and again just and i'll skip over
a little bit well let me first put the pictures so i have another i got another question before
you answer of the three people who voted no at the meeting do you happen to know where they live
no i don't i don't um i don't i just know they're in effect area all i got was their email addresses