street and the walkway doesn't go to largely street but it goes out to sedgwick street okay
okay did you know that at the time you made i believe you um so when i make my determination
again i do it by the block face the deed the dimensions and the other criteria set forth
you know in the code okay well to look at those again um let me go to that second let me go to
that provision again all right so again so the the criteria are and it's and it's shall
be designated as a primary primary frontage based on the the following so these are the criteria
it's either these criteria or something that's in the rules and regulations of the commission
and it says the orientation of the primary structure so can you tell me how the primary
structure is oriented it is facing ardly okay so what is facing ardly the front face or front facade
okay so what is facing ardley the front face or front facade of the building okay and there's
also a front facade facing east sedgwick street correct it was not determined to be so by any
documentation that i'd found or that i determined okay and and that's despite 14701d saying that
when every street frontage is a front correct that's not a primary frontage no no i know you
have to start with with the street frontage before you can make a primary frontage of one of those
or more of a street frontage okay sorry i'll move on i'll move on okay so you're saying the
orientation of the primary structure is to ardly only correct the front facade yes well i'm just
going to read it the orientation of the primary structure what is the orientation of the primary
structure the front is facing our delay okay and then despite the door being on the side
david you've been over this then the orientation david david listen i'm going to go to the next
one what i want you to get a little focused here okay the orientation of the next criteria is the
orientation of the structures on adjacent lots okay so which adjacent lots did you consider
the lot that is touching boundaries with the current application
and then the entire block face or block that is listed in the deed okay i had no reason to go
across the street okay you i'm gonna i've i have no idea why this screen is not capturing my screen
live but um if i'm going to read 14203 subsection 4 definition of adjacent to you
um and it says to touch or share a contiguous boundary or border or to be separated only by an
alley a shared driveway or a street or is the human word in that it's or not and
well it'd be hard to be share a boundary and be separated by a street wouldn't it
Okay. All right. So I'm just going to move on. So you decided that, despite that definition, that across the street is not adjacent, correct? Would that be fair to say?
I found that across the street was unnecessary due to the information I'd already compiled.
Okay. I'm just going to ask you again. Is across the street not an adjacent lot?
By code definition, it could be, yes. But it was unnecessary for what I was doing.
okay um next criteria is the orientation of other structures with frontage on the same block face
and you've said you looked at the block face of ardley street but you've also said you didn't
look at the block face of sedgwick street correct again there was no need with the information that
i had already compiled but correct me if i'm wrong this property is on a block face on east
Sedgwick Street, between Ardley and Sprague Street, correct? By definition. You may not
have considered it, but it is by definition on that block face, correct? So again, with the
information that I compiled, I felt no need and saw no need to move any farther than the information
that I had already compiled. Okay, and that's the deed and, you know. Okay, that's not, that's not
an answer well david david okay you disagree but please move on well she hasn't said that it is
or isn't you're sitting there shaking your head and things like that and i think you gotta move
on questions so well i agree yeah no i mean they i mean listen the planning commission looks at
these just like ellen i look you don't have to tell me just i'm okay i'm gonna move on i mean
i'm just let the record reflect i asked a specific question and it wasn't answered well i thought it
was okay okay it was a simple yes or no answer um the street type designation of the bounding street
are you aware of the street type designations of the bounding streets which are sedgwick and ardley
street i am familiar but again that was not necessary for my review that would be streets
department question okay all right so do you i'm going to ask again so do you know the street type
designation for the bounding streets for each section she answered that question okay um and
then were there any you went through the criteria that you looked at but were again are there any
additional criteria that are specifically stated in the commission's rules and regulations um that
you reference for purposes of clarifying or implementing uh the determination of primary
frontage so at the time of determination i compiled enough information to make the determination of
primary frontage i need not go any farther okay so you did not look at anything in the
Okay. So you did not look at anything in the rules and regulations. That's your answer, correct?
rules and regulations that's your answer correct so i
So I follow regulations and I follow the zoning code.
Okay. I think you made, I don't know if there's been any success in finding the
code standard that you were referencing earlier that we passed by.
I do not have it on me. I was just here to answer questions about primary frontage.
but you said it was something you looked at when you made this is something you referenced it's
it's in the code in the zoning code yes okay is there something else in the zoning code other
than what I've read today that you utilized in determining primary frontage that has to do with
shared driveways only being located to the rear is that what you stated well you can enter a shared
driveway only from the rear you can only enter it so you can't enter it from the side or front
i again until i read the language again i would not feel comfortable stating yes or no
okay um and that side the rear side or front is of the structure or of the
property it's it's primarily for the driveway and the shared liberties of everybody who has one
But when we say side, front, and rear, is it of the property or of the structure?
Again, I determined the primary frontage by the information that was given to me.
And then you applied the stamp to the drawings that appear?
I did.
and do you remember how long you had to review this these plans to make this determination
i do not know okay all right i have no further questions under so uh just uh
um are you still sharing oh sorry i'll stop i'll stop no i i was supposedly still sharing but i
think it was up there all right i'm going to try to share if i can't um see what happens if i can't
okay so it looks like it's working uh msuru can you see that on the screen or you can look at my
screen yes okay so uh would you agree that that is um showing that where that blue teardrop is
upside down teardrop that's that's the property we're talking about at 69 30. yes okay um and
would you agree and if i go and move see if that works so you can see it council can you sit can
for the record sure this is showing uh city atlas bird's eye view of um the the teardrop thing is
on uh on top of 6930 rt street so this is again city atlas view um which uh is would you agree
that's that's enough as it says it's official website of the city of philadelphia yes this is
not an exhibit you're just live using this now right yeah this is just for demonstrative purposes
okay would you agree that going along ardley street um all all of the properties uh at least
the main structures appear to be virtually identical yes okay and uh to the best of your
knowledge are these all uh were these all constructed as twins yes okay uh and based upon
the deed language that you read earlier probably constructed around the mid to late 1940s yes okay
and as such these properties the entrances to the properties uh which will colloquial could be
colloquially called uh the front entrance the main entrance to the properties are on
are not fronting they're not facing ardly but they're on the sides of the property yes okay
And that's the same for 6930 Ardley Street. And the only distinction between 6930 Ardley Street and the other properties on the block is that their walkway to that entrance, in this instance, just goes to Sedgwick rather than going out to Ardley.
yeah you can't see it because the blue dots are right on top of it but
yes in this photo yes okay and since we're on the photo I'm going to go to that intersection
Okay. And since we're on the photo, I'm going to go to that intersection.
Mr. Workmanides was talking about the block face of Sedgwick.
So just saying, for the sake of argument, had you looked at the block face of Sedgwick,
would you be looking at something like what I'm showing on the screen,
which is now centering the screen on a railroad?
It looks like an overpass crossing over Sedgwick, and would you agree that all of those properties
when going southwesterly from a southwesterly direction from Sedgwick, all of those properties
um are only showing their sides on sedgwick yes correct it looks like what is that sprag is that
how we say that street name okay sprague um it looks as though the rear of their lot lines are
all abutted against the railroad easement okay so again so right so again between uh
these properties uh and the properties southwesterly from them on spray street
everybody's breeders are facing the railroad right away correct which is not unusual right
not at all nobody wants to face the railroad and i like trains but
uh okay and again across the street on hardly would you agree that most of those also appear to
Yeah, I can't answer to the date, but I can definitely state from viewing this photo that they are all fronting our delay with driveways.
It looks like in the front of their homes.
And again, you would agree that there is this shared driveway that goes behind all the properties that are fronting on Artley Street that goes through the block from Sedgwick to Gorgas.
Okay, that's that. So for these properties on the south, southerly side of Artley Street, everybody enters from the rear.
Correct. As a matter of fact.
Correct. I don't have any further questions.
Okay, I'm gonna just a couple of follow up questions. Um, I'm gonna share my screen again.
Well, wait a minute. Are you gonna have any questions Alex? Okay, go ahead.
it uh yeah sure thanks
I I'm says I'm sharing but it doesn't like my computer it says it started
I might ask Glenn to use his street view again if my screen it says I'm it says your screen sharing
on my on my computer
The idea click to enter a full screen mode.
I don't know that. There we go.
Does it, but it doesn't move? Okay. In any event, I think, I think that.
Captures it enough so that the picture I have up, which is a 1 in my exhibit package that's showing the same intersection of Sedgwick and hardly street.
correct it is only it's in google view instead of city um software city website okay well does
it does it look like the what lynn had up before it's similar yes okay i mean if you prefer i don't
think i have that with my exhibits i mean i can go into that if you would prefer or we can have
lynn pull it up again yeah why don't we just use what lynn had can you pull up what you have
i mean i don't want to if you don't mind it's fine okay so so essentially you can see the red
upside down teardrop as len referenced uh down at the bottom towards the right and that says 6930
and that's the property that we're here for today that is a partial property yeah part of it okay
and then we've already stipulated it's a little hard to see but you can see where my cursor is
I think we've stipulated that there is a sidewalk, a walkway that leads from Sedgwick Street to the only door of this property, which fronts on Sedgwick Street, correct?
I don't know that it's the only door.
Well, there's no door that faces Ardley Street, correct?
okay okay and when len showed you the picture before he went all the way down the gorgas and
all those properties showed a walkway going from the side out to ardly
property showed a walkway going from the side out to ardley so this is on this block face 6930 is the
only property that has a walkway that doesn't go to ardley correct from this view just looks like
a front line it's already been stipulated that there's a by land that there's a walkway there
and i'm just talking about the ardley street block face from orgus to sedgwick um and looking
at this picture i'm going to point uh my pointer on the opposite side of sedgwick street
can you see where the walkways are located there i can however for primary frontage that would not
be in my purview or even relevant because i'm unknown of that property and what they currently
legally have established there okay i don't know if they've had permits it's a completely opposite
side of the street. They're not part of the shared easement. That property would have no relevance
in my viewpoint of a primary frontage for the home across the street. Because again,
you don't feel that that's adjacent, correct? By definition, it is considered adjacent. However,
it's not relevant for the property that was put before me. Okay. Then on the opposite side of
ardley street um on the roughly northeast corner um do you see a property there that you you had
talked about those properties on the north side of the 6900 block of ardley having driveways in
the front leading from ardley do you see a walkway there leading from that house out to east sedwick
street however that's a different style of home they do not have a rear shared driveway so again
it would not be relevant to the home that i was reviewing and that is across the street so by
definition that's also adjacent but by definition in the zoning code correct even though you didn't
consider it it is by definition but i would only go to them if they were relevant for the current
primary frontage determination and they were not okay they are completely different style homes
Even though the 14701-D says you shall consider these things, correct?
However, there was no need to move any farther since the deed language and the front facades of the home all face artiline.
Okay. And then caddy corner, which is also across the street, I'm pointing my pointer at the top of the picture now.
That's like the northwest corner.
Do you also see where my pointer is? Does that also look like a walkway that extends to East Sedgwick Street?
You're going to get the same answer, which is that was not relevant to my review, nor did I.
But you agree that there's a walkway there, correct?
Actually, this Google is not very good. I can't tell what that is. It just looks like a brown log in the middle.
I'm going to drop down to some pictures.
Give me one minute. It's a little hard to see with snow from the winter.
okay um this is uh this is tab c2 and the picture that i have up let me see if i double click again
does that change it
i'm going to stop share and start share and see if that changes it
David 1255 okay we're done okay um it just kicked me out completely so I mean again I can can we
can we stipulate that there are walkways leading from those corner properties okay then that's
fine I don't need to specifically it testified about 500 times now about what was what she took
into consideration we understand it but I think what's important is what she didn't consider which
is why i was showing those so okay anyway david you gotta that's okay that's fine yeah you gotta
stop no sure well i think it's relevant because well you've said that at least 20 times but go
ahead i'm going to see if this comes up a little better unless we're going to stipulate that there's
that there are drives or walkways from the corners of those properties yeah okay all right leading
out to sedgwick street all right then i have no further questions of the witness i have nothing
else okay thank you very much for being here today all right thank you um so it's 12 47 we
have the 12 55 do you want to try to get somebody in i mean i don't know that i so i have reserved
the right to call my that's what i said yeah i see other people you have you have the the husband
yeah i again i think he's going to add some things that really i think are going to just reinforce
some of the things that have already been said um and just for the purposes of time i would
just your closer no well no what's that you're closing oh i can't i'm just letting going through
well no what's that you're closing oh i can't i'm just letting going through the witnesses i
the witnesses i
had reserved the right to call brian sidell but i think it's just going to get into a i disagree
and i don't think that that's going to help anything here so i think for those purposes and
len is already stipulated regarding the zoning examiner um as far as what they would determine
if art if sedgwick had been determined so i don't find a need to to call them not that they were
produced in any event right so i think that i think we can i think we can go ahead and close
um i mean unless anybody else is there something you want to cover all right the city has no you
know city's position this is this was all legal argument so no we don't we don't have any additional
witnesses yeah just because i have an architect on the call that was here last time if i could
just put his testimony on the record sure i'll certainly be less what's his name ian toner mr