Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
Please proceed, Tom.
You're a little broken up, Tom.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
A little better, but you're still breaking up.
Tom, this is Tanya. If you want, you can join on the phone.
Tom, why don't you call in, Tom? It might be easier.
LaKeisha, let's hold up till we make connections with Tom.
Yes, I was about to suggest that to you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
break it up Tom
a little bit better Tom
but it's still breaking up
have you tried calling in
when you try calling in
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
how are we doing
chair this is for team l it looks like we have 39 attendees so we can proceed as you wish
let's wait till we make sure we have connection with tom yeah we excuse this is hillary yeah we
We can't proceed until we have three members for our quorum.
That's fine.
I was just letting the chair know how many attendees we have as you did.
Thank you.
Thank you, Fatina.
Okay, Chair, I requested that Mr. Holloman rejoin on his telephone and use the computer
only for video.
Perfect.
So he should be back in a minute, okay?
Thank you, Tanya.
My pleasure, sir.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Tom, if you're signed in on the phone, may you press star six to raise your hand
so we can promote you to panelists.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
Tom, please mute yourself.
I believe it's star six to raise your hand when you're on the cell phone or call it.
Star six will unmute yourself.
okay we'll start nine raise your hand star six to unmute
mr thomas if you're on the uh telephone device just press star nine so we can promote you
i think that's it yep and then star six then i mute yourself on the telephone is the time
can you hear me now a perfect time
absolutely perfect
absolutely perfect
thank you
thank you
so Tom mute yourself
until you need to respond to the chair
and we can proceed
that's ready to go
we're ready
And the recording has been started.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's DBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismael Shahid, our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
And please just unmute on your telephone.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is our attorney Hilary Emerson and our executive director Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
it. Video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phil.gov. For the benefit of
our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star
6 to unmute. To win an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the address
of the property in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for
comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sun.
Let's look at our morning schedule.
Number six.
MI 2023-000629-1447 West Cuyahoga Street, that case is continued, attorney moving party.
MI 2023.
Number seven, MI 2023-000631-2326 North Park Avenue, that case is continued, attorney moving party.
Number 12, MI 2023-000-682-5918 Chestnut Street. That case is continued Attorney Moving Party.
And number 13, MI 2023-000-633-1307 West Susquehanna Avenue. That case is continued Attorney Moving Party.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose comments relative to the cases that have been continued?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. I will be your co-host for today.
Thank you, Jason.
Yes, sir. At this time, I do not see any hands.
Are there any requests for additional continuances?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just wanted to note that Emily Persico has joined us as an alternate board member this morning.
Thank you. Good morning, Emily.
Good morning.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Mr. Chair, we have Sean Whalen with the hand raised.
I will allow them to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Whalen.
good morning chairman how are you good could you state your name please and spell for the
court stenographer sure sean whalen w-h-a-l-e-n right do you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do which case sir uh 4100 orchard lane
mr whalen yeah mr whalen this is hillary that's on the 2 p.m list
oh okay i i thought it was originally but then i saw i have an email from administration saying
it was listed at 9 30 so i just wanted to be safe okay you know we have it on the 2 p.m list
all right in that case i will see you at 2 p.m all right thank you are there any requests for
continuance sir there are no further hands at this time thank you oh wait a minute
yeah i'm sorry two hands went up one hand one hand from a number ending in one six five five
i have allowed them to speak i could you state your name and spell it please for the court
sonographer. Start six to unmute. Good morning. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell
for the court sonographer? Yes, sir. Benny Atedgi, A-T-T-D-E-G-I. We can't hear you.
Sir, we can't hear you.
You have to do it again.
All right.
It's Benny at Tedgi.
465 West Queen Lane for 442 West Queen Lane.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth?
The whole truth is nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir.
Chair, excuse me.
This is the court reporter.
I apologize, but I did not get his name clearly.
Sure. Sure. You have to. You have to state your name one more time and try to speak up.
OK, Ben.
The last name.
Any better, John?
Yes, sure. Thank you.
Okay. Your case is 440 to 42 West Queen Lane, right?
Yes, sir.
So that case will be called shortly. You're not requesting a continuance, are you?
No, no. Just attending.
Okay, good. That case will be called shortly. Okay?
Thank you, sir.
All right. Do we have any other hands?
Yes. Beverly Wilson, a tone with a hand raised. I've allowed them to speak this time.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
Yes, Beverly Wilson Stone.
Yes, Beverly Wilson Stone.
Could you spell it, please, for the stenographer?
B-E-V-E-R-L-Y
W-I-L-S-O-N
slash S-T-O-N-E
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes. What case are you calling about?
1821 North Natrona Street.
okay uh that case are you you're not requesting to continue am i correct
no all right that case will be continued and that case will be called in about an hour okay
all right thank you sure all right any other requests for continuance
i see no further hands okay oh i have a few cases here that we got to look for for exhibits
number five mi 2023 000 623 3360 north 10th street first listing we do not have any exhibits
Louis Castillo.
Do we see any hands?
So there are no hands answering to that property.
Okay, so MI 2023-000-623-3360 North 10th Street.
This is the first listing.
We are continuing this case.
Mark must be tried.
And number 11, MI2023, 0007396634 Marsden Street. Ellis Hemingway is the owner applicant. No exhibits. First listing.
There are no hands answering for that property either, sir.
MI 2023-000-739-6634 Marston Street.
This is the first listing.
This case is continued.
Mark must be tried.
And number eight.
MI 2023-003-049-8330 Millman Street.
This case has been withdrawn.
We're going to go to our add-on list, and the first case on our add-on list, MI 2022-006-988-1124-28 Dickinson Street.
The resumptive hearing in this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, August 2nd at 9.30 a.m.
We're going to go to number four as our first case.
MI 2022-004-678-6252, Lime Kiln Pike, Lamont Halley is the owner-applicant, Pro Se.
There's a letter of opposition from the Oak Lane Worcester Community Coalition.
Councilperson Bass has taken a position of opposition and has provided four letters from neighbors in opposition.
Three of their neighbors live on the 6,200 block of Lancome Pike.
The applicant is also saying, has in his support, 28 individual addresses only.
Devented as a panelist, sir.
I'm here.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's sonographer?
Lamont Haley, L-A-M-O-N-T, Haley, H-A-I-L-E-Y.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
This application is for use as a takeout restaurant in an existing structure?
It has one refusal.
The proposed takeout restaurant is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir okay good morning mr hellie have you emailed
in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing um yes i did sir thank you very much please
share your screen and proceed okay uh one second share screen
Green button on the bottom?
Yeah, I hit that and it says screen, whiteboard, iPhone, Zoom.
Let's see.
Let's see.
Let me hit this here.
Here you go.
It's coming up.
I want to go to.
All right.
Well, it comes up.
it hasn't come up yet
you got something
on the bottom
you click on there
open it up now
your exhibits right yes yes sir
start scrolling now okay
do you want me to comment about the exhibits or this we know what that is we will tell you
okay okay the application for appeal
We have that?
I have your tax clearance.
We see that.
This is the mailings you did before the hearing, right?
Yes, sir.
the ring was continued proceed
hold on right there so that's your drawings why do you why do you comment on this
yes that's that's the um that's the inside and outside of what the restaurant looks like
do you have photos too yes i have photos i think let's see the photos
okay i should be on part two let me scroll down this is the deed here probably last year
okay i was operation some of the photos from last year from sending the letters the letters out
um some of the some of the people some of the neighbors i got to sign this time around okay
um receipt from the letters i sent again for the second time for the rco meeting
all right open up part uh two
should have photos
okay here right here that's the original listing when i bought the property
um it used to be a daycare
here is how it looks now
which is basically the same
for the most part
the sign has changed
posted zoning
notice on the door
this photo here
is from across the street
from the side view
of the building
another side view
from across the street
from the side
the side one of the cleaning rooms
this is the front door when you first walk in
this is a better picture
this is the front door here
this is like what would be the takeout area
here, and the window where people would order their food would be there.
and the window where people would order their food would be there.
Another clear picture of
the front entrance.
This is behind the entrance, where the window would be.
This is the key area.
Two bathrooms, back office, kitchen area here.
Another area of the kitchen, same area, prep area there, back door from the kitchen, inside the kitchen.
Mr. Haley, what happened when you went to the RCO meeting?
Twice no neighbors participated, came to the meetings.
No one came to the meeting, you're saying?
Yes, sir.
did you get a letter from them no i did get some signatures um no did you get a letter from the
community meeting i get a letter from them yeah no it says letters of opposition came from oakland
western community coalition no i never received a letter from them okay how about the council
person's office you have a letter from them no okay
so i i guess the issue is you fitted the place out before you had the zoning is that right you
changed the sign that's the only thing i changed with the sign everything else was there okay but
i mean there was a kitchen there before when there was a yes yes it was um that's what made
you buy the property actually it was um they redid the kitchen in 2020 okay all right um
okay um also um would i be able to speak on my behalf or yeah yeah you can speak right now oh
okay okay and i had another person uh tonio hatch that wanted to speak on my behalf someone that
was helping me out as well with this process well when i i'm i'm going to open it up to the audience
later he can talk okay i'm sorry why don't you give it give me your rest of what what you want
to tell us okay um well what attracted me to the property was it was in the community um it already
had basically everything i needed i just had to change paint um things of that nature um when i
looked up the property when i bought it it stated that um at one time on the paperwork it was a food
place that serves hot and cold food. It also serves, it was a barbershop at one time and most
recently it was a daycare. So I figured I'd be able to turn it over to a family-friendly takeout
restaurant because it's a commercial building. It's basically there for business. And so when
I saw the property, I liked the vibe. I talked to a lot of people in the neighborhood and they
said it was a good thing, you know, for a takeout restaurant. It's basically a macaroni and cheese
shop that I'm trying to open up, family-friendly for, you know, different types of food, baked
foods, macaroni and cheese, things of that nature. And I thought it would be a great opportunity,
not only for myself and my family, but for the neighborhood to bring something
that's basically new and fresh to the neighborhood. And also, I want to say,
it's not a bar, it's not selling any alcohol beverages, it's not a club or anything like that,
It's just a macaroni and cheese shop that want to help them in the neighborhood, not only for myself and for to bring money to the city as well.
All right.
Questions or comments from the board?
Say it again.
No, I'm talking to the board.
I'm sorry.
Comments from the board.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have charles richardson with their hand raised i would love them to speak
good morning mr richardson please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
good morning mr chair charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass from 508 city hall
Richardson is spelled R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, sir. Okay. So with clearing this up a
bit, there were two RCO meetings. The first RCO meeting was attended by two RCOs as well as
representatives of the a few representatives of the community at the culmination of that of that
At the culmination of that meeting, they decided to vote in opposition to opening the property up for retail, or for not so much retail, but for the restaurant.
meeting they decided to vote
uh citing the fact that across the street there is a another property that is a restaurant
that opens up on the weekends primarily and it already causes uh a lot of confusion in the area
with regard to parking and things along those lines uh that street is is is congested lime
kiln pike i myself travel that street practically every day uh on my way home in order to be
traffic from Ogons Avenue, and it's always congested, always having to zigzag and things
along those lines. The traffic is very heavy on the other portion of Lobkown Pike that it meets
up with, and they use similar to a speedway to a certain extent. It's just a little crazy around
that area. Mr. Haley had written to me after the RCO meeting because he had somebody that stayed
in the meeting saying that he didn't think he should be held accountable for another business.
But the problem is, you know, I don't think that he did the research in the community prior to
buying the property. The kitchen is a commercial kitchen now. It was not a commercial kitchen while
it was a daycare. So just to be plain, that is not the case. And we've had a second RCO meeting
Last week, unfortunately, as second RCO meetings often go, and, you know, especially in that area of the community, we got nobody there.
And we did ask that, well, we let him inform Mr. Haley that, you know, it being the 17th Ward's RCO, they were going to speak to the community, the committee people that represented that area as well.
That has occurred, and nobody seems to think that that's a good idea.
Mr. Haley presented to us, we asked him to present a petition to prove that he had community support.
And the petition that he submitted had 29 names, 19 of which had no addresses attached to it.
We asked him to go back and to get the addresses for these individuals.
He indicated that he had gotten the petition or circulated the petition a while ago, so he had no idea of who was actually there.
You know, who lived at what locations, you know, suggesting that we should research it using street lists and things along those lines, which, you know, we were going to do had he, you know, submitted a petition that had been a valid petition.
There are two names also that were disqualified because of the fact that they're not near neighbors, they don't live in the neighborhood.
So it's just a culmination of everything. The RCO felt that it would stick by its initial thought, which was to deny the variance, and the councilwoman supports that.
Thank you for your taking the time to call us in. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have Antonio Rich.
okay hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
mr rich
hello good morning hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
oh yes good morning my name is antonio last name is hatch h-a-t-c-h
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
No, I'm not.
Okay, proceed with your testimony.
Okay, I am one of the persons that assisted Mr. Haley with this petition, with his appeal, with the entire process, because I myself went through this process in its entirety from December 19 until I was approved through my hearing to open up my restaurant.
um what mr richardson just stated um along the lines is number one is that this bill as mr haley
clearly stated this building was only was specifically designed as a structure for
uh you know for commercial um use however um it was an incorrect statement that mr richardson made
that all the information all equipment that was in that building came along with the purchase
And if you look at the documents, it says commercial use building, which is zoned primarily for a daycare, a beauty center, et cetera, et cetera.
However, Mr. Penal, I'm sorry, Mr. Haley right now is indirectly being penalized because of another business across the street when his building is it's not a residential building.
But to speak, it's a lot of other things that that took place during this past year that Mr. Haley was not didn't have.
That Mr. Haley was not didn't have adequate assistance from the RCOs moving forward.
And every time he made efforts to try and reach out to the RCOs, no one gave him any assistance.
And it became very frustrating because for him to have to go back and do recertified males for 156 properties two times, two times.
and if you know um if we go back in the record and see that in jill in january when prior to
the only error that was made was that he failed to uh send the zoning board you guys the packet
within five days so it was delayed until today mr haley agreed to have a second meeting and go
through this whole entire process twice and right now but we never received any opposition letter
from Cindy Bass. We never received
any oppositional letters from
any neighbors. And when you give
a neighbor neighbors two times
the option to come and
appear at a hearing and
support or opposition,
he gave them two.
So, sir, sir, let me tell you where I
think we should be. Your testimony
should be telling us, do you
support this project?
Yes, I do. Absolutely, sir.
Yes, sir. Right. And you've
been working with Mr. Haley, you're saying?
Yes, I have.
And is your restaurant across the street?
No, my restaurant is in the northeast across from Father Judge High School.
All right.
All right.
Thank you very much for your testimony.
We appreciate you taking the time.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, am I able to speak again?
Pardon me?
I'll give you.
Let me go.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
There are no further hands, sir.
Mr. Haley, you can address us.
Proceed.
For starters, to Mr. Richardson's point, that restaurant across the street is closed.
I ride past there at night all the time, on the weekends, and I have talked to neighbors about the restaurant across the street.
Mine is directly on the corner, which on the side is a whole lot of parking where there's no homes at.
And I stated, if I'm granted my variance, I'll be able to put an arrow to tell people to park on the side.
It's not a sit-in restaurant. It's a quick, almost like a fast food to a certain extent, restaurant that I'm trying to do.
As far as with the first RCO meeting we had, there was no vote ever taken, which I have to email here from Mr. Richardson.
And it pretty much stated that they wanted more, they wanted to garner more neighbor participation to consider.
That's why they said we asked them to do a continuance.
but my case got continued because it was my error I didn't send in the proper paperwork
to you to you guys so that's why my case got continued all right all right thank you um
planning commission excuse me Mr. Chair yeah I'm sorry to interrupt but Mr. Richardson has
his hand raised do you um want him to um another opportunity to speak sure understood
all right mr richardson proceed i am back again mr chair mr haley should check his email we
did send him a copy of everything that was that you guys received as well
as far as giving him a second opportunity we did want to want and want to give him an
opportunity to show, because he continually said that he had community support, which
apparently was not the case.
It was everybody that he was talking to was, you know, living not within the 250-foot range.
And unfortunately, unfortunately, you know, there's been a whole lot of, and I believe
that the board has read everything that was submitted from our office, and there were a lot
of different things that have gone on with regard to this case. Again, it was pretty much, and when
he says a family-friendly things along those lines, Mr. Haley really doesn't live in the community
either. He saw this as a business investment, and he made a very bad business investment because he
did not do the research to see whether or not it would be something that could go through
as a buy right as opposed to having to go through a zoning hearing, which I explained
to him very thoroughly when he called me at some point last year.
Also to point out, it is not the RCO's responsibility to help him or to guide him through.
I did provide some level of service because it appeared that he didn't have a thorough
understanding of what was the actual
things that were going on with regard to
the zoning hearings, and I had to
give him a thorough education on that, and
I did advise him
to to to engage a lawyer because of the fact that there would be missteps that might be it might
to engage
a lawyer because of the fact that there
would be mistakes.
occur and again missteps have taken place so you know and again the community is not responsible
for the missteps of the of the applicant so you know just to clear that up sir okay thank you
planning commission
thank you chair bergman and good morning david fecto f-e-c-t-e-a-u with the city planning
commission do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir i do proceed thank you sir mr chairman and board members in 2017 the zoning map was
amended in this neighborhood this parcel was intentionally left as single family in accord
with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
However, this building has a documented commercial history
dating to at least the mid-1960s.
By showing pictures of the building's interior,
the appellant has shown that the building
cannot be converted to residential use.
And so the City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the use variants
for a takeout restaurant.
Thank you.
We've heard a lot of testimony on this.
I'm gonna take this to our executive session,
which will be next Wednesday.
We will vote on this at 9.30 a.m. next Wednesday.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Haley.
We're going to go to number one.
MI 2023-000613-336 Pemberton Street.
Roger Perry is the attorney.
We have a letter of support from the Queen Village Neighbors Association, a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Mark Squillin.
Are we joining as a panelist?
Here I am.
Good morning.
Thank you, Mr. Perry.
could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer? Roger Perry, P-E-R-R-Y is
the last name, and I'm the attorney for the owners. All right. Do you swear for him to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client,
a relationship to the property? Yes. My clients are Jeff Weil and Lauren Crona, and there's an
architect, Jackie Gusick, and they may all be here, but I will be making the initial presentation,
and they can raise their hand if they need to add things.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, we do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Yes, we have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
okay the screen should be up there if possible
i'm going to increase the size uh can you see the exhibit list we can okay thank you uh good
morning and there's a couple of others uh as we need to proceed here but i'll try to make this
as short and sweet as possible uh this is a request by the uh the owners who are current
occupants of 336 and 338 Pemberton Street. The initial request is for a lot consolidation.
A lot consolidation was requested in order to do a build-out of their existing single-family home.
The single-family home had refusals. Request was refusals. Initially, it was too high because
they included the pilot house and we removed the closet storage space in the pilot house
and that made the height permissible on that proviso change document and the plan has been
submitted to Hillary Emerson and reviewed and we would ask that to be considered as part of the
submissions here. The other refusal, which there were two, were dimensional. And we've argued that
this is essentially a de minimis dimension variance, based on the fact that there's an
existing rear block wall that is incorporated into the single family home. And that makes the
property approximately, I believe, 3% approximately too small in terms of lot coverage.
The primary issue in terms of the variance request that went to the RCO at two meetings, who has filed the letter of support, was that they had a request for a two-car garage on Pemberton Street without an existing room on the street.
without a an existing room on the street and and queen village neighbors association has been noted
for years has requested to have some eyes on the street so by agreement the site plan was changed
the building plan was changed as submitted to one garage and with a room and windows on the street
And in conjunction with that, and the second meeting with Queen Village, they supported the project.
So let me go down through the documents and give you a little better idea of what we're going.
We may have notices for both RCO hearings.
And we'll back up a little here, see if I have photos.
Of course, thank you.
Okay, so this is the street site and so forth. This is the current interior that was submitted
by the architect. An overview, this is the property here. I have posting photos as well.
So the, let's see what we got here. This is the submission for the
site in terms of modified well I'll put up the modified plan interior plans it's a single
family home with an elevator and that's one of the issues that they wanted to do a more
comprehensive build out notices that's the new description let's see if I have the posting photos
this was for the second notice and so forth prior notices were posted here
meetings were this is in the front of the property this is what the site looks like a
little bit this is their house and this is the jason parking space at 338 this is the two lots
that are being consolidated.
Let me put up the, see if I can do that.
Right, okay, here's the proviso change plan.
So what we've done is submitted to the board
through Ms. Emerson, the revised,
and the revised would be, we only need the one page,
but we included the construction proposed.
But you can see here what we've done is reduce the off-street parking to one garage with a room on the street.
And in conjunction with those meetings and the neighbors, that was supported by Green Village as a side note as to off-street parking.
in this one block where I showed the photos, there are 18 off-street parking spaces in the
immediate three-quarters of a block next to 336. So originally when the 300 block of Pemberton was
developed with Queen Village and so forth, they requested off-street parking. So ironically,
there's 18 off street parking spaces in that same block. And the, so this will not be an
outlier garage. This would just be a 19th, you know, off street parking space. And I don't know
if there's any questions, bona fide plans, we'd be asking for the variance and this one page
that's been reviewed by Ms. Emerson for the change that was submitted originally. And the primary
change was to lower the height by eliminating the storage in the pilot house and going from
two cars to one car garage. And we can answer any questions if the board has any or any further
input. You also have a letter of non-opposition in the council member Squill, am I correct?
Yes. Okay. And Queen Village too, right? Queen Village actually supported the project.
Okay. Why don't we bring the owner on and adopt your testimony?
uh yes um who do we have there do we have uh either jeff or lauren
if they're there can you raise your hand
jeffrey wild has has their hand raised i've got them to speak hi sir could you state your name
please and spell for the court stenographer uh yep jeffrey wild j-e-f-f-r-e-y-w-i-l-d
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? The whole truth is nothing but the truth.
I do. Proceed counsel. Thank you, Jeff. Thank you for being here. Have you heard
the essence of my presentation to the board today? I did. Yeah. And can you adopt that
as true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Is this you that testified as the
owner? Yep, that is correct. Thank you. Questions from the board.
yep that is correct thank you questions from the board no chair
tom emily
no chair okay thank you um questions or comments no mr chairman excuse me thank you
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and board
members good morning david effecto with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential multi-family zoning at this location the
appellant requests off-street parking where none is allowed and dimensional variances for
maximum occupied area rear yard depth and rear yard area the proposed dimensional variances for
occupied area and rear yard depth are minor and in keeping with the spirit and intention of the
zoning code however the variances for parking and rear yard area are substantial and staff
believes that no economic detriment will accrue to the appellant if these variances are not granted
So the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variances for occupied area in rear yard depth, but deny the variances for parking and rear yard area.
Thank you, David.
Council, you want to respond at all before we take this?
Yes, just briefly, if you can hear me, the rear yard.
Where am I muted?
Should be unmuted.
We can hear you, sir.
We can hear you.
Okay, thank you. Yeah, just very briefly, the rear yard is sort of constrained by the fact that this is, this property has been enclosed by a block wall for years and years, and they're sort of controlled by that. And, and the idea, the primary issue, as noted, went to the RCO on the garages, and which we did as, as owners and the architect has reduced this to one car with, that's this here with the change with the window on the street and so forth.
And just note in this one particular, I could show that, but don't need to in the photos, but there are 18 off-street parkings immediately adjacent to this property.
So this is not going to be an outlier by any means and a very narrow street.
Okay, thank you.
MI 2023-000-613-336 Pemberton Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA, July 26, 2023.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
With proviso.
With proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Okay, thank you very much.
All right, number three, MI 2022-004-784-536 Brinton Street.
Sharon Harvey is the attorney for the owner.
uh mr chair did we mr chair did we skip number two i'm sorry if i did
i did you're right i'm sorry mi2022 007610 440 to 42 west queen lane henry clinton is the attorney
We'll be hearing this also with number 9, MI 2023-000102-442 West Queen Lane.
We have a letter of support from the 12th Ward Democratic Committee, RCO, and a letter of non-opposition from Solo Germantown with provisos.
Mr. Clinton.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, Mr. Clinton.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
The owner of the property is Rosemond, R-O-S-M-A-N-D, Properties, LLC, and the principal is Anat Madar,
A-N-A-T-M-A-D-A-R
Our Vice Chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, Counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
I have, Mr.
Thank you.
Please proceed to share your screen, Counselor.
is that visible mr chairman yes maybe a little bigger if you get a chance certainly
that's fine okay uh and mr chairman i think you mentioned at the end that you want me to
basically present two properties at the same time because... If possible, please.
So just at the outset, as the chair recognizes, there's two properties here, 440
West Queen Lane and 442 West Queen Lane. We presented both properties to the RCO and
affiliated RCOs at the same time. It's basically side-by-side duplexes. So I'm going to ask that
my testimony with regard to 440 also applied to 442. Thank you. I'll walk through the presentation.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, I just want to note for the record, Mr. Clinton, when you're referring to
440, you're referring to 440-42 West Queen Lane T-1-110935, because that's the official address
that we have on record for that property at this time.
Okay, understood, because that's the confusion
I think that was raised here is
when the refusal was issued for 440,
it had 440-442,
and then there was a second refusal simply for 442.
But I agree with counsel that 440-442,
that was the OPA number you referenced.
All right, thank you.
Just wanted to clarify for those listening
because the addresses are different.
Thank you, Mr. Emerson. So, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, this is my table of contents A1 to A10, which I ASP admitted into the record for both properties. And by both properties, I mean, Mr. Chairman, 440 and 442. And I won't describe that again in the interest of time.
There's simply one refusal here. It's a use refusal. The project is a by right project for a duplex as part of this twin. So there's no issues with regard to dimensions, height, rear yard, open space.
It's simply that in our zoning district that parking two spaces are required.
And I'll show the board that none of the multifamily homes on this block have parking spaces.
And frankly, all of our discussions with the community group really concerned the construction and elevations of the two duplexes to make them more fitting into the neighborhood.
so that you wouldn't be able to tell one house from the other,
although our homes will be new construction.
I'll show you the RCO letters at the end.
There is a letter of support from the 12th Ward Democratic Committee.
They voted 14 to 0 to support us in their letter.
They note that we've had three meetings with the community group.
And again, all the discussions were concerning the elevations
and the construction of the property, nothing really to do with parking, which I think is a
tacit acknowledgement, not willing to put words into the RCO's mouth, but a tacit acknowledgement
that the parking on this block for these two properties would run contrary to what all the
other properties have on the block. And I'll show you that with aerial photographs. So currently,
this is a vacant parcel of ground. As I say, this is a buy-write project for a duplex on one side
and a duplex on the other side, and I'll show you additional photographs of the block
indicating that all the homes on this side of the street don't have any parking at all,
and some of them are multifamily. Across the street happens to be a Montessori school
and some other properties, again, very few of which of a residential nature have any parking at all.
This is a close review. Again, Mr. Chairman, members of the board indicating that there's really no parking, off-street parking on the same side of the street as our project. These are the zoning notices that we're required to post on both properties.
on both properties.
Our plans are revised,
and I don't know if the chair wants me to go through the plans
because really there's no issue concerning the use,
excuse me, concerning the construction of the property.
But in deference to the community group,
again, they asked us to make several changes,
all of which we did.
So for both properties,
I have submitted revised proviso plans forms
consisting of two pages.
So basically, the front porch was added
to match the adjacent properties.
Front set packs were adjusted.
Grading was changed.
The depth of the proposed building also was changed.
And again, as the chairman knows,
there's give and take with the community group.
And when my client decided to undergo all these changes,
the community group supported this project wholeheartedly.
So again, I don't want to dwell on the plans
unless the chair wants me to?
I think we're fine.
So the rest of the documents that are in the package are,
and I'm not going to go through all the other plans
that we have, Mr. Chairman,
because we did three revisions, again,
to try to seek the support of the community group,
which we did.
Henry, where's a drawing of the front
I'm going to show you that. That's the last photograph, I think. I have a rendering.
You know, it may have been at the front. Bear with me and I'll get to it, Mr. Chairman.
Let me reduce these. It'll make it go faster.
Thank you.
it's in my package mr chairman you just have to find it for you okay
i did see it once when you flashed by just right i did uh
these are the revised floor plans
all right this is the side view of the property yeah the front view is to the right here it is
Mr. Chairman. Okay, thank you. So again, we're trying to match the historical context of the
of the block. Remaining documents are my tax certifications and basically the list of
notifications to all the surrounding properties that we provide. There's also a letter of non-opposition
from SOLO, which is Germantown Civic Association Southwest Central. That's also, I'll show you that
this is the letter of support from the 12th Ward Democratic Committee.
And this is a summary of the meetings indicating that we had three different meetings. We redesigned
the project twice and they are in full support and this is the letter of non-opposition from
solo germantown civic association which is really the southwest central lower germantown
they asked for a number of provisos trash stored indoors no mail boxes on the exterior
and we've agreed to do that as well as to plant trees if we're permitted by the streets department
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I just want to, in summary, mention that this is a unique situation where we're not really altering the essential character of the neighborhood.
We're in conformity with the other elevations on the block.
And more importantly, to address the refusal, we're in conformity with the other uses on the block where there is no off-street parking for multifamily use.
We're not impairing anyone's light or air.
We're not impairing the development of any adjacent properties.
we're in harmony with the code
and we're in harmony with the
desire of the neighborhood
and with that I'd like to close and ask
that all my exhibits for both properties
be admitted into evidence
thank you
how about your client you want to adopt your testimony
sure Ms. Madara can you unmute
yourself
they've been allowed to speak
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, good morning.
It's Anat Madar, A-N-A-T, Madar, M-A-D-A-R.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed.
Ms. Madara, were you on the call when I presented both of your projects, one at 440-4042 West Queen Lane, which is ZP-2022-012-462, as well as 442 West Queen Lane, which is ZP-2022-012-463?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Yes. Thank you, Ms. Medar. Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Thomas?
No, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have a hand raised from a number ending in 7798. I have allowed them to speak.
Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi. Can you hear me?
Okay. I'm Edon Shlomo. E-D-O-N. Last name Shlomo. S-H-L-O-M-O.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Proceed.
Sorry.
I was at the community meetings,
and I just want to say that the owner worked with us really well
to make sure all of our things that we wanted to change were done
as far as the front porch and the setback so that it works with the
community, and I highly approve the project.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call in. Is there anyone that's in the virtual audience?
Yes, we have another hand raised from a number ending in 5555.
Hi, state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer.
Hello?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer, please?
Certainly. Allison Weiss, A-double-S-O-N-W-E-I-S-S.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And you're from Solo, right, Allison?
Proceed.
um i i want to just um comments which i know um are not part of the
issue but uh we're unresolved and
you're breaking up i say we appreciate all of the improvements to the project that the owner made
But there were two unresolved issues from the last meeting that I just wanted to address, if possible, which was the materials of the mansard, the wooden shingles.
people had objection to that use of material and the retaining wall in front along the sidewalk
that has deteriorated being restored using Wissahickon shift, a material that's widely
used in the community and on that block. So we appreciate if that could be addressed
with the owner
at some time.
Thank you for your comments.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, I have a hand raised from a number
ending in one point.
Well, right now, the only hand raised is
Mr. Charles Richardson.
Hi, Mr. Richardson.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman
Cindy Bass Room, 508
City Hall.
Housewoman has no opposition to granting this variance.
Thank you for taking the time to call on in.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, a hand raised from 1655.
I've allowed them to speak.
I could you state your name, please?
It's spelled for the court stenographer.
Star six to unmute, please.
Star six to unmute, please.
Hi, could you state your name, please?
Would you state your name, please, and wait to be sworn in?
Are they muted, Jason?
no they weren't muted uh but now they are okay they may be having technical difficulties because
they keep muting is there is there anyone else from the virtual audience
no i do not see any further answer okay we're gonna we're gonna move on planning commission
thank you chair bergman and board members good morning david effecto with the city planning
commission chair i'll testify for both properties at the same time the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the residential two-family zoning at this location the appellant has demonstrated
the slope of the property presents a hardship requiring the proposed parking variance and so
this the proposed variance matches the character of the block and the city planning commission
recommends that the board grant the proposed variance from the parking requirements in the
zoning code. Thank you. So I'll join both together. Number two is MI 2022-007-610-44242
West Queen Lane, number T1-110935. And number nine is MI 2023-000102-442-West Queen Lane.
I vote yes to both with revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA on July 26, 2023,
and interior trash storage, interior mailbox, and mail storage.
Is that for both properties, Mr. Chairman?
Both properties. Yeah, I've read both properties. Absolutely.
Thank you.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso on both.
Emily.
Emily Bresico, my vote is yes to both with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes to both with proviso.
Thank you, Thomas.
Thank you, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Number 10.
No, wait, wait, wait, no, no, no, hold on.
Number three, MI 2022-004-784-536 Brinton Street.
Sharon Harvey is the attorney for the owner.
Letter of support from Chew and Belleville Neighbors Association.
An applicant also provided a petition in support by 10 neighbors, nine from the 500 block of Brighton.
Coming back in as a panelist.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sharon Harvey, S-H-A-R-O-N Harvey, H-A-R-V-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm the total truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
The owner, Lisa Terry, and the property is at 536 Britton Street, calendar number MI2022-004784.
Right. So I understand, talking to our attorney, we're going to hear the case and then hold it for discussion.
Yes. I did submit the exhibits, but they were late.
No, no, no. No, I mean, OK. So our vice chair has just a few questions for us.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes. Yes.
I've emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing.
Not five days in advance, but I did email the exhibits to the board.
And there is no tax clearance. We applied for one, but there is no tax.
and that there is no tax clearance. We applied for one, but there is no tax clearance because
there are no other businesses. And the only taxes that would be due would be the real estate taxes,
which are paid through her mortgage. Fair enough. So as the chair said, we'll hear the case and
hold it and make sure we have all the proper information that is needed before we vote.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Yes, good morning again we're here for 536 Britain Street and sometimes it's called East
Britain Street.
Can everyone see the screen we can we're good.
And we have the table of contents, the posting, the deed infusal, and the property history.
Copy of the posting and the deed showing that Ms. Terry purchased this property in 2022 from Brock, Weldon Brock.
as we have already uh weighed the right of the reading of the refusal the property is a zone
uh a single family use and the multi-family uh which we are requesting is a prohibited in this
RS3A zone. Initially, the property in 1962 was zoned as a three-apartment building and became
a multifamily building, which continued through the purchase of the prior owner, Mr. Weldon Brock,
who had an active rental license until 2012, December 2012, at which time he allowed it to lapse.
But he continued to have tenants in the property.
miss terry is proposing to uh have the property rezoned uh or variance for a three apartment
building uh and miss terry plans to live on the first floor of the building and then rent out the
other two spaces. You can see it was also posted on the porch. This is a side view of the property
and her property, if you can see, runs right through to the grass line. So all this property
is her side yard. And here's the back view of the property. Ms. Terry is not proposing to make any
changes to the height or the width of the building. This is the rear of the property.
There is a single, or actually a two-car garage that can be used for this property, and Ms. Terry plans to get parking permits for this back area.
and the back cellar, the back of the property has a cellar, which will have a deck on the
cellar over the, or on, on the rear of the property. So that would be a change.
These are the floor plans that propose the three apartments. And I have a picture where each
apartment would be for the first floor apartment. This is the first floor apartment. So
a one-bedroom, and it's 818 square feet, which the first floor apartment is where Ms. Perry
will be living. The second floor apartment is a two-bedroom apartment, which has 827 square feet,
27 square feet a two uh the two bedroom apartment and then a third floor apartment is 792
And then the third floor apartment is 792 square feet, and that is a one-bedroom apartment.
These are interior pictures for the building.
This is the first floor bedroom, and you can see that it's in need of repair.
And work has not actually been begun.
And some demolition has been done in the property to clear it out, but no work has been done.
This is the second floor front bedroom and the third floor bed, the third floor and the kitchen area.
Keep on listening.
And this is a side view of the property, which is here, and it's facing Chew Avenue.
And to the rear of her property is an apartment complex on Duval Street.
So this particular aerial view shows the red dot is Ms. Terry's property, and all these blue dots are already three-story, three-bedroom multifamily units on that same block.
And this is just a list of the multifamily units.
Again, this is another picture of the rear, and by allowing the variance, her tenants, at least two of her tenants could park in the rear of the property.
and this is a view of the the back of the property and right now this is the this is
actually the area of her her property right there and she's going to have parking for permit parking
for her tenants in that area um the miss terry uh plans to have cameras uh which is uh and security
around the building and um the i think that is it for us um miss terry went out and got several
of her neighbors to sign the a petition um in support of her her application the rco we did
meet with the RCO after posting and sending out the letters twice, once, and we received, it was
not very well attended. However, we did get support of all those who were attending with a
request for emergency ladders for the second and third floor, which Ms. Terry agreed to.
Uh, there's a copy of the letters and copy of our, our mailings with their 15 pages of the mailings. I did not put all 15 pages in and, and that is it.
And Ms. Terry.
You're applying to come on and adopt your testimony.
Yes, I do. Ms. Terry.
good morning could you state your name please oh good morning could you state your name and
spell please for the court stenographer good morning my name is lisa terry l-i-s-a terry
t-e-r-r-y right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Ms. Terry, have you heard the presentation? I did. And would you adopt the presentation as being truthful? I do. And your own testimony? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Questions from the board? No, Chair. No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience mr chair i have a tiffany thornton with the hand
raised i have allowed them to speak this time hi could you state your name could you state
pardon me counsel mr chair uh tiffany thornton is an attorney in my office uh and she
pardon me council mr chair uh tiffany thornton is an attorney in my office uh and she was
helping run the the okay good good good thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you
is there anyone else in the virtual audience um yes charles richardson i've allowed them to speak
good morning mr richardson good morning again mr chair charles richardson office of councilwoman
ascended bathroom 508 city hall councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance
thank you very much for calling in is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands so hillary do we want planning to weigh in or do we want to
go to l and i first um i think that's up to planning um just to be clear that the issue
in this matter is that parking uh three parking spaces will be required and it sounds like there
are one to two on the site and so that needs to to be documented and i need to speak with l and i
about how they would like to do that um but let me see let me see where david david yeah david do
you want to take a position or do you want to wait to see what l and i says sure why don't we wait
until l and i that's fine that's okay okay terrific all right good so we're going to hold
we'll have a resumptive hearing am i right hillary yes we'll schedule um a resumption
um do we have something in well actually if we do an amended refusal it might take a little while
we're just we're just going to have to post the resumption because i don't know exactly when we're
going to have a result of hearing in this we're going to hold this for discussion with ellen i
regarding the existing and required parking and amended refusal may be needed okay council
yes okay all right thank you both very much
oh wait excuse me just go back to the parking really quick and let them know that
you're going to have permanent parking right yeah so i'm sorry as i stated we are going to have
permit parking on the property uh so in the rear in the rear in the rear yeah but i i think we
still have to go back to l and i am i right hillary yes because so there's if there's already
parking on the site it needs to be documented in the refusal and you're also required to have
three parking spaces so if you don't have three you may need a variance for not having the required
three spaces as well so i just have to clarify that with l and i all right all right thank you
Thank you very much.
Number 10, MI2022, 004789, 1821 North Natrona Street.
Lynn Nichols is the attorney.
There was a meeting held with Strawberry Mansion.
we don't have an RCO letter
that I have observed yet
there was a petition in support
signed by 14 neighbors
6 from the 1800 block of North Natrona
good morning counsel
could you state your name
and spell for the court sonographer
yes my name is Lynn Nichols
L-Y-N-N
last name N-I-C-H-O-L-S
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
QA, could you please identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes, his name is Bryant Watson, and he's the owner.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refuser and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Before I proceed, Chair, can I ask if there's anyone on the call besides Bryant Watson who intends to testify in this matter?
we don't see any other hands do we i don't know there was a beverly wilson stone who
identified herself earlier i don't know if there's anyone if she's still on the call or
is there anyone else i mean she's still on the call and there's at least five other hands
accompanying her okay i guess we'll get to that when we get to it um thank you can i share my
screen? You can. Thank you. Can you see that? We can. All right. So this is a petition or request.
We can. All right. So this is a petition or a request for a variance for a multifamily, two-family household in an existing structure.
Our application for appeal notes that the requirements of the zoning code cause an unnecessary hardship due to the size, shape, contours, and physical dimensions of the property.
The variance we seek represents the least modification of the code to provide relief.
No action on our part will increase congestion in the public streets or in any way endanger the public.
It will not substantially or permanently harm neighbors' use of their properties or impair light and air.
It will not increase traffic congestion in the public streets or place undue burden on the water, sewer, or other public facilities.
It will not create environmental damage, pollution, erosion, or increase the danger of flooding.
And here you will see we also have project information form.
The deed, this property was purchased from the estate of Keith McCall by Mr. Watson.
The deed was recorded on January 3rd, 2022.
here we have the certificate of tax clearance
we notified um near neighbors there were letters sent out to 97 near neighbors
and we had our community meeting on june 22nd it was very spirited
um here's the zoning notice that's posted on the door
this is a letter that was sent to the community
the refusal which we've already
agreed to so we submitted with our package comps of what we consider properties that are similar
to what Mr. Watson has now these addresses we researched show that
these properties were built in 1915. And they're all three-story properties.
So the size of the property is consistent with other properties on the block.
During the call with the RCO, the neighbors who came on insisted that the family of the houses on the block were single family.
Now, that's not the complete story, which as these comps we've researched show, there's been multifamily units on this block.
Many of them have been three family dwellings, or three family dwellings, and some of them are
two family dwellings. Mr. Watson is asking for two families in his property.
Now, what we also determined was that because this property
is on the block where it's located. Mr. Watson has a model. What he likes to do is to provide
affordable housing to residents who want to live in this area. Here is a picture of the front of
the property. This is a view looking to the left. A view looking to the right. This is a view
looking across the street. And these are the plans. I'm going to pull them up in a different
of screen so you can see them. All right. This is a 2,200 and I believe 52 square feet property.
So it's pretty big. What Mr. Watson proposes to do is to have one unit on the first floor
where there's a bedroom, living room, kitchen, bathroom. And then the second and third floors
would be a bi-level unit, which would contain a bedroom on the second floor with the kitchen and
living room, a bathroom, and then on the third floor would be a master bedroom, bedroom with a
closet. And we provided these plans during our call with the RCO. In addition, as the chair noted,
We did get signatures from near neighbors. I believe it was two, three, four, five, six.
I believe it was two, three, four, five, six near neighbors on the block.
If you look at the signatures, one of the near neighbors or two of them live at 1835 North Natrona Street, which is a multifamily property unit on that block already.
And the owner of that property has a rental license for three units, but it appears that only two people are living there.
or if there are three maybe there's not someone in the third unit. In any event what we also
discovered is that there's been a property for sale on the block 1827 North Natrona Street for
almost five months. I say that because economically Mr. Watson as I stated before wants to provide
affordable housing for residents to live in this block. And it would be economically unfeasible for
him to have this as a single family property, considering that there's a property on the block
that hasn't even sold in five months. At this time, I would ask if my client would be allowed
to come on and adopt my testimony. Yes, absolutely. Mr. Watson. Mr. Watson, could you state your name
please and spell for the court stenographer? I don't have to speak. Can you hear me? Yes. Could
you state your name and spell for the court stenographer? Bryant Watson, B-R-Y-A-N-T,
Watson, W-A-T-S-O-N. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Watson, are you the owner of 1821 North
Metrona Street? Yes. And do you own another property on that block? Yes. And do you agree
with and adopt the presentation and testimony I gave here today? Yes, I do. Do you have any other
comments you would like to make to the board oh i don't thank you questions from the board
no chair
no mr chair thank you questions or comments in the virtual audience mr chair i have whitney
blake with their hand raised i have allowed them to speak hi could you state your name please
and spell for the court stenographer. Good morning. Can you hear me? I can. Okay. Good morning. My
name is Whitney Blake, spelled W-H-I-T-N-E-Y. Last name is B-L-A-K-E. What else do you need? Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. Are you a
neighbor? Yes, sir. Proceed. I live directly across the street from 1821 North Latrona Street.
I have been present to all previous meetings with the Strawberry Mansion Board, along with Lynn Nichols and Brian Watson.
In the first meeting, they did not provide the correct dimensions of the building they were going to build.
And in the second spirited meeting that she mentioned, there was a lot of callousness regarding our concerns about the congestion in our neighborhood, particularly from Ms. Nichols.
um in the uh document they stated that there will be no impact on the congestion in and around the
neighborhood that is entirely untrue um our neighborhood is already congested as is people
are parking on the sides of the street as we do not have access we do not have the room adding
additional families would cause a lot of congestion and i am just appalled at the callousness as to
how they're going about this. As many people on my block have expressed our concern on the
construction, its impact on the already limited parking that we have, as well as just the overall
negligence of the feelings of the people who have lived here. I have grown up on this block. I am in
my 30s. I grew up on my block. And just noticing just how all of this has transpired, even now,
it seems as though our concerns are not being addressed. We have asked several times about the
parking situation and how that is going to be addressed and the congestion, and we did not
receive an adequate response. So I am hoping that you guys reject their request and that they come
to our block with an adequate revision. Thank you. Chair, can I ask what her address is, please?
1818 North Nachona Street. I'm directly across the street. Chair, do you want me to respond now or
wait why don't we uh why don't we see who else is in the audience okay okay
Why don't we, why don't we see who else is in the audience. Okay. Okay. Other people in the
virtual audience? Yes, Tyrone Williams. I've allowed them to speak. Good morning, Mr. Williams.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer? Oh, good morning, Mr. Chair.
My name is Reverend Tyrone Williams, first name T-Y-R-O-N-E, last name Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, sir.
And, Reverend, are you a neighbor?
I am the program manager for the Strawberry Mansion Community Development Corporation, which was the RCO day of the meetings.
All right, proceed.
As well as the chair of the meetings. So as it was forestated, the first meeting, they did not have the proper dimensions or wasn't prepared to present. So they did not. On June 22nd, they did present. Yes, that was a very spirited meeting.
Many of the residents at that time expressed their concern of congestion, their concern of just changing the block from a family-filled block, single families, to having a change.
It was a fair factor going on with the residents about what can happen in that block.
It's a lot that has been going on around that block,
surrounding that block.
So they are observing development happening around them.
And they gave a vote resounding overwhelmingly no,
because they say that this is the only way that they think they can speak up.
Other than that, they don't feel as though they have been being heard.
um with that the struggling action cdc has to uh offer non-support we saw really we did get the
letter in i got it to mr lee i hope he got it to you miss nipples uh i know it wasn't timely but we
did give a letter of opposition to this project and like i said the residents uh supports we
support the residents and so that's our position all right thank you reverend for your taking the
time to call. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, Calvin Williams. I've allowed them
to speak, sir. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello? Mr. Williams, please unmute yourself. Yes, can you hear me at all? Yes, we hear you. Could
you state your name please and spell for the courts yes calvin williams c-a-l-v-i-n-w-i-l-l-i-a-m-s
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do are you a neighbor sir yes i am a neighbor an 1800 block of natrona street
i am along hello okay i along with my neighbors thank you for the opportunity
I, along with my neighbors, are part of three and four generations of single family home ownership on the block.
Our block is no longer than a football field with the church at one end of the block and the other end of the block from Burke Street is an apartment houses.
I think we have maybe 20 houses, maybe on the entire block.
And there's all single families.
The comps that the attorney presented, neither of those houses and none of those houses have variances for multiple family units.
Two of the properties are lots.
Mrs. Blake owns one of the lots, and she has never given any authority or saying that it was three units allowed on there.
We are not in the position right now.
We're small. We're family oriented. We do everything together.
And I've spoken to the board before that we're trying desperately to keep the continuity of our neighborhood with single family homeowners with four and five generations.
And that is my block. I just hope that the board will vote into in our favor.
We reject this project. Thank you so much for listening.
Thank you. Is there anyone else? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else in the first?
Mr. Chair, can I ask what Mr. Williams' address is?
Mr. Williams, what's your address?
Hold on.
It's okay if you don't.
I think he said he lived on the block. I know. Okay. Okay. All right. Is there anyone else in
I think he said he lived on the block.
I know.
All right.
Is there anyone else?
the virtual audience? Yes. Bevan Journey with her hand raised. I have allowed him to speak.
Okay. I could just state your name as spelled, please, for the court stenographer.
Hi. Yes. My name is Bevan Journey, and it's B-E-V-I-N-J-O-U-R-N-E-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. Do you live on the, do you live, are you a neighbor? I do. And I live at 1817 for Miss
Nichols. Okay. Um, so I moved in about, uh, four years ago, um, with, I live here with my nine
month old daughter and I just want to second what Mr. Williams was saying. Um, to me, this block is
very family oriented. It is my intention to raise my daughter here. Um, I really like the tradition
of multi-generation families on this home.
And that's my intention to stay here and do the same thing.
The block is very family oriented
and I would hope that any change in development
would support that.
And then I also just wanted to push back again
against that idea of not increasing traffic.
And I just wanna point out that another neighbor
who I actually think is on this call
started a petition to switch the block
to permit parking years ago
because we were already facing issues with traffic on this block.
So we have a long history before this property was sold
and development was changing of being concerned about parking.
And as far as I know, that change was granted by the city.
They're going to allow us to switch to permit parking
because the city did recognize that there's already problems
with parking availability on the street.
I think we're just waiting for the signage on that.
And then the other thing I just want to say is that I also work at the neighborhood catchment school around the block. And we definitely, you know, the enrollment there is low. I think we would be looking for families to come in. I know I own a single family house.
the people on the other side next to me um it's a young couple they bought a home so i do think
that there is interest from families to buy full homes um i i don't think that there would only be
interest in multi-family homes i think that people are interested in uh uh you know a one family home
so thank you i just i oppose this yeah okay sure thank you for taking the time to calls
Thank you. Jason, how many more hands do we have? Just two. The first is Beverly Wilson Stone. I've allowed them to speak. Okay. Good morning.
Morning. Hi, I think I've already sworn you in. Could you just please state your name for the record?
Beverly Wilson Stone. All right. And are you a neighbor? Yes. 1831.
Okay, proceed.
Yes, I just wanted to reiterate on what my fellow family neighbors were saying.
We have one side parking, that's first of all, that's evident.
You know, there's not much parking space available for us.
Older residents and our regular new residents that's already on the block to own homes.
we already have
two apartment buildings on this block
we're fighting
always for parking spaces that are
disabled
the elderly neighbors who still drive
it's going to be
a real inconvenience
like we said at the prior
meeting on June 22nd
we had a little discrepancy there
we had a little
a little rough communication.
I'm going to say it like that. But, you know,
I'm just hoping that, you know, we stay family oriented and the block will stay
where as far as families are in these homes that, you know,
getting the industrialized, we would like
to stay family oriented on this block.
All right. Thank you for taking the time to call us, and we appreciate your testimony.
And I am against the building of it.
I think I understand that. Jason, next hand.
Bryant Wilson. Nothing to speak.
I'm Bryant Watson.
Watson.
Could you state your name, please?
Mr. Chair, I believe this is Ms. Nichols' client.
I know, I know.
Yes, I was going to recall him, Chair.
uh chair if all right what why don't we do that now okay mr watson is there anything you'd like
All right, why don't we do that now?
to say in response to the comments that you just heard from the members who've uh testified yes
can you hear me yes yes um the last meeting there was never a issue with parking about saying we
wouldn't try to uh fix the parking the issue with parking is not with not not concerned my concern
with me because there's only one side of parking on the street so if i have a fan one family or
two family that's that that's that's not nothing that i can fix if i put one family in there and
it's a five-bedroom house there's going to be two people or three people with cars regardless
the whole time like my family lit that's my family's house just interrupt you 1821 was your
family's house yes it's my family's house so the the parking was always an issue right there
there was always an issue in that neighborhood if there's only parking on one side of the street
so that's not that it's not like i said like i i didn't try to fix that concern is that there's
no way to fix that there's no parking on the street so most people that rent most young people
uh catch ubers anyway so that wouldn't have been an issue with me and and my property so there was
never like so when when they said it was testy and it was getting loud in the last meeting that
wasn't because of us because it was because of the uh someone talking loud it was it was never
me talking loud I was always respectful I was actually getting high on that on the last meeting
I never talked back to anyone I didn't raise my voice to anyone that was all the neighbors
getting tested with me and and and Miss Nichols I never said anything loud that was the neighbors
getting loud so we never had I never had an issue about parking I never said anything about that
is that it's parking it's only parking on one side of the street and that's most of the streets
in the neighborhood, unless you're on a big
street, whereas there's two sides of parking.
But on that street, there's only one side of parking.
And Mr. Watson, how long did your
family own that house?
They owned that house since the 50s.
So when Mr.
William?
Mr. Calvin, yes, when he says he'd been there
and his family, he just moved in that house
in the 90s. Like, my family remember
when he moved there. So for him to say that and say
it's family oriented, my family been there
longer.
My family owned that house in the 50s.
Did you obtain these signatures on the petition of support?
Yes, yes. And they all have addresses. Yes.
Now, there's addresses here on Montgomery Avenue.
Yes, right behind there. Exactly. I'm from that neighborhood. I'm 55. I've been around
the whole 55 years. I'm from there. So when they say I'm not from there and I'm coming
from somewhere else and family oriented that doesn't that doesn't relate to me i'm from there
i've been around there longer than most of them it's been a lot of them actually not most of them
but a lot of them the people that's on here the lady that says she in 17 that just moved there
i've been there longer and the address is on the trona street these are people that you spoke with
who are in support yes project yes like i was under the impression that they didn't vote last
time on the 22nd they cut us off said they're going to postpone the voting so there was no
voting so all the people that was going to vote logged off so there was no voting now i'm now i'm
hearing that they voted when they told me when mr uh the reverend told me and you that no i
recommend you postpone it there's no way you're going to win postpone it so everybody hung up
but now i hear that there was a vote so so that was kind of like unfair to me that that people
didn't get the vote for me because they all hung up and so when you were on that call the last thing
you heard was that there was no vote taken there was no vote they wanted me all they wanted me off
they wanted you off and there was going to be no vote they said they was postponing the vote
they said there was going to be no vote because you try to say i want to vote now because next
month we're not going to be able to get an rco before the zba meeting so you try to get them to
vote right then and there and they told me and you know we can't vote they said there will be
no voting that day now they saying there was a vote and we lost we didn't want to vote so that
sounds kind of funny to me thank you okay i'll share do you want to you have any other comments
i just really would like the board to understand the dynamics of what happens i understand that
the community members who are on the call feel that they don't want change. And that's, that's
understandable. And we try to, as Mr. Watson said, explain to them that we heard their concerns.
There was no callousness. We actually asked if they had any specific requests,
requests, we would consider them, but they continued to insist that we were not listening
we would consider them, but they continued to insist.
to them. That was the whole conversation, that we weren't listening. We weren't. We sat on the
meeting for about, it was over an hour. And Mr. Watson is not the kind of owner who wouldn't want
to address any concerns. Again, the first that we're hearing is that there's opposition is here
because we were told there was no vote that was going to be taken, that they couldn't take a vote.
So it's a little, as Mr. Watson said, confusing and, you know, somewhat concerning that
that changed somehow, and we didn't know about it until today. But with that aside, we believe
we've presented enough for the board to know that there are neighbors on that block who do support
Mr. Watson and our near neighbors in a block next to him that support him having two families he's
only asking for two he's not asking for three he's asking for two and as he said this was his
family's house and they had multiple people that lived there so understandably if you have a five
bedroom house five people could live there and parking would you know be what it is whether it
was single family or not. So we would just ask that you grant the variance, understanding that
this will not change the character of the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Planning
Commission. Mr. Chair, please pardon the interruption, but we have one more hand raised
from a number ending in 61641. I will allow them to speak. Okay. Okay. Could you state your name,
please and spell for the court stenographer hello can you hear me yes could you state your name
and spell for the court stenographer my name is Gwendolyn Blake Blair g as in girl w-e-n-d-o-l-y-n
b as in boy l-a-k-e where you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth? Yes. Are you a neighbor? Yes, I am. Proceed. Okay. I reside right across the street from
your client's residence. I also own the lot next to my home, which is 1820. On that list,
It said that it was granted a zone for three family homes.
Number one, I'm the owner of that, and I've never requested a grant for anything.
It's always been where I've been living here for many, many years for single-family homes.
And, again, I'm going to agree with the other neighbors that I'm with, and we are family-oriented.
We know each other.
um there is a severe issue about the parking whether or not it's too like adding on additional
family we're still going to have that issue and we're just asking that you would consider that
when you um whatever you decide that there is to be but you just need to know that it is very
congested in this neighborhood along with the services that are not being granted or not not
following through. I've had an issue with the tree that was planted by the city and it's been
over two, three years and I still have not had any results. Wait, we understand your personal
issues, but the question really is this property here, are you for the variance or against the
variance? I am not for the variance. Okay. Thank you very much. Ms. Nichols, you want to follow up
any questions? Well, I don't want to follow up with any questions from Ms. Ware. Thank you.
What I would like to just point out, as the board knows, the documents that justify the variances
are on Atlas. So we didn't research properties and find them to be multifamily when they weren't.
That's what I just wanted to point that out. Thank you very much. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chair and members, in 1967, the zoning maps were changed at this location from residential multifamily to residential single-family.
In 2014, a neighborhood-wide zoning map change left the single-family zoning unchanged in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variants for two dwelling units.
Ms. Nichols, we've had a great deal of testimony on this.
And what I want to do is take this to the other members of the board and meet in an executive session to vote.
to vote. We will vote next Wednesday at 9.30 a.m. on this request, okay? Thank you, Chair.
We will vote next Wednesday at 930 a.m. on those.
Thank you, thank you, and thanks for everyone else who called in. Is there anyone else in
the virtual audience whose 9.30 case has not been called? I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Thanks, everyone. See everyone at 2 p.m. Okay, Chair, thanks.
And Emily, thank you, Emily.
Thank you, everyone.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's CBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
And also here is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunket.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised if proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tanyasunket at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and
star 6 to unmute. To an unappearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the
address of the property a question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for
comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon. Number one, MI 2021-004-819-2900 Distance Street.
This resumptive of hearing this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, October 18,
2023 at 2 p.m. Number two, MI 2023, 001-213-301 Delmar Street. This case is continued. Number four,
MI 2022, 005-442-3021 Vare Avenue. This case is also continued. Number six,
MI 2022 007 282 4100 Orchard Street. This case is continued. Number nine.
MI 2023 001 286 152 to 58 West Logan Street. This case is continued. And number 10. MI 2023
303-001-364-1433 McFarren Street. This case is continued. Is there any comments relative
from the virtual audience on any of the cases that haven't been continued?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. I do see one hand, Mr. Brian O'Neill.
I've allowed them to speak.
thank you mr chair sir could you say your name please mr councilman brian brian o'neill um
councilman for the 10th district which includes 4100 orchard right do you swear a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed sir um we're asking for a
continuance, um, Sean Whalen, um, my attorney is on the, is on the call. Um, but two months ago in
May, um, this city solicitor asked for a continuance and, uh, as, as a favor, because he
had a very busy schedule. Um, we were not anxious to have a continuance, but we've been having
difficulty for the last year or so getting a measurement of said property garage. The property
in question is a garage. And we didn't get that. We had an agreement to get the measurement before
the next hearing, which is today. It was a must be tried. That measurement has not been taken
by the city. And I'm asking that the zoning board in their wisdom and authority
get a continuous there's a clear discrepancy on both the
get a continuous. There's a clear discrepancy on both the atlas and just a visual of the property
that this property is well into the required setback. And all we're asking for, it's a
different, it's not the issues we have before you in the appeal, but it's an issue that would
automatically make it a variance. And rather than waste the ZBA's time, and also knowing that
this is a serious issue that I'm hoping, and my counsel is hoping, he stated this in his
continuance request, that we can have an order that L&I or the survey department,
streets department um do a um uh a a survey or measurement of the um uh the garage from the uh
from the um uh you know with the setback and the uh and the utility easement uh we haven't heard
anything on that and i don't know what is going on hillary uh yes mr chair i've um i've asked um
mr reuter who is representing uh the city in this matter to hop on i believe he is coming on
okay um so let's if we could just give him a minute come on and respond to that thank you
they've been allowed to speak
mr reuter
uh the way i know this is this is sean whalen hi sean how are you sean i i swore you in earlier
didn't i you did that was my mistake apologize that's okay all right good um yeah just want to
let you know that i'm here i'm representing councilman o'neill okay to put it succinctly
so that mr reuter can respond and i think he will very clearly um we conditioned our last
continuance agreement on one item which was that basically we meet out at the site and have a
measurement done either by ellen i or the survey district um that has not been done and that's all
we're asking for right now so as soon as he gets on
leonard is on you've been allowed to speak i'm mr reuter hi sorry i apologize my computer i had
to reboot and that's okay just for the record state your name is spelled for the court reporter
sure leonard f reuter r-e-u-t-e-r right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do leonard have you heard any of the conversations we were having
uh yes and i know i know uh and i can surmise from what i maybe didn't hear uh i i were talking
about 4100 orchard and the agreement to remeasure um my understanding and my recollection is that
the we we the city did agree uh to go back out and and met and see if the prop if we could measure
uh the property um and we did uh reach out to the inspector there was a change of inspectors
for the area, and so unfortunately that didn't happen. I made several attempts to reach out to
the supervisors to see if they could arrange for another inspector to do that, and they just
unfortunately just haven't responded to that. I can say that the property had been measured
previously, which was the basis of clearing the permits. What we did not agree to, and this is
what I want to be clear about is getting someone from the survey districts to do that. I agree
that would be arguably more accurate. However, city surveyors don't do surveys on private
property without being able to charge a fee, which is somewhat substantial, and the city
wouldn't agree to waiving that fee. And by substantial, it's probably around $1,500 to do
a survey, to have a surveyor go out. So what we had suggested in the past is if
Mr. Whalen wants to get their own surveyor, again, if they want to get an actual surveyor,
there's plenty of engineers who are licensed surveyors to go out and measure. I can see
and try to make sure that we can have an inspector there to witness the survey done by their surveyor.
But again, you know, as far as L&I going out and doing measurements,
uh again you know as far as l and i going out and doing measurements i mean it would be just
an l and i inspector going out with the tape measure or something along those lines uh but
yeah an actual licensed surveyor uh is not what we agreed to at least not from the city we've always
been we have no objection whatsoever if they want to go do their own measurements and have
somebody from the city present for that or and you know mr whalen yeah chair if i may um i'm not
in disagreement with mr reuter i appreciate the clarification i apologize if it came off that way
um we had requested a measurement at the site that was what was agreed to uh when the issue of
whether you know the change in inspector had arisen we had simply suggested that maybe somebody
from the city survey district would be an easier or quicker option you know the city can make that
measurement however they want we just asked for notice so that we could be present at the site
and we would do so at ellenon's convenience and and again if if there is and again there may be
still difficulties in terms of just scheduling an inspector to go and do this since there's no
current open violation or anything um yes if there were if this were a violation case then
we would always do re-inspection um but if there's a difficulty getting somebody there i guess the
question i have is because it doesn't have to be a surveyor why do we need somebody from lni to do
this anyway any of us could just go out there with everybody present with the tape measurer
is you know again i will do my best to get an lni inspector to agree to go out there and do it
but I'm just not sure why it needs to even be somebody from L&I anyway. Can't we all just go
out there and measure it? So, Chair, this is Sean Whalen again. I understand Mr. Reuter's
point there, and that was actually the exact reason why we had asked this board to direct
the city to since this is an appeal against lni the board has authority over lni to direct them
to conduct this measurement and therefore mr reuter is freed of that hurdle of you know not
having any basis to force somebody out there that that was all we we had been requested wanted on
the record. Hillary. Yes, Mr. Chair. We can do this, right? We can request that a measurement
be done. In appeal against LNI, the burden is on the appellant to show that there is an error on
the part of LNI. So if LNI is willing to do the measurement, that is great, but the burden in this
case is on the appellant yes and and if if i can uh just interrupt i i will we will agree if the
board wants to you know and if and if miss emerson believes it's it's possible for the board to
quote unquote order ellen i to do the uh inspection that might actually be helpful to make sure that
somebody from ellen i gets out there i can just say hey you got to do it um why don't we do that
hillary i'm i'll i won't object to that um uh but um well and again i don't i don't we don't want
to get into the merits or anything like that but this is an appeal against the validity of the
permit not that there was an error in the actual construction which so if we go out there and we
just we determine that the measurement is actually uh off and that in fact the uh the subject
structure is not set back far enough, that still doesn't invalidate the permit anyway.
It just means that there would be a violation for not following the scope of the permit that
was issued. So again, I guess that gets into the merits. Hillary, why don't we do this? Let's
order for L&I to go out there. Let's just get this moving. All right. Okay. And Mr. Chair,
what i will do is i will i will send uh correspondence on behalf of the board um
requesting the inspection um and copy all parties so that um that can get moving okay good
thank you very much chair and thank you mr reuter and thank you miss emerson yeah is sean ward also
here or no i don't think he intended on showing up i don't i didn't see him but right okay that's
fine. Thank you. Obviously. Yeah. All right. Thank you very much, everybody.
Okay. So is there any other requests for continuances?
I do not see any further hand. Okay. We're going to go to our add-on list. Number one.
Okay. We're going to go to our add-on list. Number one, MI 2023-001-042-10 South Front Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
ish it's no sahib i vote is yes thank you number two
mi 2023 000 484 2426 cedar street
i vote yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Okay, thank you.
Number three.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just want to note for the record that Emily Persico from Development Services has joined us as an alternate board member this afternoon.
Great. Thank you, Emily.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2023, 001-327-6212-22 Market Street.
Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
Letter of support from Achieve Ability.
They've been promoted to panelists.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Counselor, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Brandon Saverin.
That's B-R-A-N-D-O-N, S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N as in Nancy.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is JL4475 LLC, who is the owner of the property.
All right.
our vice chair has just a few questions good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes i do have you emailed in all the
required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing yes thank you please proceed and share your screen okay thank you very much
All right. Good afternoon, members of the board. I am here to speak about an application to legalize an existing parking lot, and I will show you our notice of refusal and referral in a second.
but first I just wanted to familiarize you with the property. So the property is located on the
south side of Market Street, basically under the L, the L train tracks on the block that
ends at the west at 63rd Street and the 63rd Street L station. And this parking lot,
which is shown here is comprised of five parcels, but the doctrine of unity of use
enables us to present this to you today as one project, because what we'll be doing if we get
the variances and special exceptions that we've requested is we will be recording
a restrictive covenant that binds us to use this parking lot as one property going forward,
at least until a different zoning permit is applied for a different use.
But it's pretty much exactly what you think it is. It's a parking lot. So here are aerial images
and everything I'm showing you is in our exhibit package that was submitted five days in advance.
The parking lot is at the corner of 62nd and Market. We will be restriping it, and I'll show
you our restriping plan in a second, but it's going to continue to exist as a surface parking
lot, and it's been that for years. We just didn't have the proper permits, and I think this comes
down to the fact that the parking lot serves an office building at 6232 Market Street which is
here where my cursor is down the block. I'm not sure if my client was aware that it needed permits
because it turns out that we and probably most people out there would have assumed that this is
uh we and probably most people out there would have assumed that this is an accessory use to
that office building but what ended up happening is l and i categorized it as a non-accessory
parking lot as if we're sort of like a paid parking lot you'd see downtown which we're not
but the reason we were categorized that way and given some of our um you know uh points of refusal
is because there is a church. I'll go to the zoomed in image. There's a church and the church's
parking lot both sort of separate our lot from the office building it serves. So because of that,
let me show you our refusal now. That's why when we went to legalize this, we ran into
some trouble here. So here's our notice from L&I. It is technically a notice of refusal and referral.
And that actually is a good thing for us as the applicant in a way, and I'll explain why.
So what you see here is what I call the scope text on the refusal.
The big paragraph I'm not going to read through, it says what I said about that the board can hear this as one case because we're promising to use these five parcels as one parking lot.
and the next paragraph here says what we want to do with the lot continue to have it be a parking
lot with 53 spaces after we restripe it including three handicap accessible parking spaces so we do
not have a refusal for not having enough handicap accessible spaces we're good on that front
what we have refusals for and I'll go through these in one second is lack of landscaping
and lack of bicycle parking, but those are all existing conditions. And what we're asking for
your permission to do today through the variances we're requesting is not to dig up the ground
and install these features, which is an extremely expensive proposition. And after consulting with
the community, we don't believe they want that. And it actually would work counter to the community
organization's goals for this property. The special exception is the use. So while we have
refusals for the landscaping and the bike parking, the core issue, the use of the property as a
parking lot is permitted under the zoning code. It just requires a special exception. I think that
intent of the code is to force us to obtain a traffic study, which we did, to demonstrate that
it's not going to cause undue congestion. But with the special exception, parking is a permitted use
here. The issues that are refused are landscaping and the bike parking. And just to spend one more
minute on it, let me go to the zoning plan and I'll talk through those landscaping issues.
So this, excuse me, is our zoning plan drawn by Michael Cole, our architect.
What this basically says is that we're going to re-strike the parking lot so that it conforms to all of the rules about the depth and width of the parking spaces, the width of the drive aisles, the number and the layout of the handicap accessible spaces.
So this basically, you know, keeps us kosher in terms of all those rules pertaining to driver safety. We don't have refusals for those issues. Again, what you'll note on this plan is in the rear, there is a retaining wall. And I'll show you a picture of that in one second.
But one of the refusals is that we don't have landscaping in the back of the lot. We're supposed to have an eight-foot landscaped buffer with several trees and shrubs, but the retaining wall serves the purpose of that landscaping.
It creates privacy for the homeowners in the back, and it's already there and in good shape, too.
The other refusals for landscaping have to do with not having it along the street lines and not having like islands in the interior of the lot, which might be something you've seen in like a suburban office park setting, but it's somewhat difficult to pull off in the city.
So here's why we ultimately chose beyond just the expense not to install the landscape islands and the street side landscaping.
The community association, and I'll show you our letter from them, called Achievability.
We met with them. I think we sent three folks from the ownership team, including my colleague, Rachel.
We had five folks on their end come out to the meetings or eight people at the meeting.
everybody from this organization and all the local attendees agreed that they
Everybody from this organization and all the local attendees agreed that they wanted this to remain a parking lot.
They had no issue with the way it's been a parking lot for the last several years.
And one of the things we did was we struck this community benefits agreement with the group.
And among other things, let me just walk you through what this provides.
It notes that the parking lot already has security cameras and lighting and will continue to have those features. It notes that we're going to make this whole lot and I'll show you the photo in a second. It's pretty big.
We're going to make this available to Achievability, this coordinating RCO, at least three full days per year on weekends for them to hold events to the public, which has to do with their programming for local residents and namely those who suffer from disabilities and other disadvantages.
So this is going to be sort of like an outdoor meeting room for them. And if we have that landscaping in the middle of the parking lot and on the front edge, it effectively reduces its usefulness as the outdoor gathering space that they want to use it as.
it chops up the space if you picture something like a farmer's market if there's interior
landscaping islands you can't put up tents or exhibition booths or whatever else achievability
might want to do because the space is broken up and in terms of that that front perimeter
landscaping and the bike parking which would also typically go on like the front side of a lot
that sort of would preclude folks from seeing the event that Achievability would want to throw on
the lot because it would make the lot interior private, which isn't good for Achievability
and its programming. Also, because this is on the corner of 62nd and Market, having perimeter
landscaping maybe can be seen as a safety concern. You can't see across the corner. So say if you're
walking up 62nd street you don't see who's coming at you along market street at the same time
so i think that everybody felt that it was better not to use landscaping to screen off this
important corner property because it would reduce visibility and safety um let me see a couple other
things i want to highlight um why is this lot the way it's used the other days of the year
important to the community. That's because, just to go back to this office building for a moment,
you know, this is more than a typical office building. It's 6232 Market Street.
The current tenants in there are City Health Life. That's an urgent care center,
medical urgent care center that specializes in treating patients who are on Medicaid.
the Veterans Administration the VA has an office in there and Health Partners which is a company
that helps folks obtain and sign up for health insurance so this is sort of like nuts and bolts
survival stuff for the community and they serve people who are in distress medically with like
acute ailments or long-term disabilities so a lot of people show up to this property by car
Now, what you can see in the aerial image is that that office building does have some on-site parking, but it's very important to have the overflow parking that the subject property provides, because on a given day, particularly when you kind of include all the staff, that parking lot fills up.
So it's really important to the community to have this property available as overflow parking.
And then finally, I submitted a memorandum to the board. It's exhibit one in our packet that walks through all of the standards for the grant of a variance for the landscaping issues and the bike parking, the lack of bike parking facilities, and for the grant of a special exception for the parking use.
So I'm not going to tick through all of the things we have to demonstrate to, you know, earn those things from you, because I think they've been explained in my testimony.
They're explained in that memo. The only thing I want to highlight is that there's a requirement for the special exception to obtain a traffic study.
And we did that. We hired a very reputable firm called Traffic Planning and Design.
They went out and counted cars and measured, since the lot's already there, what effect it has on the surroundings, particularly the three lights.
It's 63rd Market, 62nd Market, and 62nd and Chestnut.
And this is like a several dozen page long plan. It's very professional.
I'm simply going to tell you what the conclusion is.
I'm simply going to tell you what the conclusion is.
It's that the proposed parking facility.
It's that the proposed parking facility will not degrade the level of service at any of those traffic lights.
And also that the sight lines for people driving on Market Street and people entering and exiting the lot are safe.
So they concluded there's no measurable impact of this parking lot that could cause traffic congestion or danger to drivers.
That's the extent of my testimony.
um last last thing i promise is um just to show you um on google and i have a still of this in
the packet what this thing looks like here's the parking lot so on the corner with market street
there in the back is that retaining wall so if you're on our lot you really have to walk up to
that retaining wall and peer over because i think it's about a half dozen feet tall to look into the
backyards of these adjacent homeowners. And nothing else around here is residential. So
for the homeowners, it's pretty private as it is. I'm going to stop sharing my screen and call
Mark Nicoletti, who's the owner's representative. Council, how long has that parking lot been there?
So, Mr. Chairman, my understanding, and Mr. Nicoletti will correct me if I'm wrong,
is that in its current size, it's been there since 2019. But before that, because if you
remember it's composed of five parcels it's actually been there for longer before that it
just wasn't quite as large and mark may know how long okay good thank you you're welcome
mr nicoletti
please raise your virtual hand away to be sworn in mr nicoletti could you state your name please
and spell for the court stenographer
Mr. Nicoletti could you please unmute yourself
how about now that's good Mr. Nicoletti could you state your name and spell please for the
court sonographer Mark Nicoletti M-A-R-K-N-I-C-O-L-E-T-T-I do you swear or firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel mark i'm just going to ask
you a few quick questions and then after that the the floor is yours and if you could um then answer
the chairman's question about the age of a lot that'd be helpful um but to get us started um
are you authorized to speak on behalf of jl4475 llc today yes okay and were you able to hear
my testimony over the last few minutes in your zoning case?
And was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you therefore adopt it as if it were your own testimony?
Okay, so you're free to add anything you'd like to my testimony at this point.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Zoning Board,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity today to not just discuss this application, but to share a really good story with you.
These are the days I'm going to suggest that you feel the work that you're doing, the vital work that you're doing, you walk away at the end of a meeting like this, and hopefully you feel good about this.
And this is why.
Most of the time that we come in front of you and applicants come in front of you, it's for a proposed project.
This story has already been written.
In a city that struggles under an enormous weight of unacceptable poverty, food deserts, and health equity imbalance,
This building opened at least five years ago to go directly into the root of the problem and deliver a state-of-the-art medical office building right where it was needed.
For example, the Veterans Administration operates out of that building a primary care medical office for veterans that have veterans benefits.
So they don't have to wait in long lines down at the VA hospital just to get primary care.
There's actually another organization, and Brandon didn't mention, Oak Tree provides
primary care for Medicare advantaged, usually I think it's pretty much seniors and those
with disability.
And the third medical operation focuses on adults and children that have Medicaid benefits.
This is a case study.
This is a case study.
If there could be a dozen buildings like this.
If there could be a dozen buildings like this
around the city, maybe we get somewhere
with the issues related to health equity.
But the fact is that this one's been there,
it's been serving a purpose.
The community in the meetings that we've had
has embraced this building and its programming.
We didn't realize that we needed a parking permit.
That's really what we're talking about today.
And Brandon did a great job talking about some of the exceptions we've asked for, but I think the one that really was consistent in the conversations with the community was no one seemed to be concerned about a landscaping waiver because, number one, it creates more parking, which was needed.
And number two, the visibility seemed to be a priority from a public safety standpoint for the seniors, especially that are parking in this lot.
The lot is well lit at night. There are cameras on the lot for surveillance, but the visibility seemed to also be a priority.
um we take um no presumptions here that this is not a small matter getting a parking permit
um we respect the process and we did a traffic study we hired a very good law firm to represent
us we had a number of meetings with the rco we reached a um developer's agreement with the rco
we handled this parking permit as if it was a major zoning application
he gave it just as much respect
hopefully today you'll agree
with us and we'll be able to
get this approved
questions from the board
no chair
this is Ron Bednar
City Planning. Hold on a minute, Ron. Tom? Sorry. Mr. Tom, are you there? Please unmute.
Star six to unmute, Mr. Tom.
No, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Virtual audience. Any comments from the virtual audience?
There are no hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission.
My name is Ron Bednar. First name Ron, R-O-N. Last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R. I'm with the City Planning Commission.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
The property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on a city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning and dislocation.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique fiscal circumstances that would prevent it from being in conformance with the landscape requirements of the code.
We have no record of a landscape waiver permit.
Therefore, we recommend the request for variance not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023, 001-327-6212-22 Market Street, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, thank you.
Number five, MI 2023 001 271 1400 South Edding Street.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
recommendation of support from the Tasker Morris Neighbors Association
good afternoon could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer sir
oh yes my name is Sherman Thompson um I'm just is there Mr. Chairman just to let you know
um david orphanetes who is with the office of orphanages and toner may be in the gent in the
office to present this hearing um you want me to come back to it uh i don't is he not is he not
present yes he's present do i make him thank you please bring him on yes
Yes, Mr. Chairman, are you going to do this?
Yes. So our office submitted the appeal and is handling this matter. Mr. Topping will need the submission on behalf of our office.
Yes. So our office submitted the appeal and is handling this matter.
Mr. Toppin.
All right. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Certainly. David Orphanides, O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Certainly. My client is Crossover Properties 3 LLC, and they are the owner of the property.
All right. There's a recommendation of support for this in the Tasker Morris Neighbors Association. Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to with accuracy?
Yes, I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have, Mr. Shahid.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Okay, hopefully everybody can see my screen and minimize some of these things here.
All right. Again, the property we are here for this afternoon is 1400 South Edding Street.
It's property located on the southwest corner of Reed and South Edding Street, just below Grace Ferry Avenue.
As you can see from the photograph here on the cover sheet of our exhibits that were submitted, it is an existing two-story structure.
The last zoning permit is for a residential dwelling unit on the second floor and a commercial unit on the ground floor.
You can see from the photograph, the ground floor is set up for a typical corner commercial operation that historically have existed in Center City, Philadelphia, going back hundreds of years.
and continue to exist throughout these neighborhoods.
However, I think this board has seen plenty of these cases come before them.
These ground floor commercial units embedded in these commercial
or in these residential neighborhoods just can't make it as commercial operations.
And applications have been submitted to L&I.
Appeals have been taken to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
and variances have been granted to utilize these ground floor units as additional residential
dwelling units. In fact, in the immediate vicinity of this neighborhood, and we have copies of a map
and zoning archives in the materials that we have today, there are 12 properties in the nearby
vicinity of the subject property that either RSA 5 or CMX 1, like this property, this property is
zone CMX1 again, where variances have been granted by the zoning board for the use as a two-family dwelling.
The proposal that we're here for today is to, and you'll see in the photographs and the plans that I'll provide,
is to demolish the rear one-story portion of the building, to leave the full two-story remaining,
and on top of that existing two-story to erect a third floor, and upon that we will have a roof deck.
Again, the proposed use is for a two-family dwelling. There are three refusals.
One of them is that the roof deck pilot house needs anything, any portion of a pilot house that's more than five feet or 42 inches tall needs to be set back, not only the five feet of the deck setback, required deck setback from any street frontage, but an additional five feet.
because the property is only five feet, 10 inches wide.
And because we're a corner,
because we're a corner, we have two street frontages
and we have to be set back.
And because our pilot house is more than 10 feet,
we have to be set back at 10 foot,
total 10 feet from both street frontages.
And we have no problems making that
from the Edding Street frontage
where the property fronts, the narrower portion.
But because the property is pretty narrow
at only 15 feet, 10 inches wide,
We don't have enough width for the additional five feet on top of the five feet for the roof deck to set back the pilot house. And you can see that refusal. We're about two feet six and 15 sixteenths of an inch short. It's a minimus variance. And one that, again, as the chairman stated, it was variance along with the other two variances that were supported by the community group.
The other variance involves the required nine-foot rear yard depth in CMX1 when bounded by RSA5 properties.
As I indicated, we're taking that one-story portion off.
The existing two-story building is eight feet, eight inches from the rear property line.
There's also an alley beyond that that runs behind the properties parallel with South Ending Street on the block.
um so we're four inches short um the existing building and when you take off the one story
So we're four inches short.
the existing bill
portion at the rear is four inches short of the nine feet required we i guess could set back the
addition the third floor addition an additional four inches but that creates a both a construction
and a maintenance hardship and so we've just proposed the third floor at the same depth as
the two floors below, which again, leaves only eight feet, eight inches to the rear of the
property line. Again, a de minimis variance, and we feel it's a hardship and unnecessary to comply
with that. And then the other is the use variance. CMX1, when it's bounded by RSA5 properties,
I like to call it zoning TOFU. It takes on the residential characteristics of the properties
that abut it. Since the CMX1 property is abutted by RSA5 lots, only one residential dwelling unit
is allowed. You're allowed any number of commercial or non-residential uses at the property,
so long as none of them take up more than 2,000 square feet of gross floor area. However,
again, because we're bounded by RSA5, the limitation for this particular CMX1 property
is only one residential dwelling unit, so we have a variance that's necessary for the two.
Again, we have, we've gone through, we've mapped out other two family dwellings in the property
at tab six. These are all the properties that we're aware of that we pulled these zoning
permits for. There's probably more than this, but you can see that there were a couple C1s,
which is what CMX1 used to be, that are apparently granted as a matter of right before the current zoning code,
a number of CMX1s that were granted variances, and a number of RSA5s that were granted variances.
And we have all those zoning archives in our exhibit book, but I'm not going to go through all those.
Again, as indicated, our property is located in a residential neighborhood.
Here you have it clouded. You can see it's located at the corner of Reed and Edding Street.
And here's another picture from the north from the from with Gray's Ferry to our back.
And you can see it's all residential, having a commercial operation in this neighborhood, particularly with Gray's Ferry.
So located so close to it where you do have an abundance of commercial uses, the shopping centers that are there, the shopping center that's there and other commercial uses that are coming along.
long that either are being utilizing using utilizing that space there's no need for a
commercial operation at this location or in this neighborhood existing photographs we've already
showed you some of these and here I've clouded the one story portion to be removed here's the alley
to the rear to the west of our property that runs behind all the properties on our side of the 1400
block of South Edding Street that will remain the gate that's there is going to remain we're not
to touch it that gate's not part of this application because it's not on our property
and then additional views down reed street and you can see um all residential
across the street and down reed and then um down um down heading street
we don't have a height variance um other than the rear depth variance we do not have
a um dimensional variance then the rear depth in the pilot house the plans that were submitted to
L&I are included at tab 10. And again, you can see that we are simply removing the one-story
portion, takes up all of, goes to the rear, pretty much to the rear of the property or to the rear
of the property. We're now opening up with the demolition of that, all of this open area and
ground and rear yard area for use of the occupants of the property. And you can see here the roof
deck that set back the minimum five feet from each frontage on Edding and Reed Street, and then the
pilot house. We're permitted up to 125 square feet. It's because it's such a narrow building,
not doing a straight run up to the pilot house, which then necessitates of being wider or boxier,
more of a square, but we're substantially below. We've made it as small as possible. We're smaller
than what could be allowed as a matter of right in order to make it work, but again, it just
encroaches slightly into that additional five-foot setback requirement. We did send out a 14-303
notice for the community group meeting that was held on Tuesday, April 18th at 7 p.m. with the
coordinating RCO that was identified by the Planning Commission. Their certificate of mailing,
214 pieces of mail, went out to the list of addresses that were pulled from the Planning
commission's website we did post the property both frontages with the notice for today's hearing
and then again the letter of support from um from the community group uh is attached at tab 14 of
and then again the letter of support from um
our exhibits uh that letter dated april 18th from the task of morris neighborhood association
and with that um i would just have uh garrett lister who's my client representing a crossover
who is crossover properties 3 llc and representing that uh the ownership entity um to raise his hand
to be sworn in and identified
so he can adopt my statements.
Sir, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Garrett Lister,
last name L-I-S-T-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Sir, Garrett, did you hear the statements
that I made to the zoning board this afternoon?
Yes, I did.
And are they true and correct
to the best of your knowledge?
yes they are and would you adopt those statements as your own yes i would thank you very much
chairman we rest all right questions from the board
no mr thank you no mr chairman thank you no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair any commission this is ron bednar city planning
the property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on a city plan or adopted
district plan recommends no change the existing zoning at this location applicants hardship is
not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that
would prevent it from being in conformance with the use requirements of the code therefore we
recommend the request of variance not be random. MI 2023-001-271-1400 South Edding Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. That concludes my business. May be excused. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Have a
great day. All right. Number seven, MI 2023-002-336-251 Greenall Street. Alan Nocklipson is the
attorney. There's a letter of opposition from the Manny Young Neighborhood Council.
applicant has provided a petition and support signed by 18 neighbors
Mr. Nockamson he'll be rejoining as a panelist
Mr. Nockamson, how are you, sir?
Could you state your name, please?
Yes, Alan Nockamson.
Spell it, please, for the court stenographer.
A-L-A-N, last name is Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is the owner of the property, 251 Greenog ST LLC, and their virtual audience is its member, Darren Hardiman.
So, talking to Hillary, this case will be resumed on Wednesday, October 18th, after an earth-moving plan has been submitted to the board and the planning commission.
The result of hearing will be limited to a discussion of the steep slope
criteria in the zoning code and for the planning commission to provide their
recommendation on the applicant with the response from the applicant's record
would otherwise be closed. You're okay with that, right?
So we're going to hear the case and then we'll, we'll come back.
That's my understanding, Mr. Chair.
Right. And I understand that planning has asked to defer giving their position
to until they see the plan. Right.
That's my, that's my understanding, Mr. Chair.
Okay, so our, our vice chair has just a few questions.
In afternoon, counsel, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and show your screen.
Thank you.
all right so i'm here to present 251 greenock street uh as you can see this is well this will
be a single family home we hope uh with a front-loading garage uh and we're here uh
And we're here basically for the parking, I would believe.
basically for the parking i would believe
We do have the earth moving variance as well as a steep slope variance.
Some of these things we can't change because we are on a steep slope.
So during our presentation, we're first going to review quickly the original notice of refusal.
I noticed that there were a number of missions in the original notice of refusal.
So we asked L&I to amend the refusal.
to account for those additional variances we're requesting for. So exhibit two is the amended
notice of refusal. And then we have a petition that we circulated throughout the neighborhood
which shows support for this project. Then we have a correspondence from the Manionk
Neighborhood Council. So we did meet with them, I believe it was last Tuesday, regarding this
matter. Originally, we were supposed to meet on a Monday. There was like a confusion with the
current representative from the group. We had no issue meeting on a Tuesday. But, you know, again,
it originally was a Monday. Then we have illustrations of the 200 block of Greenock
Street and nearby of nearby off-street parking. And then we have maps of the area, photographs
of the property, our original architectural plans and drawings, but then we made some clarifications
with revised architectural plans and drawings, which is the basis of our amended notice and
refusal as well. Our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal that we filed on behalf
of 251 Greenog ST LLC, our deed to property showing that entity owns the property, and the
certificate of tax clearance. At the conclusion of this matter, I would ask that Mr. Hardiman,
the owner's representative, who's also the member of the organization, virtually raise his hand.
I would ask AB sworn in, and then we can ask him some questions so he can adopt
my testimony as his own. And Mr. Hardiman may be able to answer some factual questions regarding
this matter as well all right so the noise refusal again we're not looking to increase density here
this is a single family uh sony classification what we're trying to do is is erect an attached
structure including a roof deck roof deck access structure um as well um as a another deck uh
including a front loading garage size and location um shown on the plans and the only refusal we
received was about the earth moving plan that we did not provide one i looked at it i said that you
know we're we're providing off-street parking so base level zoning because of the zoning
classification we would need a refusal we're also in an nco which uh does not allow for a front
loading garage so i understood you know that we would need another refusal uh so here is the
updated refusal specifically for this project. And if this board feels so inclined in October
to grant the variance request, I would ask that they grant it with proviso, with amended refusal
dated July 20th, 2023, you know, just for record keeping purposes. So three of the refusals,
the first three refusals all have to do with parking, as we understood the case would be.
The fourth refusal had to do with the earth moving plan or lack thereof that we provided.
And, you know, we'll provide that plan prior to next resumption here.
And then the last refusal has to do with earth disturbance.
So when you're on a steep slope like this, when there's more than 1,400 square feet of land area that's disturbed, that requires an additional refusal.
I will say that the majority of the earth disturbance is the building structure itself that we fall below that amount.
But for technical purposes, we are above 1,400 square feet.
So my client took it upon himself to personally go to members of this community.
And again, really the basic gist of this zoning variance request is parking and off-street parking in particular.
And you can see from the presentation, there are four other addresses on our block on Green Alk Street in support of this project.
There are a lot of addresses on RIPCA, which is parallel to us on Greenock.
ultimately is this, and you'll see this in our materials, this is a situation where we're not
Ultimately, is this, and you'll see this in our materials, this is a.
taking a parking spot off the street. And, you know, there was some issue about like, well,
there's parking allowed on the street. There's not. There's a no parking sign at the end of the
block. You'll look at the pictures. You'll see that. I even have a video. My client drove on
the block. And I would like to show that video shortly at the conclusion of my presentation,
which shows that there is there's no parking allowed on that side of the block so us creating
a curb cut is not taking a parking spot off the street so the thing is with this project which is
very particular is that where my client's property is there's not there the street's not paved it's
not completed so we're actually with this project extending our streets on greenock street where
we're creating two parking spots across the street so we're in in essence making a net
positive of three the reason why i'm discussing this is when my client was distributing the
petition a few a few members of the community that signed this you know stated it was a no-brainer
like the parking situation in maniunk is really hard it's there's not park there's not a lot of
parking in maniunk and to take one car off the streets by having a front-loading garage where
not taking you you're not eliminating a public parking spot on our side plus you're creating two
other parking spots across the street because we're extending the streets and having a net
positive of three many members of the community this willingly said of course i'm going to sign
this it's going to help the parking situation in manioc so anyway that's where we that's well
the gist of the petition and then here are the letters of support behind it
and then we got correspondence from the manning up neighborhood council
uh they did not think too kindly of our presentation um you know again they basically
it was this we're against front-loading garages this is part of our overlay and we're never for
it and i can understand conceptually that's the case a couple things to factor in again no parking
is allowed on our side of the street. We're actually extending the street out where we're
creating two parking spaces, which makes that even more unique than any zoning variance I've
ever asked for legalization of a front-loading garage. So that alone, there are particular
circumstances here. But what you'll see here is that no one in the affected area, at least how I
read this uh you know this letter no one with the affected area is against this project
the only people opposed to this project are mnc members which presumably is members of the board
of the manioc neighborhood council maybe some neighbors but no one within the affected area
actually voted against this project and if you look at their letter these are their issues a lot
of them are not even related to this matter the setback requirement there's a there's a reading by
the by the zoning examiner that stated that we complied with our setback requirement
the the manioc neighborhood council stated that the lni examiner was wrong and i said you know
we we actually double checked when we submitted the amended zoning uh application we even said
please look at this matter please make sure that that you're not wrong with this as well and they're
like no we're correct so there's no issue in terms of of of the setback and we'll show you on the
plans the next one deals with the front yard parking um we wanted to be set back in the front
it's a design element because of our steep slope which we can't avoid we wanted to have
habitable space like technically it's below but it's really not and how we're creating that light
and air for that lower level that's all above grades essentially because of the slope is that
we have holes like you know great a great basically as our driveway so it's a unique design feature
and we're asking to have it you know the buildings you know set back in the front to be able to
provide the light and air necessary for those for those other floors which we want to make
habitable that are all above grade. Then going to habitable space there there's an interpretation
that this board at the Manioc neighborhood council is making stating that we're not providing
habitable space in the front of the first floor in violation of their overlay. We don't agree
We don't agree with that interpretation. Actually, the City Planning Commission reached out to us recently specifically about this, whether we have habitable space, so we're not in violation of code.
with that interpretation actually the city planning commission
It was stated to us by Alex Smith and Aaron Hawley of the City Planning Commission that they wanted to make sure that we've dealt with this appropriately because they didn't want a situation where we got ZBA approval for a variance.
we get to the building permit stage and then we have this open item so we had a very detailed
meeting with them throughout the whole project I said let's not only talk about the habitable space
I want to make sure we comply with all the other requirements of the overlay and if we don't then
I would like to make sure that that's part of any refusal they confirmed to us that we met the
habitable space requirement because our 4a area which is not really a 4a area is more like a study
because we would have seating there, we would have maybe a desk there, it is habitable. And
they were in agreement, given the largeness of the space, given the functionality of the space,
that's not an item. But again, that's the second item that was brought up to us
as this L&I missed a refusal. And again, I feel like it's more so that they're missing refusals,
or we're not happy with the fact that you're doing off-street parking in violation of our
overlay. But during that meeting with Mr. Smith and Mr. Holly, we went through all of the requirements
of the overlay. And according to them, because I was there at that meeting, we met all the
requirements other than the front-loading garage requirements. And that's why we're here today.
And then the parking. The developer offered a series of off-street parking examples from the
area. They predate the current zoning, predate the NCO, and are not in a Ridge Park overlay.
Again, my philosophy in zoning variance law in Philadelphia is simple, and this board has heard
it before. If I walk by the property built or used as proposed, does it stick out like a sore thumb
or is it something that fits within the fabric of the community? Maniunk has a really difficult
parking situation. I take my dog. Every other week, I go to Maniunk and go on Main Street to
give him a bath. It's really hard to find parking around there, right? So if we can alleviate the
situation in Manningham by providing off-street parking where we're not taking away a public
parking spot by creating a curb cut there. Plus, we're adding two parking spaces because we're
extending the street out. Well, that makes sense. But not even that, it's on that block. There are
multiple instances on our side of Greenog where parking's not allowed, where there are curb cuts.
maybe yes they do they predate uh the overlay yes but it makes sense like again i feel like
the you know the manioc neighborhood council which i respect i think they're great i think
they're sophisticated i think they ask the right questions and i think most times are reasonable
here i don't think they're being reasonable i think they're trying to cut off their nose to
spite their face at least for the community because they're making the parking situation worse
What they're saying is build a single-family home with no off-street parking, put that car on the street with everyone else where there's a humongous problem in Manioc.
And the next thing they talk about, any claims related to the street appear to be speculative.
They talk about us creating that sidewalk, whether it's a public street.
You know, there was a whole discussion during the meeting. Well, this is not even an open street. This is not a public street. Well, we got records from the city, which shows that that's a public street, you know, specifically for this hearing, because I didn't even think this was an issue, a zoning issue, but we decided to do our due diligence and get that. And we have confirmation in these in open streets.
um they talk about mr knockamson mr knockamson could you go back one minute sure the the issue
about the you had correspondence from the streets department they said they never received it
what's that about correspond let's see hold on let me see a closer they assert that they they
they had discussions through the streets department and offers us a copy of the
correspondent. I don't know. Again, we share everything. So I apologize if we missed something.
No, no. I'm just curious what the correspondence was about. That's all.
I don't know. Alex Goldberg from my office.
Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you.
Yes. So the earthmoving plan report, yes, we're going to provide that. And that's where we're
asking for the resumption hearing. And finally, about heritage trees. Our building footprint
is not large and we purposefully put our building footprint where we don't expect where we where the
And we purposefully put our building footprint where we don't expect, where the trees aren't, right?
trees aren't
We actually, one of the benefits of this lot, not only is it a steep slope, but it's surrounded by trees.
If in any way there needs to be a removal of heritage trees, which we don't believe would be the case, we are required by the building code to replace them.
And that's what we plan to do.
We want to create this type of foresty feel.
So again, I think that's also a red herring where they bring up all these things, but it ultimately comes down to this. They don't want off-street parking on this lot. And they're giving every reason why this project is wrong, but they don't really go to the crux of it. They try to add everything. This is just a single-family home on a single-family neighborhood that has off-street parking where there's much off-street parking similar to this.
and then here are the examples 283 Greenock Street I try to stay within our block or within
the block 255 Greenock Street 257 Greenock Street 275 and 277 Greenock Street 279 and 281 Greenock
Street this is the parking site on our side of the street at the beginning of the block
no parking anytime this is our hearing notice poster right you can see we're like there's a
house down on the bottom that's not ours but you'll see from the aerial view what I'm talking
about like how this is a unique property these are not in the NCO but these are properties that
are nearby which both would have front loading garages 450 4579 boon 266 cramps and then here
are all these properties which run parallel to us on Ripka Street, where it's 278-60 Ripka Street,
all front-loading garages. 304-08 Heritage, 4745-55 Sheldon, again, front-loading garages.
And then maps of the area, again, very unique property. But here we are on Greenog Street here.
and then just from a google maps perspective and then this is what we got from the streets
department so here's greenock street here's fowler we're on the other side of fowler and
you can see there's a there's a street here same thing here we received uh from the city
and then photographs the property so we're essentially right here you can see there
you know another thing they stated was like here you're taking away two parking spots from us
because these two cars here cars illegally parked at the on the dead end of public street is not
public parking it's just someone conveniently using it but that's not public parking but it's
a very unique uh uh lot and then here's green nog street from our perspective right everyone's
parked on this side we're on this side it's not happen chance that we're like you know that there's
no one parked on this side. First of all, there's a no parking sign at the beginning of the block.
Secondly, if someone parked on this side and someone parked on this side, there would be no
streets. You couldn't go through the streets. And then this is where we are over here, but this is
the dead end, right? We're extending the street out and we're going to be creating two legal
parking spots. So hopefully those two cars, which are not parked legally, will have a place to park.
And then these are original plans, which you don't have to worry about, but these are our revised plans. Again, the rendering. We're trying to really make it pretty because it's, again, a very unique property. But unfortunately, if we don't get the off-street parking, it's going to be fairly difficult for us to sell this property. That means you may never get built.
And again, as you know, when my client Darren Hardiman
canvassed the neighborhood and he'll be testifying,
that was stated over and over.
It's like the last thing this neighborhood needs
is another building structure
with no parking associated with it.
Here, we're doing a building structure
where there are three parking spots associated with it.
Two created on the street, one created off the street.
And then this is just another angle.
Again, very unique property
were nestled in this foresty area
and we purposefully situated this property
that we're gonna do as least damage to that as possible.
And if we have to relocate trees,
my client's more than ready, willing, and able to do it.
And again, you just see the slope
where the front part of the property doesn't look that high.
You go to the back part of the property,
it's really deep and humongous and there's four stories.
And it's just a very pretty, unique property for someone who's really interested in buying into Maniunk with parking.
with parking. And then this is, again, our site plan. This goes to the earth disturbance variance.
And then this is...
So 1,283 square feet of earth disturbance for the building coverage. And then there's an
additional earth disturbance of 229 square feet at the front of the property, where there is no
issue with the terms of steep slope. But we get over that 1,400 square foot requirement
when you're dealing with a steep slope matter so that's a technical refusal and then if you can see
here too in terms of this is the street extension right we're extending it's going to be wide of 33
feet 10 and a half inches two cars can fit now across the street and if you want to take it
to a degree that there is parking allowed on Greenog Street I'm not saying it's a big car
it's probably a mini cooper but we have 13 feet and eight and one half inches that we extended
the street out even more so you have two parking spots here not that it's allowed but if they
really want to park on that side of green hog here's the third parking spot and then yes we're
taking then a public space away but that would be the fourth spot right so we you know we don't
believe we're creating a spot here but if the community thinks parking is allowed here's another
spot that we created and this spot doesn't even exist until we've paid until we pave and develop
the street so there's four parking spots we created with one single family home which i
think is a really great net positive under the circumstances
and then there's just elevations here well i think it'll be better to just go through the floor plans
but i think this is actually a really good uh rendering right here in elevation so this is the
front of our property right this is the little driveway we created you see here there's a there's
there's living space down here and it's really not down here but it's just it's a very unique
property um we created a situation where we because we put a grate here a metal grate there's light in
there that's created. That's why we created the setback, is to create additional living space
under the circumstances. And then you'll see the deck up here. You'll see a deck on the side. You'll
see a deck back there. But it starts as basically a two-story structure in the front and goes always
a four-story structure. We're not taking anyone's light in there away. We're just trying to be
nestled in a forestry part of Manioc. And then these are the floor plans. I'm actually going
to start at three, but it's really one. So third floor, you have this study area, right? It's 10
and a half feet by 16 and a half feet. They considered that not a livable area. The city
planning commission disagrees with that when we met with them. There are bedrooms that I have
presented in the past that are not that large. This area is rather large. How we see it, especially
in this post-pandemic era, is that we would see maybe a sitting area, a desk there. Someone's
going to do something to get away from, whether it's the kids or life in general. You have the
garage here. You have a couple of coat closets. You have a bedroom in the rear. You have a full
bath. Now, you can go up or down. If you go up, technically, this is the fourth floor. It's an
an open floor plan of a kitchen, dining room, and a livery room. Now, if you go down,
we'll go backwards. That's where the living areas are. And when we're going down, this is, oops,
when we go down, I'm not going down like where you would say I'm in a basement area.
This is, again, because of the slope, it's all above ground, right? So you have two bedrooms,
two bathrooms and then you go into the lowest level which is still above ground
where you would have a little flex bedroom maybe you have a media room you have a separate deck
that's above ground and where it's really private and serene
and then you have a roof deck as well now again we were supposed to have our meeting
on July 17th at 7 p.m.
We got a call last minute that day
stating, oh, I thought it was supposed to be
on a Tuesday rather than a Monday.
So we, you know,
because we want to appear in front of this EBA,
we're like, fine, we'll do it on a Tuesday.
I don't know if that decreased
what would have been the people showing up.
This Maniunk neighborhood council
is very unique in that you have to email the group
You have to email the group and then they'll give you the information about like the Zoom
and then they'll give you the information.
information for the virtual meeting.
So I'm sure that they contacted anyone who said, I wanted to show up on Monday and told
them Tuesday.
I just know how people's schedules conflict there.
But again, at the meeting that we had a community meeting, there were no affected properties
who voted for it or against it.
72 properties were within the affected area.
these are the list of the properties a lot of them i believe i i haven't cross-referenced i
don't want to state it i have to take a look at the petition how many people were within the
affected area but there are at least four properties on our block on green og who are
in support of our project uh proof of mailing our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of
251 Greenog STLLC, project information form and notice refusal, deeds of property showing 251
Greenog STLLC is the owner, and then our tax clearance. One other thing, during the meeting,
and I don't think this was the general feel from the group, but during the meeting, someone even
said, if it's on the steep slope, it shouldn't be developed. And I don't even think that the
representatives from the coordinating rco would say that but that was a general feel and temperature
of the uh room i want to do one more thing i just want to show the video of uh of you know showing
that there is no parking down the street on green auburn per side so i'm just going to share my
screen one more time can everyone see my screen yeah so this is the beginning it's going to slowly
to go down the street. You can see all this off-street parking. And we're on the left-hand
side, driving down Greenhaw. But the left-hand side is the side that our house would be.
Again, more off-street parking. Has a more suburban feel, this part of Manhill.
But you can see the right side. There's cars parked. If any cars were parked on the left-hand
side you couldn't drive down the street this would not be a functional street
we get more off street parking and you see the two cars at the end those are the two cars that
are you know again the green ox stops there we would extend it out those two cars would be able
to park legally if we did so. I'm going to stop sharing my screen. I would also state I would
also move both my exhibits as well as that video into evidence. Yes, thank you. Hi, Mr. Hardiman,
can you virtually raise your hands? They've been allowed to speak. Hi, sir. Could you state your
name please to spell for the court stenographer? Darren Hardiman. My name is D-A-R-E-N, last name
H-A-R-D-I-M-O-N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel. Yeah, Mr. Hardiman, you heard everything I had to state
today about your zoning matter, correct? Yes. And everything I stated was true and correct, right?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Besides my presentation, would you like to add anything so the board can hear your position regarding this zoning request?
Well, yeah, one thing I wanted to go back on, Alan, for the steep slope disturbance that you looked at on the plan.
If you could share your screen, there was one thing that you kind of misstated.
Oops, wrong one.
hold on let me get let me get my so if you can go back to the zoning plan
yes there so if you could zoom in on that a little bit
so with regard to the going over to 1400 square foot of earth disturbance when you when you did
the calculation earlier you did building coverage and site disturbance so that was incorrect our
site disturbance is only 229 square feet. The hardship comes in because we have to build this
street. If we did not have to build the street, we wouldn't be disturbing the additional 1231
square footage, which takes us over the 1400. Okay, gotcha. So the 239 is including the streets.
Okay, gotcha. So the 229 is including the streets portion aspect.
Yeah, so 1231 is all of the owner developed cartway and footway. And then the 229, that includes the piece that we're going to be site disturbing. Like our original site is going to disturb that because we're on pillars. So because we're on pillars, we're not going to disturb as much of the site.
Other than that, I think that everything you said was true.
I just wanted to get back to that because our site disturbance, the hardship comes in for us is when we have to build that street.
Had the city built the street or had that street been developed by the owner, the developer of Renault Street prior across to the other side, we wouldn't have that steep slope issue at all.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, I'm on the call.
Okay, thank you, Jim.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have Kevin Morris with their hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you state your name, please?
Kevin Morris, K-E-V-I-N-M-O-R-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And you're from the Manioc Neighborhood Council?
I'm not from the council.
I'm a resident of Wild Street, around the block from the property.
Proceed, sir.
I guess I don't have a position on the creation of the off-street parking, just factually.
There are three parking spaces up in that area now, and neither the PPA nor the PPD consider that illegal.
um the no parking sign that was shown in the video you can see the arrow actually points to
the north away from this property um that's just a factual matter there um but i am also an objection
to the development on the steep slope uh during the presentation i noticed you know he asked the
question if the building sticks out um walking around the neighborhood and the building up on
piers would stick out to me um you know obviously i've lived in the neighborhood 15 years so it's
not really uh development that i've seen around here and i think the last comment i was saying
the only issue is because the street was never built and i think that street was never built
out because of the slopes in the area that's why a lot of these paper streets exist around here
um yeah that's all i have to that that's speculation i see lips moving in but i don't
say it again oh i'm sorry uh i i object to some of the some of the testimony as
i understand that i i agree with you mr morris anything else
is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i'm mr john hunter with the hand raised i've allowed them to speak
Yep. Hi, state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer.
Please unmute and wait to be sworn in.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, it's John Hunter, H-U-N-T-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am the zoning chair for Manningham neighborhood council.
Okay, proceed, Mr. Hunter.
Thank you.
Mr. Narkinson has gone through our letter in quite a lot of detail, and I thank him for doing that.
I'd just like to sort of go backwards and clarify some things.
We first started a discussion with the applicant or with the attorney in mid-May of this year.
And when I looked at the refusal, I immediately asked, well, what about the other refusals for the steep slope, for the front loaded garage, for the, and it came as a surprise.
You will see in the appeal of the original appeal document that there is no mention in the description of the property of a front loaded garage, and there is only one refusal.
And I'm going to object in that respect.
The only thing that's disclosed in the appeal is the notice of refusal.
Our documents are that we submitted to L and I,
as well as our application references are for a loading garage.
I can't control or my client can't control what the examiner does.
I'm not.
Well, Mr. Hunter, listen, I understand.
But Mr. Nakamura, I'm going to let him continue.
Mr. Nachman, so I'm going to let him continue.
Sorry?
Sorry.
Thank you.
I continue, Mr. Hunter.
Okay, thank you.
What I was about to say is that obviously that was considered to be the complete list of refusals
because in the appeal document, it actually says that there's only one refusal and it's a de minimis refusal.
So there's a real misunderstanding about the number of issues that are triggered by this application, partly because of the steep slope.
And this steep slope is one of the steepest slopes that I've ever seen anyone attempt to build on in Maniunk in my 12 years of being zoned chair.
And also because there is the RSA 5 restriction on front-loaded garages just generally throughout the city.
In addition to that, to make sure that it is clarified, there is the Ridge Park Conservation Overlay, which specifically goes into the no front loading parking garage, but also the other issue, which is the habitable room with windows overlooking the street.
And that's introduced to ensure that there is activity on the street and it would limit the and goes hand in hand with the front loaded garage.
So these two main principles that were not addressed at the beginning in mid-May. The revised refusals was issued by L&I last Thursday afternoon. That is two months later.
And therefore, the letter that went out to the neighbours only referred to that one refusal, not all the other refusals which came subsequently.
And I assume the petition that the applicant rustled up, which refers to the appeal document, also was only asked about the one.
Well, if it wasn't, then there were 18 addresses on the petition, 12 of them are on Ripka Street.
And just to understand where Ripka Street is in relation to this side, Ripka Street does not connect to Greenhoff Street.
Greenhoff Street is a dead end of Silverwood Street.
So no one would go down Greenhoff Street unless they were actually driving to a property on Greenhoff Street.
Ripka Street is accessed because of the steep slopes in that area from Silverwood Street, turning left onto Hermitage Street and turning left again to end up in Ripka Street.
The properties do not look to that property on Greenhoff Street. I doubt if most of the people there even are aware of it because there's no reason for them to go down Greenhoff Street.
So there were 18 petitions listed, 12 of them were on Richter Street, and only four were on Greenough Street. So I just wanted to mention that too.
Sorry? We looked at the petitions. We saw that, Mr. Hunter.
Okay. But you have to understand the disconnection, the geographic disconnection between Ripka Street and Greenough Street to realize that the people on Ripka Street probably don't even know why Greenough Street is at that end of the street because it's a dead end.
Okay. Mr. Hunter, thank you for taking the time to call and we appreciate it.
is there anyone else in the virtual i'm sorry i'm not finished yet well okay would you would
you finish then i'm sorry we have another hand raised mr chair it's um rebecca froger
go back to mr hunter go back to mr hunter okay i understood
mr hunter it's been about to speak mr hunter proceed
The applicant on the question at one of our meetings was, has told us that he's not undertaken a geotechnical survey for the property yet.
He's, as I said previously, it's a really steep slope and you really need to be aware of what the geology is on the site.
they're also the the way that they're they're developing the site using piles there's no
explanation on how that would be accessed from either leverington avenue or from greenough street
and that really plays into the disturbance issue because not only have you got to locate those
piles you've got to get access to them you also have to deal with drainage power and all the other
things that need to be uh positioned on the house which will also add to the disturbance
so we're really concerned about that this property has not has been underestimated
the difficulties of building on this extremely steep slope side.
the difficulties of building on this extremely steep slope side going to the other issue which
mr notcheson sort of was preoccupied with the idea of creating that extra area and extension
of greenhouse street that the client initially said he thought he would have to do it was just
some concrete it's a huge undertaking because that area of the of the property dropped significantly
So you have to build a street to the standards that the city requires, and we don't believe that he would do that.
And therefore, if he didn't do that, and he then moved to close the street, which he could do at some later date, the two parking spaces that Mr. Noctis and her sort of trumpeting would not be provided.
and so and so yeah and the the street could be closed and then um the property of the in the
middle of what is at the moment the green off street would be become part of his property and
the other property on the other side of the street on power street and so we were just questioning
all of that and we never got clear answers on that and we didn't get the description from the
streets department all right thank you thank you mr hunter so are you for the project or against
the project we are as i'll let it says we're opposed to it all right thank you and mr chair
and i'll wait until everyone's yeah wait let's see if anyone else talks out is there anyone else in
the virtual audience yes sir rebecca froggett i've allowed them to speak hi could you state
your name is spelled please for the court stenographer yes rebecca frogett r-e-b-e-c-c-a
f-r-o-g-g-a-t-t do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yep are you a neighbor i am i live on granoff street okay are you for the project or against
it against the project okay could you sure in a short sentence tell me why okay um i'd like to
start by mentioning I never received a letter. I'm not sure what that letter was. The way I found
out about this construction was a sign all the way at the end of the street, which is fine because I
guess that's where the property is. Pretty much everybody on that petition that lives on Green
Off Street, three of those four people have a driveway. Only one person on the other side of
the street does not. So really they would be the people impacted by losing those. It's actually
three spots at the end of the street and there is really no sign saying that you cannot park there
um i'd like to mention too like this um cliff it's really a steep drop off it's not so much
a slope it's very much a drop off and i'm not sure how you could build something well i think i think
i think that's why we're going to do additional studies right or you could just skip it i don't
think we need a house built down there i think it's okay okay well okay thank you all right
Thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone else?
In the virtual audience.
Chair, we have
Darren Hardiman.
That's my client, Mr. Chair.
That's his client.
Do we allow him to speak again?
I mean, I think
you have something to say different than me.
Okay, sure.
Thank you for letting me back in. Just wanted to try to address some of the things that were said, and I'm sure that Alan's going to address some of those things as well.
With regard to the off-street parking, this came up in a meeting, and I'm glad that Ms. Froggett actually brought it back up that the two parking spaces at the end of the block are legal.
Well, because it's an open street, it is a throughway. So in order to access the property that is to be built, or in order to access my property in general,
those two cars would not be able to be there because they're technically in the middle of
the street. So that's not legal parking. Because it doesn't say no parking in the middle of the
street, doesn't mean you can. It doesn't say no parking in the middle of the street and a bunch
of streets in the city of Philadelphia, but you can't stop there and stop traffic. Aside from that,
with regard to the streets, we did have a meeting sometime back, and I'm sure that Alex or maybe
Even my architect, Adam DeCant, has the email that went out to John Hunter and his team.
And it was the same email with those two street proposals or proof from the streets department, because we've had that for some time now, that said that the street was open.
That didn't just come up the other day.
And with regards to L&I, we do apologize that L&I didn't pull out those refusals.
We do apologize that L&I didn't pull out those refusals, but that's nothing that we can do
but that's not
about that. We got those refusals back from L&I as soon as we could. I actually sent an email
really ripping L&I, but I send it always to the top to Mr. Pietro saying that we didn't have
these and it made us look disingenuous in our meeting. We have absolutely no reason to want
to come before the board without the board knowing fully what we were here for, having all the
refusals and not having to go back through this process again. With that, I conclude, and Alan,
I think he can probably finish up. Yeah, and really quickly, Mr. Chair, we've devoted a lot
of time for our presentation. I really appreciate it. I always try to be short and sweet, but
Mr. Hardiman, when you sent that petition or circulated that petition,
that was this weekend when we had the updated refusal.
so anyway you don't have to answer that but the other thing is the habitable space
um mr hunter brought it up again it's just really difficult when he keeps bringing up things that
we again we confirmed with with the city planning commission so which has nothing to do with with
with this variance uh request uh and then finally i would like to share my screen one more time
there mr hunter brought up the fact about ripco street that it doesn't matter it's not within the
affected area there are multiple addresses on here all ripco street they're all within the affected
area so when i asked mr hardiman to to canvas the neighborhood and get signatures in support of this
project i didn't just say randomly go get signatures i said go look at the petition look
I mean, look at the affected areas that the city believes is affected.
The 200 block of Ripka is one of those blocks.
So that's why Mr. Hardeman got a number of addresses on that block.
So I think that's, oh, and then all this stuff about like whether it can be built or not built.
A lot of this stuff deals with the geotech, deals with building permit issues.
If we're lucky enough to get past this in terms of the ZBA giving us a variance, we will have to address many of those issues at the building permit stage.
We're not going to get a building permit unless L&I feels comfortable that we're going to build a safe structure.
Thank you.
All right. Thank you.
This case will be resumed on Wednesday, October 18th, 2023.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
So we didn't get through everyone in the audience.
There was still one more individual.
all okay that person has been allowed to speak mr chair hi could you state your name please
and spell for the court stenographer um my name is kevin smith i'm the uh president of
manioc neighborhood council okay do you swear or spell your name first for the court stenographer
kevin smith k-e-v-i-n-s-m-i-t-h all right do you swear or affirm tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Proceed. A couple of quick points. Mr. Nkomsen has conflated a lot
of the parking in Manioc. This is a dead-end street with no sort of geographical or circulation
connection to other parts of Manioc. So it's an isolated, it's its own thing. There's no
interaction with the parking issues in Manioc is a wider thing.
The street itself is row houses and twins.
The row houses have side driveways.
The twins do not have parking.
And so the discussion here is on front-loaded garages.
There are no front-loaded garages on this street.
um and i would also encourage the board to take a close look at the room or the foyer and the
the claim that it's habitable space require regardless of what uh were the discussions
with l and i uh it's a door leading to a stairway and coat closets etc and lastly um
So, Mr. Nacombson made an untrue statement about our notice.
We send an email to our membership, and we post it on our webpage.
And we did that.
People were not dependent on the webpage, and I believe the letter directed people to our webpage to find out information on the meeting, and it was posted there.
That's it.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you very much for calling in.
So, this case will resume on Wednesday, October 18, 2023, after an earth-moving plan has been submitted to the Board and the Planning Commission. The resumptive hearing will be limited to a discussion of the steep slope criteria.
The resumptive hearing will be limited to a discussion of the steep slope criteria in the zoning code
and for the Planning Commission to provide their recommendation on the application with a response from the applicant.
The record is otherwise closed.
Thank you, Mr. Nackensen.
Thank you. Have a great day.
MI 2023-001-328-4237 Lancaster Avenue.
Brandon Sabrin is the attorney.
good afternoon again mr mr saverin you've already been sworn just state your name for
the record brandon saverin could you identify your client a relationship to this property
yes um so i have two clients one is the islamic cultural preservation and information council
And the other is, in his individual capacity, their director, Abdulrahim Muhammad.
That's because the property consists of several parcels.
ICHPIC owns two of them.
Mr. Muhammad owns two of them.
We have a letter of support from HOPEPHL, and we also have a letter of support from
Councilmember Gauthier, which is a pretty long issue.
We'll probably read that into the record later.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
sir. Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? I agree to waive the reading, Mr. Vice Chair, but there is one, I believe,
inaccuracy in the refusal, so I don't stipulate to its accuracy, and I can talk about that in a
minute. Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I did. Thank you. Please
proceed and share your screen. Okay, thank you very much. I'm really going to try to keep my
comments brief because I do have a couple witnesses that I'd like to call. So the property in question
is on the 4200 block of Lancaster Avenue. It's outlined in the black box on the screen here in
Exhibit 5 in my binder. It consists of four parcels. As I mentioned, two of them are owned by
the organization that is developing these parcels, the Islamic Cultural Preservation
and Information Council. And two of them are owned by its director, Mr. Muhammad.
But they're going to be consolidated if you grant this approval today. And let me show you what
we're trying to build on these four parcels. So this is what I think is a magnificent design for
what is going to be a five-story building shown on your screen right now. And these are also in
my exhibit binder. The building is going to have ICPICS sort of community center museum and offices
on the ground floor, which will feature a cafe open to the public and four floors of apartments
above. And this property, once it's consolidated, consists of 7,200 square feet. So it's a large
property. And sort of my general theory of the case when we go to the refusals in a moment is
that for what my client is trying to do here, it doesn't fit within the sort of constraints of the
zoning code. But this is an appropriate space for a larger development in that it is right in the
center if if the board members know lancaster avenue in this sort of mantua belmont area this
is like main street and this is where we want um cultural uses and affordable apartments you know
on our main commercial thoroughfares not off on side streets where they disturb residents so this
is this is a great location for this project i'll really quickly show you our zoning plan
um it contains um some technical elevations as well as the site plan um basically the site plan
speaks to what we're going to do upstairs which is have 34 apartment units um and I'm going to
have the architect walk you through floor plans in a moment but um just know that we do have a
code compliant zoning plan submitted. And I will just go to the refusal and show you our letters
of support. And that will be the end of my remarks. So here's our refusal. It says, as it
always does in the capitalized text, what we are attempting to do on the property. So the first
The first paragraph is just describing the consolidation.
paragraph is just describing the consolidation the second
The second describes the project that I just stated, the cultural center with cafe and offices on the ground floor at the 34 apartments above.
And here are refusals. So working from top to bottom, we are permitted 21 dwelling units without any variances
because we are committing in our application to make four of the dwelling units
rentable, affordable to folks making 50% AMI or less adjusted for the number of individuals in
their household. And because we're making that commitment, we triggered the mixed income housing
bonus at the low income level. So that means that 21 of our 34 units are permitted by right,
but we still need a variance for 13 additional units. The second refusal is for height. This is
where I think the examiner may have erred. When you trigger the mixed income housing bonus in the
CMX2 district, you get an additional seven feet of height permitted. So rather than 38 feet,
I believe we're permitted 45 feet. But in any event, we're at 62. And the last refusal is for
bike parking. So in the shortest form I can offer, because I did give you a memo of law as
exhibit one in my binder, what are the hardships that sort of enable this? Well, CMX2 is a tough
designation, particularly when you don't have any bonuses, 38 feet height, unless you're going to
sort of do relatively low ceilings. You can only get three stories out of when you're talking about
a mixed-use building with higher ceilings like ours. And that's just not supportive of the cost
of this development, which is so beneficial, as you'll hear from the developer, the owner,
and all sorts of community members. What we're attempting to do here warrants a bigger investment
than the code allows. We financially and physically just can't make it work to have a cultural center
open to the community if we're constrained to a 38 feet building and, you know, less than 34
dwelling units. There is such a dire need for affordable housing and all of these units beyond
just the four that are going to be deed restricted to be affordable will be affordable to normal
working folks, which you'll hear about in a moment. We haven't committed to more than four
on the refusal because beyond four, there's no zoning implications, but the entire project is
geared towards affordability. And again, in a smaller envelope or with less units, it just
doesn't pencil out. We can't provide the uses we want to provide. And finally, on the bike parking,
you know, when you're dealing with a mixed use project and CMX2, you have to have covered bike
parking. That would have taken away space from the functions we want to provide on the ground
floor. The alternative would have been to maybe do something covered outside of the building,
but I have personally too much experience with L&I and community members where they don't want
that to eat up the open space outside the building. So we may install that later, but we're not
committing to it in this application, and that's why we have a refusal. And then I'll just show you
are a letter of support from the coordinating RCO, which is HOPEPHL. And then we have,
in my few years of doing this, what might be the most impressive roster of letters of support from
other organizations, and I won't read them, I'll just sort of name them, PHA, and you'll hear more
about PHA's potential involvement in a second. But you have beyond that, the mayoral administration,
the Director of Neighborhood Initiatives, Ms. Brown, offered a letter. You have a letter from
State Senator Vincent Hughes in support of the project, a letter from House Representative
Eamon Brown in support of the project, support by Jamie Gauthier, of course, the District
Councilwoman for this district, from Harris Steinberg, who is a design professor in leadership
at Drexel University, and also letters from several of the non-coordinating RCOs, which include West
Belmont Civic Association, the People's Emergency Center, and the Mill Creek Community Partnership.
So that's it for me. I promised I'd keep it short. What I'm going to do is pull up the
proposed floor plans and ask that the board promote John Arend, who is our architect,
to just give you some highlights off of those plans.
Is Mr. Arendt in the audience?
He's been about to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. This is John Arendt. That's J-O-H-N-A-R-E-N-D.
Sure. This is John Arendt. That's J-O-H-N-A-R-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
John, you can overrule me. So tell me if you want me to show something else. But my ideas for maybe
the two most critical images were this colored schematic that shows the different uses within
the building and then i also have um like a sample uh floor plan that actually goes into the
apartment units on one of the upper floors um which of those do you want me to start with or
somewhere else you you take it from here uh well let's go ahead and start on the the area plans
page that you were showing originally okay um as you can see uh this is a sheet that has all five
floors the first floor being the the one that is unlike the others it has the kind of salmon red
color for the cultural center and there's there is one thing that I just now noticed this was an
this is an older version of the plan the actual 34 unit plan that we were talking about does not
have the rear blue unit next to the elevator that's actually been brought into the cultural
center so we only have two units on the first floor but if you if you look at the plan south
side of the building we have two entrances one for the cultural center directly and then another
unit or another entrance off to the side for the residential portion of the building there's
Two stair towers going up, one in the front, one in the rear, and an elevator.
So if you want to scroll over to the image on the left there, this is a pretty typical floor plan of the residential floors above.
so as you can see it's a fairly simple double loaded corridor with all of our units having
windows either on the front of the building or off to the side yards and honestly this
this was a plan that took some finagling and we did our best to get as many affordable units
for the community into this space and keep it as usable as possible so if you want to go to the next
sheet that you were showing just a sample yep you can see that all of these units are fairly
economically organized you have your entrance bathroom kitchen living area bedroom with windows
on each and every one of these with the exception to the two studio apartment sizes on the right
there those just kind of have one you know open space for the living kitchen bedroom as a studio
typically does uh and then we have a two-bedroom unit at the very front of the building uh with
two bedrooms and then kind of a central living kitchen space with the bathroom okay um john um
the next person i was going to call is going to be um mr mitchell from the developer but anything
else you want to say before i do that uh no not at this time i'm happy to answer questions later
okay um so unless the board has any questions for mr mr mitchell on sure um naeem mitchell is who
i'm looking for do we see a hand there he is yes they've been allowed to speak hi could you state
your name please and spell for the court stenographer naeem mitchell n-a-i-m mitchell
m-i-t-c-h-e-l-l right do you swear affirm tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do proceed uh counsel thanks um so naeem the first thing i'm going to do is um have you
adopt my testimony and then i'm going to invite you to you know make any other remarks you want
So firstly, are you authorized to speak today on behalf of ICPIC and Mr. Muhammad, the two
owners of the properties? Yes. Okay. Were you able to hear my comments to this point in the
zoning case today? Yes. Were they true and accurate to the best of your knowledge,
information, and belief? Yes. And would you therefore adopt them as if they were your own
testimony? Yes. Okay. Thanks very much. And if you could, you know, just introduce your role in
your role in the project, and, you know, offer any other information you think would be useful
the project and, you know, offer any other information.
to the board. Okay. Again, good afternoon, everyone. My name is Naeem Mitchell. I'm the
Vice President of Development for Mosaic Development Partners, and we are the developer
for this project. We walk hand in hand with ICPIC and Mr. Muhammad in reference to this project.
This is not just a developmental project. It is really a community driven process and purpose.
If anyone has ever had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Muhammad, he is very passionate about the community as well as Mosaic is passionate about the community.
And it was just a match made in heaven in the sense of just being able to work together.
With this particular project, we've been very intentional from the beginning, pursuing housing vouchers from PHA.
So as Brandon stated earlier, this project is fully affordable in reference to all of the units.
We've also been intentional in reference to our fundraising efforts.
Mr. Muhammad and his team, as well as the Mosaic team, have been able to raise over $3 million in grant funding to make this project feasible.
Um, the, the entire foundation of this project is really being able to provide quality, affordable housing to the community, revitalize the 4,200 block of Lancaster Ave, and also bring back the essence and the history, um, of the community.
I can go on and on about it because I'm passionate, but I just wanted to to really speak to that and really lay that out there.
And I'm going to pass it off to Mr. Muhammad to tell you a little bit more about the community impact.
OK, thanks. So we're looking for Abdul Rahim Muhammad.
Mr. Muhammad, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Muhammad, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes, Abdul Rahim Muhammad, A-B-D-U-L-R-A-H-I-M-M-U-H-A-M-M-A-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
yes proceed counsel mr muhammad i invite you to make whatever comments you'd like to make um
you know particularly as the director of it pick
yes i i am the director of the islamic cultural preservation and information council
and the New Africa Center, CDC.
I've been very, very passionate about this project,
and I'm very pleased with the way that you've explained it
and that Dr. Naim expressed how this is a community-driven project.
We partnered with Mosaic Development Partners, I guess a little past two years ago, and our partnership has been like a marriage.
I mean, I feel like we're all part of one family, and they are just as passionate about uplifting our community as I am.
And when I met with Mosaic Development Partners, I told them that our development project was to preserve the legacy and utilizing arts and culture, history and neighborhood identity as an economic engine to rebuild our community.
And the underlying goal was to uplift this community and put our footprint in this community because all the gentrification going on, you won't even realize and know that African Americans had a rich, strong history in this community in another 25 years from now.
But if we continue to preserve our legacy and preserve that history, I think that will be...
and preserve that history, I think that will be a great service to uplift our community.
We can use our legacy and culture as an economic engine to rebuild our community
rather than running away from it.
And for the last 10 years, we were able to acquire these properties
And we finally had the opportunity to partner with Mosaic Development Partners and move this project forward.
And so we are just so excited about how we are looking to transform this 4200 block of Lancaster Avenue that have been collected for over close to 50 years.
But now we see a revival taking place, and we're looking to have our development project serve as the anchor for our new Freedom District.
So thank you very, very much.
Thank you.
Brandon, you're through?
That concludes our presentation.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Chair, I'm going to recuse myself from this.
Okay. Emily? No, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you. Questions or comments from the
virtual audience?
i see no handshare planning commission so ron bednar city planning your property is indicated
for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan we support the grounding of the variance
thank you mi2023-001-328-4237 lancaster avenue i vote yes
Thomas Holloman my vote is yes
James Snell my vote is yes
thank you counsel thank you very much
is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose two o'clock case has not been called
I do not say yes Mr. Chair
let's let's take a five minute break let's get Mr. Kelly straight
and then we'll come back and we'll we'll finish the afternoon work
thank you everyone understood thank you chair hey hillary
hillary are you there yes yes i'm here just get me over a form and i'll and i'll fill that out
oh okay thank you
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
How are we doing?
There looks like all the board members are here.
I'm just checking for the court reporter.
Mr. Kelly?
Let's see.
yes chair looks like we lost the court reporter okay let's wait we'll wait he'll be back
Thank you.
Mr. Kelly?
I'm trying to email him now, Chair.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
There he is.
Mr. Kelly, you ready?
Yes, sir.
i apologize for that just as i we were getting ready i had just sat down and my internet went
out it has now okay it's come back yes did i miss anything thank you very much did i miss anything
chair no you did not absolutely not no we're ready to roll okay thank you ready to go i'm ready to go
now okay good afternoon my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this afternoon's zba hearing
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismael Shaheed.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
And our Board Member, James Snell.
He's here.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
here's our virtual format be advised the proceedings are being recorded video will be available by
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting Tanya Sunkett at Philadelphia.
For the benefit of our court stenographers, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumter.
Let's look at what we have for this afternoon.
Number five, MI 2023-000074-4745 North Penn Street.
That case has been continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. I'm once again co-hosting. I do not see any hand.
All right, thank you. And number one, MI 2023-003-762-160-64 North 2nd Street. That case
has been withdrawn we go to number two first mi 2023 000 397 734 jefferson street this is a
resumptive hearing murder the ferlicker is the attorney
they'll be coming back in as a panelist sir okay
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, counsel. Just for the record, state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, with Dilworth Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. The purpose of this is to check for additional public testimony.
Is there any additional comments from the virtual audience relative to this case?
There are no hands raised, sir.
Thank you.
Case number two, MI 2023, 000397, 734 Jefferson Street.
I vote yes.
yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much. Number three, MI 2023-000-112-812 North Uber Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
We are going to hear this with case number seven also.
And case number seven is MI 2023, 000113, 814 North Uber Street.
And, okay, Mr. Clinton.
I'm back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clinton, you've already been sworn in.
Just for the record, state your name.
Sure. Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
In these two particular cases, could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is on the call. His name is Alon, and the name of the owner is 812 North Uber Street.
Great. And we also, our vice chair has a few questions for you.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that are needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing i have thank you please proceed
and share your screen and mr clinton just for the record uh we're going to hold the vote on this
for an amended refusal and a new streets department review understood mr chairman
We will not vote on both these today, okay?
And Mr. Chair, I just want to interject.
We did not receive a letter from the RCO.
So Mr. Clinton, unless you've received one in the last day or so,
we can hold the record open for the letter from the RCO as well.
Did you receive any letter, Mr. Clinton?
Yes, I did receive letters at the last minute,
and I have them attached that I can forward to you
and also include them in this presentation.
Okay, great. And do the letters reflect the revised plan?
Okay, great. And do the letters reflect the revised plans that are going to be sent to L&I for an amended refusal? Is that what was presented to the community?
Okay, excellent. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Emerson. Mr. Chairman, is that visible or do I need to enlarge?
Thank you.
Okay. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. I'm here today on behalf of 812 North Uber Street.
And as the chair said at the outset, there's really two cases that are the same, 812 North Uber, as well as 814.
And my client is on the call.
So basically, an introduction.
These are two multifamily buildings, and we're seeking one parking space for each building and the relocation and reduction of a curb cut for net gain of removing basically one car off the street.
And as I'll show you in the aerial photographs, this is a typical scenario on this particular block.
And the other request is for a rear deck on the property for the second floor tenant, similar to the deck at the adjacent property at 810.
This is my exhibit package, exhibits A1 through A10.
And again, Mr. Chairman, for both cases, I won't keep repeating that.
the addresses, but it's 812 and 814. Exhibits A1 through A10, which I ask to be admitted into
the record. This is the refusal. So two refusals have to do with parking. The first refusal has
to do with the rear deck. And as I said at the outset, this deck is consistent with the house
next door, which also has a deck to provide some outdoor space for the tenants on the second floor.
The second and third refusals concern parking, indicating the second refusal is for parking, as the panel knows, you have to have parking for any single family or multifamily must be accessed from a shared driveway, alley, or rear street.
In this instance, the parking we're asking for is in front of the building, consistent with other uses on the block.
And in this third refusal, I believe we've eliminated because it indicated that our space was not of sufficient width or depth.
And we've basically conformed with that because we've changed the location of where the parking space is going to be, which has in turn prompted the fact that I have to get an amended refusal, as the chair mentioned at the outset.
The RCO letters I do have, and I'll show you at the end of the presentation.
This is a photograph of the front of the building.
You can see there's a large apron in front of the building.
and these black spaces below the front of the building are egress well hatches for anyone who
happens to be in the basement to egress from the building. This is the building here. If you take
a line down the middle to the right-hand side is six units. There's three on the right side,
three in the middle, three again to the left of the middle, and three on the far left.
And again, you can see a large apron in front of the building.
And what's been happening, Mr. Chairman, is this is where the curb cut was.
And people, not necessarily residents, but people on the block are parking this way on the space and also parking to the left of the vehicle.
And it becomes very difficult for the management to track what's going on in front of the building, because if you park perpendicular to the building, you are actually blocking the egress wells in front of the building, which we want to eliminate.
So our proposal is to move the curb cut to the middle of the building, reduce the size of the curb cut to about 11 feet, and then have one car parked perpendicular to the building and the other car parked perpendicular to the building.
And I'll show you what that does. You can see if you park in this direction, you basically block the sidewalk, and we're trying to avoid that.
this is the aerial photograph for the rear of the building and i show you this photograph to show you
that on the block there's typically parking in front of the properties on the street not only
directly across the street down the street but also on the same side of the street so it's not
unusual but what each parking space is doing it's taking the car off the sidewalk and moving it back
away from the sidewalk. So there's easy pedestrian use. I also wanted to show the board that
we were asking for a deck off the back of both buildings. That's resulted in one of the refusals.
And you can see there's a deck next door, a little bit smaller than our proposed deck, but
it looks like it projects about the same amount, four feet from the building. And then that refusal
amount four feet from the building. And then that refusal is generated because the code says if you
is generated because
have a deck on the second floor, it's considered really an encroachment on the rear yard and that
lessens the rear yard. We are not lessening the depth of the rear yard. We're simply providing
a deck for tenants on the second floor so they can have some outdoor space. The tenants on the
first floor have use of the rear yard and the tenants on the third or fourth floor, which is
one unit have access to the rooftop deck. So we're just trying to offer another amenity for the
tenant in that second floor. Again, another aerial photograph, just a little bit distant from
the close rub photograph I showed you. Again, just to show the board parking across the street and
parking on the same side of the street. And again, here's the curb cut I mentioned where there's not
enough room to put a car perpendicular to the building. Really, the curb cut has to move to
the center and then have one space in front of the building to the left and one space in front
of the building to the right. This is a photograph looking down the street. Again, the proposal that
we have, the cars will be situated basically perpendicular to these first four trash cans,
and then you would be able to see the rear of the car
if there was a car in this photograph
and that way the egress well is protected
as well as the pedestrian walkway will be safeguarded.
This is the photograph looking the other direction.
Same thing, car will be parked parallel
providing egress for pedestrians
and not blocking the egress well.
This is our revised plans.
If the board looks kindly upon this application,
We're going to ask that these plans be submitted and approved.
So this is the front of the building.
Originally, Mr. Chairman, our proposal was, again, we were going to have cars parking perpendicular to the buildings.
That really is not something that's going to be compatible with easy ease of pedestrian access, as well as the egress wells.
So our plan is to have an 11-foot curb cut, move the existing curb cut down to the middle of the building.
Yes, we're losing one parking space on the street, which was brought up by the neighborhood,
but also the neighborhood realized if we had the curb cut, we're actually having net gain of one car being taken off the street.
Here are just some additional photographs.
This photograph is here we're rendering to show the board the rear deck that we're proposing.
The proposal is to keep the deck railing open, metal rails or something, so that light and
air continue to get through into the inhabitants of the second floor.
Again, the rear yard is not being affected in any way.
It's the reading of the code that resulted in that refusal.
We have our tax certification, application for appeal, all the other standard documents
you would expect to see within a zoning proposal such as this, including the deed.
These are the two letters of support that we received from United Francisville Civic Association.
a pretty strong vote, 12 in support and there were four in opposition and they submitted
two letters, one for 810 as well as one, excuse me, one for 812 as well as one for 814.
And if you look at the ZP numbers, you can see that there are two separate letters for
two separate projects.
So in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to say that the application is not impacting lighter air. We're not asking for any relief with regard to height, open space, or rear yard.
It's basically a use that we're moving a curb cut, taking one car off the street, making it safer for pedestrians to walk by, and mirroring the use of parking on other properties on the street, as I showed in the aerial photograph.
With that, I would like to conclude and ask if my client could adopt my testimony and obviously field any questions that the board may have.
Yes, please.
Alon, can you unmute yourself?
Please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court stenographer?
Elan Elkayem, E-L-A-N as in Nancy, E-L-K-A-I-M as in Mary.
Ilan Elkayem
N-A-Z-N-N-C-E
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Elan, were you on the Zoom call when I presented your projects?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Yes, sir.
Thank you, sir.
questions from the board no chair no mr chairman
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair hi planning commission ron bednar city planning
this recommendation is for both properties are indicated for residential use on the city plan
Our adopted district plan recommends no change to existing zoning at these locations.
The applicant's hardships are not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances
that would prevent them from being used before with the regulations.
therefore we recommend
requests for various not being ran
we need to hold the vote for an amended
refusal and a new streets
department review
Hillary
it's closed just for those
objects
it'll just be closed for that
and this will
we'll put this on an add-on list we don't need to do
a resumption hearing
so that's for number 3 and number 7
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. Number four, MI 2023-000-126-2105 Ellsworth Street. Michael McElhenney is the attorney. Letter of support from the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
hi counsel how are you how are you sir excellent please state your name and spell for the court
sonographer michael mcelhenney m-c-i-l-h-i-n-n-e-y right do you swear affirm tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client and the relationship to this
property? Yes, my client's plural is 91C LLC and Maidcon, M-A-D-C-O-N-L-L-C, the owners of the
property 2105 Ellsworth and 2107 Ellsworth, respectively. All right, our vice chair has a
few questions for you, sir. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Yes, I do. Have you emailed in all the
required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing? I have. I have. Please proceed and share your screen.
Excellent. I just shared my exhibit packet on the screen, which the packet consists of 17 exhibits,
uh preliminarily the at exhibit 12 are our is a copy of our zoning appeal to the board
exhibit 13 are just the photos showing the property was posted with the notice of the zoning hearing
exhibit 14 is our rco notice for the community meeting that we held with the point breeze
Community Development Coalition. And Exhibit 15, there's an additional community flyer that the
Point Breeze community requires us to mail out. We've included that at the property and mailed
out to the neighbors. My client's deeds are at Exhibit 16. As I mentioned, there's two LLCs
involved, 91C LLC owns 2105 Ellsworth, and then Madecon LLC owns 2107 Ellsworth Street, which are
the two properties at issue. Exhibit 17 is just a copy of the tax, Philadelphia Tax Center report
for each property showing zero tax balances on both. As the chairman mentioned when I was zooming
in, rejoining as a panelist. The Point Breast Community Association held a meeting in May,
on May 22nd, and we have full support for this project today. Exhibit two is our refusal.
Exhibit two is our refusal. So my client is proposing to redraw the lot lines, create a subdivision for taking the existing two lots and create four lots from the existing two lots.
So my client is proposing
Thank you.
On those four lots, we plan to construct four new construction attached structures with roof deck and roof deck access structures and for single family use.
and three of the four properties are proposed to have off-street parking.
This application created two refusals.
One, the property is owned to RS-85, and that creates the off-street parking in the RS-85's neighborhood from a front-loaded garage is not permissible by right,
and three of the four proposed houses have off-street parking.
The second refusal is because, as you'll see on the plans, there is a side yard created
with this project, and we are proposing a six-foot fence for privacy at the front of
the properties, and that fence would be a wooden fence that would be more than 50% opaque.
So we have two refusals as part of this project.
And if I can give a quick background of this property, this project is actually back before
the board for the second time.
We were originally before the board in January of 2021.
We met with the Point Breeze community in 2020, and the original proposal was to create
six lots from the existing two lots and create six single-family houses with no off-street
parking.
On January 27th, 2021, the zoning board granted our variances for the proposed six lots because
we had a dimensional refusal for having slightly substandard lot sizes.
After getting the notice of decision and approval from the zoning board, Councilman Johnson's office filed a request for reconsideration and reached out to my office and we consented to the reconsideration.
The councilman wanted additional input from the community and more of a consensus plan.
we did go back and meet with the neighbors back in 2021 in april and i have copies of those letters
from april 6th and april 7th from the point breeze community then where they basically wanted
to reduce the density slightly and they didn't want to lose the off-street parking and exhibit
11 just shows the main unit the main issues they wanted four units three garages and basically
dimensionally compliant houses height wise and open area so that brought us back to the drawing
board to redraw the plan and come back with the proposed plan today for the board, which is this
consensus plan with and which is why we have full community support. Exhibit 3 is just a copy of the
zoning map for the subject property. It is RSA 5 single family. The properties to the east of us
are RM1. The properties to the north of us are I2, which are all the properties along Washington
Avenue. Exhibit four are aerial views of the subject property, just to orient the board into
the location of the property and its surrounding environment. Page one of exhibit four, the
properties at issue are on the north side of Ellsworth Street, which consists of various
single-family houses, many of which have off-street parking, and I'll go through the street view
photos so the board can see that. The properties to the west, as you can see, is the Jehovah's
Witness Hall with its surface-level parking, and all the properties to the north are Washington
Avenue industrial uses. Exhibit 5, and the remaining photos are just the different
directional views of the property. I'm not going to go through those. Exhibit 5 are the current
site photos for the property in the block. On the screen at page 1 is 2107 Ellsworth Street.
It's a single-family house, a pre-existing curb cut with off-street parking, and a fire
hydrogen located in front of the property.
The second photo is 2105 Ellsworth, the property to the east.
Again, single-family, existing curb cut with off-street parking.
Farther to the east, 2103 Ellsworth is a two-unit condo building with curb cut off-street parking.
And then the property on the corner, 2101 Ellsworth Street.
Again, it's a single-family house with the existing off-street parking.
And farther to the east is the Jehovah's Witness Hall with its surface parking lot.
The properties to the west of the subject property on Ellsworth Street, 2109 and 2111 Ellsworth, are the same type of structures as are on our property.
Single-family house with curb cut and off-street parking.
The remaining houses on the west side to the west of our property on the north side of Ellsworth are just existing three-story single-family houses.
And on the south side of the block, again, these are three-story single-family houses that take up the majority of the south side of the block.
The middle of the block does have 2124-26 Ellsworth Street, which is a combined consolidated lot with two units and off-street parking and a curb cut.
The middle of the block does have 21, 24-26 Ellsworth Street.
The remaining properties are just three-story single-family houses.
At Exhibit 6 is our approved subdivision plan for the proposed development.
Looking at the left side of the plan is the existing dimensions of the existing lots.
These lots are approximately 68 feet 8 inches deep by 42 feet 10 inches wide.
So very sizable parcels for South Philadelphia and the Point Breeze neighborhood.
Our proposal, turning to the right side of the Exhibit 6, is to create four subdivided parcels.
All the parcels obviously will stay 68 feet deep and going from east to west, they will end up with different variations in width because of the side yard we're creating as part of the development as requested by the community.
The first property is going to be 23 feet wide. The second ends up at 19.8 feet wide. The third property is 18.4 feet wide and the fourth is 24.4 feet wide. So again, these are four subdivided lots.
that are still quite sizable and less density than the six-unit plan that we had approved back in 2001.
Our zoning plan is at Exhibit 7.
And I'll zoom into the zoning plan.
As I mentioned, we're proposing four attached houses.
The properties themselves are 50, the houses that were in construction are 42 feet deep,
and we're leaving 26 feet three inches for the rear yard so we have massive rear yards
portion of the rear rear yard will be porous pavers and the rest will be grass
the neighbors requested that we not build to the property lines and these are with four
properties that are almost averaging 20 over 20 feet wide they're they're massive so we are doing
a six foot side yard on the east side of the the property and on the west side to give light and
to the neighboring properties and keep more of the existing conditions that have been at this
property for 20, 30 years with the existing houses. That does create this issue with the
privacy fence in the front of the property. So in order to have security and privacy along the
property, we do have a six foot fence proposed, which is one of the refusals created by the
the community's request. And turning to the second page of Exhibit 7 is the elevation,
the front elevation of the property. So the property farthest to the east will have that
six foot side yard and we're requesting approval for a six foot privacy fence that is more than
50% opaque. The building itself is dimensionally compliant, 38 feet high with a three foot six
inch parapet wall. And beyond the parapet wall, the community asks us not to do a 10-foot
pilot house, as you often see. So we have a roof stair enclosure that will be flush
with that parapet wall. So it will not be visible beyond the parapet wall.
On the ground floor level, again, the first house on the east, the easternmost unit will not have
parking, but the other three units will have front-loaded parking, which makes sense. There
is an existing curb cut for the, I'll say, with the second property and the fourth property.
The one in the middle, there is that existing fire hydrant, so there would be no parking along
the front of that house anyway, so this allows us to get an additional car off the street and
comply with what the community was demanding. As far as the floor plans, we have those at exhibit
eight. The basement floor plan is for, we have a utilities and family room in the basement with an
egress well leading out to the rear yard. The first floor is the garage for the front loaded
parking, along with the main entryway into the house, which has a powder room at the first floor
and the main living space. The living room is a, has a, it's a vaulted ceiling. So the second floor
has, is open to below. So the second floor only goes back halfway. Second floor will have the
kitchen room, kitchen and dining room and stairs leading up to the bedrooms at the third and fourth
floor level. The bedrooms themselves as a third floor, we end up with a one bedroom, one bath
unit with washer and dryer and mechanicals. And the bedrooms are sizable. It's 13 feet
wide by 13 feet deep approximately on bedrooms one and two. And then the master bedroom is on
And then the master bedroom is on the fourth floor level that has a full bedroom, full master bath, walk-in closet, wet bar, and access to the roof deck.
the fourth floor level that has a full bedroom.
And as I mentioned, the roof deck is not going to be a pilot house.
It is going to be flush with that parapet wall as requested by the community.
And Exhibit 9 is the rendering of the property.
Again, nothing in particular here other than I want to point out that the privacy fence that we're going to need because of the side yard that the neighbors requested, we are requesting permission to have that at six feet and more than 50% opaque, along with the approval for the off-street parking as requested by the community.
with that um mr chairman that those are our exhibits for this project i would request
jason kuter is on the line he is a member of both llcs that own these properties i would
request that he raise his hand okay
they've been enough to speak hi sir could you state your name and spell it please for the
court stenographer? Yes, Jason Cuter, J-A-S-O-N-C-U-T-A-I-A-R. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed, sir. Mr. Cuter, did you hear my
presentation to the board today? Yes, I did. And were my statements true and correct to the best
to your knowledge, information, and belief? Yes, they were. And are you, just to clarify,
are you a member of both owners, a member of both LLCs that own each of these properties?
Yes, I'm sole member of MaidCon LLC 2107 Ellsworth, and I'm a member of 91C,
owner of 2105 Ellsworth. Okay. And would you adopt my statements as your own?
I would
Nothing further Mr. Chair
Questions from the board
No chair
No chair
Thomas
Questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands Mr. Chair
planning commission. Sir, Ron Bednar, city planning property is indicated for residential
use on a city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to existing zoning at this
location. Applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances
that will prevent it from being used in conformity with the parking requirements of the code.
therefore we recommend your perseverance not be granted. MI 2023, 000126-2105 Ellsworth Street,
I vote yes. Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes. James Snow, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed,
my vote is yes thank you counsel thank you number six mi 2023 000 277 1222 hayworth street
thomas kenny is the attorney
we do now have an rco letter am i right hillary yes mr chair um we have just received a letter
in opposition from the northwood civic association right um we have also received a letter from
council member lazada leaving this member to the board because they did receive the letter
in opposition but they've also received the petition in support submitted by the applicant
okay mr thomas kenny he's been promoted to panama sir hi mr kenny could you state your name and
spell please for the court reporter yes good good afternoon board and chairman bergman this
is attorney Thomas Kenny, K-E-N-N-Y. Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? I do, Chairman. Could you identify your client and relationship to this
property? Sure. My client is the owner of the property, 1222 Hayworth Street. She's also the
proprietor of the business that is attempting to get this change. Our vice chair has just a few
questions. Yes. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy? I would, sir. Thank you. Thank you. I have emailed in all the required
I have emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing.
documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case.
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Esteem board, I also have one of my paralegals ready in case I'm a person who doesn't do this a lot.
But so if I. Walter, I'm going to ask my paralegal to also be I think I I think I just did it, panel.
I think you did it. Also, the old man, the old man has done it.
So I'm I'm proud to say, OK. Panel, thank you very much for giving us the time today.
um what we have here is the my client is not attempting to do any construction no alterations
to the property she's simply trying to change the use from what's basically a family group
a family uh to have children uh for a business and this would be become a group the difference
between a family to group goes up to six children this would be from seven to 12 children
um we have been notified we went in front of the rco um we'll get to that in a minute but these are
my the notice of refusals uh we applied for this and got refused on 12 20 the house my client lives
there she also has her business as the date this daycare out of there she's been the proprietor of
this business is 2008. She's had licensing here since 2008. She's also cross-licensed throughout
the Commonwealth as according to the Department of Public Welfare or the DHS allowing her to be
zoned to have this type of property or to say have the use and she's monitored by them and
she's in compliance with the state dictates. We have filed the application for appeal
And I would, at the end of this, I'll ask to move all my exhibits in.
We can note to the panel that we've went and had a public meeting at the RCO.
That meeting was not favorable to us, but we'll get to that in a second.
I've submitted the deed.
My client purchased the property back in 1999.
Her name today is Kelly Burnett.
She is also Kelly Lewis.
That was her name before marriage.
So that is the same person.
She purchased this property, as you see, from the Trinity Reformed Episcopal Church, a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation back in 1999.
She's held it as same since that time.
We have all the applicable tax clearances.
We have pictures of the zoning signs.
To touch on now the community group, we met with the community group,
and there is now, as the chairman said, there was an email sent yesterday.
I got it yesterday, and there was a, of the people attending, we have supporter votes of three people supporting.
We have opposing the six people on the board, and we also have 13 people who were voting opposing it as to this change.
I can say, getting a little bit to this point, our position is we have the necessary oversight by the state, and she's a good standing business within the state and all those things.
I don't think that's the issue.
I think what the concern of the community is, and we just got a council letter.
So, Chairman, did you receive that yet?
We do.
I just got it in the last couple hours.
And I understand that they are deferring, they will defer ultimately to the zoning board because we've also supported, we've also sent in our package here, letters of support from the community.
We have our tax clearance.
And we have various things from the state showing that she's in compliance with state regulations.
We have loads of support from people that she works with, showing that this is an ongoing business.
It's been a successful business.
My client cares about kids and keeping kids out of trouble, keeping kids on the job.
My client cares about kids and keeping kids out of trouble, keeping kids on the right path as they start their life moving on to adulthood.
And this is what her only obsession is.
She's been doing this her entire life, and that's really the only concern that she has.
Getting to the community.
What the concern is, I can see, is that really it's a small street and parking has been contested and also moving up and down the street.
It's a one-way street and parking.
The complaints from the neighbors have been that sometimes the parking situation, students, children's parents park there, and then there's issues and stuff like that.
Um, we obviously acknowledge that that is a situation, but we are open and we have some other ideas in store, uh, that we think that would be helpful, uh, to the community and, and keep this business moving forward.
One of the things we were discussing, we spoke to DHS, and DHS suggested we're close to Oxford Avenue, and we could have parking there at Oxford Avenue for the additional six students, or maybe it might be less, but up to six more students.
And the DHS suggested we could park at Oxford, and then, of course, a staff member could go walk up the street and help the person come down.
We also thought about ideas of carpooling, and we've considered ideas of trying to work out different parking arrangements, actually following a different approval of the streets department another time.
But that's, it's not really, in my estimation, a problem with what my client does, and I'll call her in a few moments.
It's a worry about the congestion and things like that.
I'll note on page 49 of my packet I just put up there, there's pictures we have of other businesses on the block.
And so this is a situation where we're not the only business.
This isn't just a full residential street.
It's a twin.
We did have particular objections from our actual neighbor, and I'll address that if that comes up in a few minutes.
But this is a street that does have businesses on it, and we feel that this would be a good addition to the community.
With that said, Chairman, I would like to ask permission to call my client, Ms. Burnett.
Please.
Ms. Burnett, could you put your hand up?
i've been allowed to speak why could you state your name please and spell for the
court stenographer sure my name is amber burnett i'm not sure if you were calling for kelly burnett
or not we were calling for kelly burnett okay that's my client's daughter i'm sorry
i'll stop sharing for now
Kelly Burnett, if you're in the virtual audience still,
please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in.
Ms. Burnett?
Here we go.
She just raised the hand.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Kelly Burnett.
K-E-L-L-E-Y
B as in boy
R as in Robert
N as in Nancy
E as in Edward
T as in Thomas
T as in Thomas
Swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth is nothing but the truth
Yes, sir
Proceed, counsel
Thank you, sir
Ms. Burnett
have you heard my testimony
for the last few minutes?
Okay, and if this was your testimony
if you heard it
Is it true and accurate, the best of your knowledge, information and beliefs?
Yes. And would you adopt my testimony?
Yes. Miss Burnett, I know that you have made some prearranged remarks.
Would you like to read that now to us? Yes, please.
Panel, would that be OK, Chairman? Sure, please. Go ahead, ma'am.
Good afternoon, Chairman, panel, and everyone else. My name is Kelly Burnett, and I am the
proud owner of Kelly's Inspirational Daycare Service. According to Start Strong PA and the
Child Care Works Organization, as of 2022, there were close to 700 children in the state of
Pennsylvania under the age of five. Of those 700 children, 75% of those children are underserved.
The remaining 25%, approximately 170,000,
The remaining 25%, approximately 170,000 children, are served, but only 45% of them are enrolled in quality child care environments.
Quality child care is relatively unaffordable for families that live in this community and in this state.
In addition to that, there is a nationwide shortage of teachers.
High turnover in facilities creates an unsafe environment and makes opening a center a much
more difficult endeavor. Creating a job, excuse me, criteria and job descriptions are being
negatively modified to meet staff needs, thus lowering the quality of the facility.
in the 19124 zip code which we live in there are 90 child care facilities and of that amount
only 20 of the facilities have a star 4 badge of quality through though our facility is included
in the 20 star 4 child care facilities we happen to be one of the only very few nationally accredited
facilities in the state. For those quality facilities, enrollment is very limited, which
creates high demand and long wait lists. Our variance request comes from the desire to provide
better service to the Northwood area and provide our children with a solid learning foundation for
success. Between the amount of underserved children in the state and facing a scarcity of
qualified teachers and staffing, and less than 25 percent of the facilities in this area in
possession of a Star 4 badge. There is an incredible need for families and their children
to find facilities that provide the type of care that is so desperately needed for the children.
Since 2008, I have worked diligently with my team to create an atmosphere that provides license,
high-quality care for my family and the community. According to the PA State Regulations for
Family Providers 3290.51, family facilities are able to care for six unrelated children
at any given time, and related children of the legal entity or staff are exempt from that count.
Our facility hosts many playdates with fellow providers and incorporate the sharing of costs
and space. The many activities that our students are involved in, the mobile zoo, various music
venues, Spanish science, mindfulness, and fitness classes. These shared expenses help cut the cost
for providers and for families they serve, all while encouraging the children's development
of fine motor skills, socialization skills, and scholastic education. The children that are
enrolled in my facility are allowed access to the back area for playtime and curriculum lessons
with supervision. However, the children are always assisted whichever area of the facility they are
in. There are also other children that live in the neighborhood that often can be misconstrued
as children that are enrolled in my facility. Kids, which is my acronym, is a school that provides
the Philly Pre-K program since 2017. And just like the Philadelphia School for the Arts and
Sciences, located at the end of the 1200 block of Hayworth, parking issues are the bone of
contention. The elementary school parents block traffic, cause confusion, and misuse other people's
spaces as well, from 7 a.m. to 7.45 and from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. We were very saddened about the
incident that occurred almost two years ago with one of our parents and the neighbors on the block.
Due to that incident, we hired an additional staff person to assist with the late afternoons
and evening care. Unfortunately, I was not able to assist in this matter because I was caring for
children and my morning staff at left for the day, so I was alone. While our ultimate goal is to keep
our children safe, we also want to be considerate of our neighbors. Since this incident, our pickup
and drop-off policies have changed. Parents alert us when they are close to so that we can minimize
the time spent in a fellow neighbor's parking space and in the driveway. When the facility
was originally zoned in 2008, I was advised that the driveway could be used for parent pickups and
I was advised that the driveway could be used for parent pickups and drop-offs.
drop-ups.
I was recently advised by our new community officer that even though a no-parking sign has been mounted, the parents can continue to use the shared driveway for that purpose.
Contrary to what was shared with Northwood Civic Association, I am not the villain.
And I take offense to the slanderous accusations that have been stated.
Over the past 24 years, I've made several respectful attempts to resolve the shared driveway issues.
I've worked extremely hard to build my reputation in this field, and I'm hoping you can see past these baseless allegations
and see that I have nothing but the community, the families, and the children's best interests
in mind with this variance request. The space to facilitate the additional children should not be
of any concern because the Department of Human Services and License and Inspection have been to
the facility on numerous occasions and have measured to ensure that there is enough space
on our main and basement levels of the facility, and it was because of those entities that come
to visit that I am attempting this variance today because they did say that because of my
standing with the ECE community and the size of the home that this would be a great place to start.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Burnett. The reason I had my client address some of these issues because it's been submitted to the board. And while I'm not admitting it, it is in the board's purview. There was, in addition to the letters of opposition from the RCO, there is paperwork from the next door neighbor that I alluded to a few moments ago.
So our client just wanted to address these.
We think there are submissions of that, but really not relevant to our case here today.
And that's pretty much it.
So how many were going from six to 12?
Yes, sir.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
sir we have a michelle wait we have a a tanya sears with the hand raised i've allowed them to
speak hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
hi can you hear me yeah i can okay thank you tanya t-o-n-y-a
Sears. S-E-A-R-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? Yes. Are you a neighbor? No, I am a parent. Okay. I am a parent and a
colleague. My child has been attending Kelly's or kids for approximately three years now. She
will be going to kindergarten. I also have a home daycare. I drive from Wayne Junction all the way
to Oxford Circle just to place my child in Kelly's care because of the excellent service that she
provides to my child. My child has, you know, some issues with being an only child and just
i guess somewhat emotional um they provide excellent care prior to even putting my child
in kelly's on care she was a colleague we worked together with the pre-k program um kelly again as
she said is now nationally accredited so she's a star four facility um tanya you're in favor of the
project i am absolutely in favor of the project and in terms of um parking i pull into the driveway
i drop off i pull out if there's an open space thank you monsieur all right you're welcome
thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes evanlyn perez i have allowed them
to speak hi could you state your name please and spell for the court sonographer hello can
Can you hear me?
I can.
My name is Evelyn Perez, E-V-E-L-Y-N Perez, P-E-R-E-Z.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, told truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am adjacent neighbor at 1220 Hayward Street.
Yes, I am adjacent neighbor at 1220.
Okay, proceed.
I'd like to make a correction for the record.
The attorney stated and showed a picture which Ms. Burnett accepted that there are businesses on the street.
This is not an accurate photo or an accurate sighting.
this is a hundred percent a hundred percent residential neighborhood we have twins and
single homes in front of us and I'd like to say that as a resident I purchased my home
it was a a HUD home I'm a real estate broker and at that time I was starting in the real
estate business and looking for a good neighborhood for my family. And I've always loved driving by
Northwood, which is a tree-lined neighborhood that has deed restrictions, fencing restrictions.
And I thought, wow, this would be a great place for me to raise my kids and to live here at peace.
I've learned through being a member of the Northwood Civic Association that the deed
restrictions means that there are a limited amount of businesses that are allowed.
Ms. Kelly and I live in the middle of the block.
We don't share our driveway, but we share our walls.
And we've had some issues that don't come into play.
But in terms of maintaining the neighborhood's integrity and maintaining a peaceful place for us to live and come home from work, having a business grow in a residential block, to me, is not something that lends itself to Northwood as a community.
So, Ms. Perez, you're not in favor of it?
I am not in favor. I am in opposition.
Okay. Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chairman, I would like to call Don L. Powell. He's one of the neighbor residents.
Let me just double check first, okay? Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, sir. There are four other hands raised. Well, now, wait.
There's at least six hands now raised. So the first one I got is Don L. Powell.
Mr. Powell, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
Yeah, my name is Donnell Powell, spelled D-O-N-N-E-L-L, last name P-O-W-E-L-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am a neighbor.
Are you in favor of this project or against it?
I am 100% in favor of this project.
Thank you very much.
we appreciate your time to call in who's next all right sir we have a k barnett okay all right
could you state your name and spell please for the court stenographer good evening can you all hear
me yeah most certainly great my name is keziah barnett k is in kangaroo e z is in zebra i a
Last name is B as in boy, A-R, and as in Nancy, E-T-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Are you in favor or against this project?
I am one billion percent in favor of this project.
Thank you for your one billion vote.
Thank you.
Who's next?
And Laurie Litz, I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, my name is Laurie Litz.
It's L-A-U-R-I-E-L-I-T as in Tom, Z as in Zebra, and I am a representative of the Pennsylvania
Child Care Association.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you in favor of this or against it?
I am in favor of kids' daycare service being able to expand to a group home.
Thank you. Thank you so much. We appreciate your taking the time. Who's next, please?
Terry Heiser. I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Terry.
Do you want to be sworn in?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the quartz stenographer?
Just waiting for them to unmute, Mr. Chair.
Hello?
Hello.
Hi, could you state your name, please?
State your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Terry Heiser, H-E-I-S-E-R.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
are you a neighbor no okay proceed are you in favor of this project or against it
opposed okay and and do you do you live near here sir do i live near it yes yes okay all right thank
you thank you for taking the time to call in we will take note of your comment who's next
oh amber burnett okay what's the matter mr kenny she's my client's daughter she'd probably be
duplicative at this point i don't know okay thank you who's next all right sir gene jones i've
allowed them to speak hi could you state your name and spell please for the court stenographer
hello hi could you state your name my name is jean jones j-e-a-n-j-o-n-e-s right you swear
or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor yes i am
I live right next door. Are you for this project or against it? I am against it. Okay thank you
very much for taking the time to call and we appreciate it. Who's next? All right Mr. Chair
we have a Patricia Steers. I have allowed them to speak. Hi could you state your name please and
spell for the court stenographer. Patricia Steers, S-T-A-T-R-I-C-I-A. Last name is Steers, S-T-E-E-R-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
No, but I live like five minutes away from Kelly.
Are you in favor of this project or against it?
I'm for it, 100%.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call in.
Jason, do we have anybody else?
Yes, we have three other hands.
The first is Jamisa Murray.
I have allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
Ms. Murray?
Please unmute and wait to be sworn in.
Jason, pick another person.
Okay, I have Michael Burke with their hand raised.
They've been allowed to speak, sir.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Michael Burke, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, last name B as in boy, U-R-K-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
No, I'm not.
Okay. Are you for this project or against it?
100% for the project.
And you use the service, sir?
Yes, yes. My three grandchildren go to here, my three grandsons go.
Thank you very much. Jason, what do we have left? One?
Two more hands. A Siani Neal Campbell. I have allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Siani Neal Campbell. First name Siani, S-I-A-N-I. Last name Neal Campbell, N-E-A-L hyphen C-A-M-P-B-E-L-L.
Right. You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Are you a neighbor?
I am a parent.
Are you for or against the project?
I am for.
Thank you so much for taking the time to call in.
Jason, we have one left.
No, it's two left.
I'm Jamisha Murray from before.
Ms. Murray, please unmute and state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
How you doing?
My name is Amisha Murray, J-A-M-I-S-H-A-M-U-R-R-A-Y.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Do you use the service?
Proceed then.
Are you for this or against it?
I'm for this.
Thank you so much for taking the time to call in.
Jason, we have our last hand.
There are no more hands, Mr. Chair.
There are no more hands, Mr. Chair.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning dislocation.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances that would prevent it from being used,
with the requirements of the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request of advantage
not be granted.
Mr. Kenney, we've had a great deal of testimony
on this today.
I'm going to take this back to our executive committee
on next Wednesday.
Hillary, we would vote at 2 o'clock for this or 3.30?
At 2 p.m., Mr. Chair, and the record is closed.
2 p.m., we will vote next Wednesday, okay?
Thank you very much for your presentation.
And thank you, Board.
have a nice day but is there anyone else from the 330 list whose case has not been called
i do not see any further hands mr chair okay um jason thank you today for for getting people
through and uh thanks everyone else uh see everybody next week thank you do as well sir
thank you good night great job everyone thanks have a good night good night