and it would be difficult for us to have a functional three-story structure
if we were required to have that sat-back requirement.
2120 North Percy Street from the rear of the property.
2128 North Percy from the front of the property.
Again, we don't have a refusal with regards to the third story,
but we still have it in terms of having that second unit.
And then 2128 to the rear of the property on North Deli Street.
Percy Street to the right of the property.
Percy Street to the left of the property, North Deli to the right of the property,
North Deli to the left of the property. And then our plans and drawings. Again,
in most respects, we comply dimensionally with the code.
Those are our site plans. You know, we try to keep the traditional brick facade to mesh well with the other brick facades in the area. We chose not purposefully to have bay windows, again, to mesh well with what is in the neighborhood as well.
Those are our site plans. You know, we try to keep the traditional brick facade.
And then just our floor plans. The first unit, unit number one, is a bi-level, first floor, lower level. Unit number two is a bi-level, second and third floors.
And then our meeting notice that went out for both of these February 15, 2022 at 6 p.m. As you can see here, 176 addresses were notified as the 2120 North Percy Street. These are the addresses.
proof of mailing and then this is for 2128 north percy street again february 15th 6 p.m same
meeting 195 addresses were notified these are lists of the addresses proof of mailing
and our deed to the property showing that jacob y motts inc is the owner of the property for both of
them, our applications for appeal to the ZBA, along with our notice refusal and project
information form for both properties, and a certificate of tax clearance, and showing
that payment was made of an arrearage that was previously due.
So with that being said, I would ask that my client, Dimitri, virtually raise his hand and to adopt my testimony.
Dimitri, state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please.
Mr. Gordetsky, can you please unmute yourself?
Can you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Dmitry Gordetsky, D-M-I-T-R-Y-G-O-R-O-D-E-T-S-K-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Hello?
i do i do okay thank you proceed thank you um mr gordeski uh you heard everything i stated today
yes i did and is it true and correct that is correct everything and do you adopt as your own
testimony yes sir thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr jim questions or
comments from the virtual audience? I see no hands at this time, Chair. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning for 2120
and 2128 North Percy Street. These are 796 and 739 square foot lots, respectively. There is no
unique physical there is no unique physical condition of either lot that would prevent them
from being used in conformance with the zoning code nor is there a hardship that would require
the roof deck variance and rear yard variance so the city planning commission recommends that the
board deny the use in dimensional variances for 2120 and 21 uh 28 north percy street yeah and
mr chair members of the board i would just like to highlight the fact that these that these are
are more in properties. So we're trying to do the lease modification possible by only having a
duplex there. And we do have unanimous community support. MI 2021-005018-2128 North Percy and MI
2021-005017-2120 North Percy. I vote yes to both properties. Thomas Holowin. My vote is yes to both
properties ishmael shaheed my vote is yes to both properties thank you thank you mi 2021
005012 2400 east venango street revised provision proviso plans port richmond on patrol civic
group letter of support councilman school and non-opposition rachel pritzker
Ms. Pritzker is coming back in now as a panelist chair.
good afternoon hi miss pritzker just state your name you've already been sworn
Good afternoon.
Hi, Ms. Pritzker just stayed.
sure rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r mr hallman has a few questions for you
sure good afternoon counselor do you agree do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to his accuracy yes according to our records you have submitted all of the
the required documents, is that correct?
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
This is 2400 East Venango.
This is currently zoned ICMX,
industrial commercial mixed use.
It is a large 37,500 square foot parcel.
We are proposing the erection of two semi-detached structures with roof decks and pilot house
and closing for access stairs only and for use as multifamily, although they are actually
single-family townhomes just stacked next to each other on the same lot, which is what
generated the multifamily refusal.
It's going to be 30 single-family homes with 30 accessory parking spaces with accessory
garages, including two EV spots, electrical vehicle parking spaces, and 30 class 1A bike
spaces with access by Cedar Street with a drive aisle. The only variance we are requesting from
this board today is for use of residential, again, technically multifamily because it's
multiple uses on the lot, although it is directly adjacent and attached single-family
homes. This property is, again, extremely large. As you can see, 37,500 square feet. It's this
property here. It has a longstanding use of various industrial vegetable oil mixing uses,
but given the fact that it's not on a main street and it's in an area that has directly
adjacent residential single-family homes, in addition to some other commercial uses not far
from Aramingo Avenue. We're proposing residential adaptive reuse. As far as how this relates to the
city's comprehensive plan, the River Wards plan does a great job of laying out that properties
similar to this, former industrial sites, you know, should be granted some sort of financial
or zoning relief, given the fact that a lot of the industry has sort of shifted to other locations
and especially needs to be closer located to main corridors and highways and things of that nature.
As such, we're kind of in line with the River Ward's plan of doing an adaptive reuse here of
single-family homes, as you can see right further down Venango or other single-family homes. So this
is in character with, you know, directly adjacent properties. And I think that's why both ProPAC
and the councilman's office were in non-opposition. Again, just in your packet,
you'll see the excerpt from the Riverwards plan that lays out nicely. We're in compliance
from a tax perspective. The agreement of sale is this client is also the equitable owner of
the property and utilizing it as an industrial commercial mixed use site would require
some sort of light industrial commercial use that is probably going to be better suited for
directly on Aramingo Ave or a main area or main road, not on the corner of Venango and Cedar.
And again, so we're proposing adaptive reuse to a single family, 30 single family homes and 30
parking spaces. We met with ProPAC on January 5th. As the chairman mentioned, we have a letter
of support from them as you can see on the screen um and as a result we have a letter of non-opposition
from councilman mark squilla um we have our architects here as well that can go through
the plans if the board would like um otherwise um my client uh if it's okay uh chairman as a
officer of the court if i could just uh have my testimony adopted in that regard as an officer
the court will allow that why don't why don't you just let your architect speak real quick
sure okay just a quick absolutely chairman so that would be jimmy hair or scott woodruff
um so if one of them could raise their hand and go through the plans
and either mr hair or mr woodruff raise your hand please
oh i apologize you know it's not either one of them it's actually um i believe from sky
I'm getting mixed up with all these architects that we all work with.
I'm getting mixed up with all these architects that we all work with.
Okay, so let's go back.
So I'll give it to the board, but really what you're building is 30 single homes.
Yeah, I can bring the plans up.
I have them in front of me so the board can see.
Let the board take a quick look at it.
Happy to.
so here yeah here are the plans as you can see yeah there are basically 30 single family
homes directly adjacent the curb cutoff of cedar um for in an in and out drive aisle and
accessory off-street parking of these homes i'm happy to answer any questions questions
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience chair we have al toro hall mr hall you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair please
mr hall state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Yes, Altoro Hall, A-L-T-O-R-O, last name Hall, H-A-L-L.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Dear Chair Bergman, on behalf of the Philadelphia Department of Commerce, I am writing to oppose the request for an appeal at 2400 East Benango Street.
The Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation joins in its opposition.
The site in question is located within an industrial area with high potential for intensified industrial or commercial use and development.
The site is currently used for commercial industrial purposes and possesses the characteristics to support the existing or future industrial commercial use at this site.
Redeveloping the site to residential will negatively impact industrial users, particularly those west of Gulf Street and east of Aramingo Ave.
Nearby industrial operations feature sounds, smells, and often vehicle deliveries and pickups,
forcing the cohabitation of industrial operations along residential housing often leads to community
complaints followed by punitive measures, such as heavy fines and fees, against longstanding
industrial businesses that impel businesses to relocate elsewhere. When industrial businesses
leave philadelphia they take their jobs with them the relocation leaves people in the community
without jobs and training to obtain new ones while market rate housing continues to expand
the proposed 30 30 residential units is inconsistent with pidc's industrial land use
and marketing strategy and the city's comprehensive plan philadelphia 2035 and a community supportive
remapping in 2014. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the proposed use variance be denied.
Thank you, Mr. Hall. Ms. Pritzker, do you want to respond?
Yeah, I just would like Mr. Hall to put his address on the record as I'm not sure that
he is an affected neighbor or this organization is an affected neighbor of this. Additionally,
I just want to ask Mr. Arturo if he attended either of the two community meetings that we
held for this project? So yes, I am the Director of Manufacturing Advanced Industries for the
Department of Commerce. Yes, correct. So what is your address? Work address? Yes. Yes, 1515 Art
Street, 12th floor, Philadelphia PA 19102. Okay, and the reason I'm asking you that is because
typically you have to be within 250 feet of the property or on the block to have standing in the
matter and my other question was just about were you at either of the two community meetings
because we had unanimous support from the community near neighbors and the council office
and I don't believe anybody from your organization reached out to my office the client or attended
either of those meetings to express any concerns or discuss this with us
So my responsibility within the city is for industrial preservation, working with planning and with PIDC. So no, I was not at those meetings, but whenever there is an industrial rezoning, our department is notified.
And we look at it and see if it would possibly impede industrial partners, not necessarily in that area, but in adjacent areas close to the sites.
So just so you're aware, nobody from your organization or any of the adjacent owners.
Yeah, just so you're aware, nobody from your organization or any of the adjacent owners, although were notified twice, came out to speak with any concern.
Most of the near neighbors actually were happy to see this be an adaptive reuse, given the fact that there's actually sinking machinery on this site.
The directly adjacent neighbor doesn't maintain their site in a very respectful manner of the residential uses directly adjacent.
and nobody was asking for us to preserve any of the industrial uses here.
So that's why I had asked if you were at the meeting because you would have heard, you know, all of that.
And while I appreciate the potential impact, do you have any reports or studies that show that this would, in fact, be detrimental
besides just your word for it or the letter that you provided?
Understood. Other than the PIEC's industrial mapping and the comprehensive plan,
none other than that all right thank you thank you okay i i just want to make the point i i i
i hear your points okay is there anyone else in the virtual audience has a comment
chair i see no other hands at this time planning commission good afternoon chair bergman david
facto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends this property for commercial shopping center zoning the current industrial and commercial
mixed-use zoning requires either light industrial or commercial businesses neither zoning district
allows residential use residential encroachment will have the have a possible impact of uh
sorry residential encroachment will have a possible impact to erode the viability of this area to
maintain business activity there is no hardship that necessitates residential use of this property
the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the use variants thank you thank you
and thank you council we're going to take this to the executive committee next week when we meet
and we'll vote and we'll vote in public next week but we're going to discuss it a little bit further
next week okay that's fine chairman thank you very much thank you so much i appreciate it
yep right and i appreciate that david yours too okay here we go
mi 2021 005015 2546 hope street norris square community alliance support
councilwoman sanchez letter of non-opposition al knocklinson
chair mr knocklinson is coming back in as a panelist now thank you
mr knockamson just state your name yes mr chair uh alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson
n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n mr hallman has a few questions good afternoon counselor do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do according to our records
you have submitted all of the required documents.
Is that correct?
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Can I share my screen?
Yes, sure.
Thank you.
All right, so we're here to present 2546-52 North Hope Street.
This is a variance matter that's somewhat unintended.
My client purchased this property,
and we'll go through the materials as an RM1 property, understood it to allow for the use that we're requesting.
And if we were under the previous version of the zoning code when he purchased the property, we wouldn't be here today.
So with our presentation, we'll show the notices of refusal again, or the notice of refusal,
which will show that the only refusal we're here today essentially for is because of the use.
We have a letter of support from Norris Square Community Alliance. It was a well-attended meeting, overwhelmingly in support. A letter of non-opposition from District Council Member Maria Quinonez Sanchez.
um exhibit three is the office of property assessment my client purchased a property on
july 16th of 2021 on july 11th of 2021 he took a screenshot of these properties and you'll see
from there that these properties to him were noted as rm1 at the time so he understood that he was
purchasing a property where he can build exactly what he's trying to build today maps of the area