this is a pretty nice facility very clean everything you would see in a
proper daycare, books, toys, activities.
This is the rear play area, as you can see,
that's that covered one-story section in the back.
In the, my exhibits, sorry, just zoom here.
I submitted a copy of the commercial lease,
again, showing that my client,
the big handprint is the tenant.
This is the zoning application, which the zoning application, the ZBA appeal, it does
list the reason.
Again, we're not seeking to exceed 12 children.
We just want the child care center classification for funding purposes with the Commonwealth.
So nothing is actually changing.
We're not changing the use.
It's been in use for a year or two.
um it's as i said it's really only uh the paperwork that is changing here are the plans
uh when you walk in from the corner of 58th and race you walk in there's a little reception area
uh where the parents can you drop off their kids pick them up sign them in sign them out
and then you go back into the education station these are some of those first photos that you
show this is where the most of the day-to-day operations with the children take place going
Going back a little further, you've got your bathrooms, your kitchen areas, and then going all the way back, there's that indoor play area, which is 170 square feet.
The usable space for the kids is 477 square feet, but as I said, the whole floor and then a little bit of the basement for some storage is 1,000 square feet or so.
uh this is the side we have uh the front corner entrance and then a side egress
um we had some issues getting the tax clearance certificate but uh
i did print out tax balance of zero as well as commercial trash fees
l and i there's nothing showing there's no judgment liens against this entity
would you like me at this point to address the rco issue why don't you do that okay so this is
the third listing for this hearing my client had been trying to get an rco hearing for quite some
time for the first two listings in june and july they were not able to get anything from from the
rco prior to the hearings at the last hearing july mr bergman and the board you agreed to a
continuance we immediately went to the rco um which is the um for that area at 58th and race
we did we were scheduled for july 9th and my client sent out all the notices on on
I'm sorry, on July 17th, here's the notice that was sent out. My client sent out the notices to
all the addresses that were required, listing a hearing at July 29th at 6.30 p.m. before
achievability. That is the RCO. On the day of July 29th, somebody from the RCO reached out to them
and told them that, oh, I'm sorry, you didn't submit any documents to us in advance. We're
alleged requirement was never communicated to my client in advance. We do have a letter from
who my client was dealing with at Achievability, Hassan Abdul Rahim. He's the business and youth
engagement manager. This is an email from him to my client dated August 5th, 2026.
Again, we were scheduled for July 29th. Third paragraph, I was notified we did not have
sufficient time to properly review the application materials prior to the meeting.
Concerns regarding whether the application included the required community signature
support were also printed out. Without adequate time to complete that review, we did not feel
it would have been appropriate to proceed. This situation was a result from an internal
communication breakdown during a transition in our staffing. During that transition, I was unaware
that the application materials needed to be submitted in advance. So again, that was not
communicated to my client. We should not be prejudiced for their failure to do this and
THEN CANCELING AT LITERALLY THE DAY OF THE RCO MEETING.
THE APPLICANT, I AM PRIDING THIS EXPLANATION SO THAT THE RECORD ACCURATELY REFLECTS WHAT
OCCURRED.
THE APPLICANT MADE AN EFFORT TO SCHEDULE AND PARTICIPATE IN THE REQUIRED COMMUNITY MEETING.
the applicant made an effort to schedule and participate in the required community meeting
the inability to hold the meeting before the hearing was due to our internal scheduling
THE INABILITY
and review process not because of any lack of effort by the applicant so given that explanation
and given my client's efforts to actually schedule the rco meeting we asked that the board
disregard the lack of an rco letter in this case they made the effort the rco was not letting it
happen. And given what we're actually asking for, which is not going to change anything in the
neighborhood and is really not a substantial, should not be a substantial issue before the
neighbors, I ask that this RCO issue be waived for today's purposes. All right. So why don't you
finish your presentation and we'll see where we stay. Okay. That's all I have, really. I'd be
happy to bring your client. Okay. Miss Jones, are you in the audience? Could you raise your
hand, please? Please raise your virtual hand. Would you be sworn in? Seneca Jones?
we also have money kind of coach the business manager on as well
sure whoever you have you want to bring okay monica if you could raise your hand please
um but mr chairman that person can't adopt the testimony or me that person can't adopt
the testimony only only the owner the tenant can adopt it yeah but he could
bring her on right and ask her questions oh as a witness yes yeah yeah
either person there yeah when you care that coats is there i promoted them we can't hear you jace
Sorry, Mr. Chair, Moniquita Coates is promoted.
Good morning. Good afternoon. I'm sorry.
Hi. Who is this now?
My name is Moniquita Coates.
Okay. And with respect to the Big Camp Print LLC, you are their business manager,
and you've been handling this referral through the CBA on their behalf?
Yes, the business manager in Africa.
could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer moniquetta m-o-n-i-q-u-e-t-t-a
last name coach c-o-a-t-s do you swear or firm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed okay moniquetta you are the business manager for the big hand print llc yes
okay and you were the one that actually filed this appeal to the zba yes were you the individual
that was attempting to schedule hearing before the rco achievability yes okay um did you were
you present on the zoom when i gave my presentation yes i was was everything i said accurate and
truthful to your knowledge yes okay all right well well counsel you're also an officer of the
court will accept your testimony questions from the board yes um with this designation
understanding that you are saying you're not intending to have more than 12 but how many
children would you legally be allowed to have based on the size of your property so based on
the size they will only legally give us they will give us 14 but the whatever the co says is what
they'll stop it so right now being as though the certificate of occupancy says group child care
they won't let us go above 12 but also i just want to state that with a group child care you
only need eighth grade education to run on and operate a group child care you don't need a
director which we have a clinically master degree director and owner and we want to be able to use
our director to its to her fullest potential where with a group child care setting we cannot
okay no i understand that this wasn't necessarily about your current business but since this
designation runs with the property should this business not exist I just wanted to be clear
what the density could be even if your business doesn't operate it a future business could so
that's why so yeah the certificate of occupancy will state no more than 12 children so they won't
the state won't allow more than what the currently if you get approval you're saying it's 14 no what
I'm saying is when so with our application we're still asking to be at 12 children so if you guys
give us the zoning you are understood it you are but a future business could get up to 14
based on the square footage no they could they have to say 12. the certificate of occupancy will
The certificate of occupancy will stay 12 regardless of who owns the business.
state 12 regardless of
So they will only allow 12 because it's a group.
If you look, I could show you the plans which lays out the certificate of occupancy because
there's 477 square feet.
Current condition.
I'm not talking about the current condition.
I'm not talking about the current condition.
I'm talking about the current condition.
I'm talking about the future.
the future as a child care center your square footage would allow 14 children in a child care
center yes which is what i was asking so thank you okay i have i have a question so just curious um
is there any outdoor space there's no outdoor we have indoor play so what what do you do for outdoor
space for the children we take them on walks and take them to the local playground how far is that
way it's not even a block okay thank you other questions questions from our attorney um
i just want to clarify is there space for more than 12 children at this location
uh per state measurements there is but we don't want more than 12 but there is so
So for the state, they require 45 square feet per child.
And that includes the indoor play also or just education?
No, just the education space.
Indoor play space is measured separately.
50 square feet.
Yes, exactly.
So you have a designated indoor play space?
Yes, sir.
If my attorney can pull up the plans, the indoor play is in the rear of the building.
that was 120 125 square feet do i remember that eric once the indoor play area 170.
what how big was it the indoor play area 170 square feet back there yep
and the shepherd recreation center is a block to the north uh at 58th and vine
okay all right so i have one more question what are you doing oh sorry mike go ahead
go ahead i'm sorry i was going to ask what are you doing for safety measures for the
for your i guess your clients uh just understanding that like there's a septibus
depot very close by that's a pretty busy and um active corner what are sort of the provisions for
the youth when we're treating for the to the playground so we have this coming in and out
like without like are they always being dropped off by a parent inside i'm just trying to wonder
yeah so they have to they have to park they cannot double park um on any of the streets
they have to find a parking space and park in a legal parking spot and they have to walk their
children in and sign them in daily as well as pick up they have to come into the building sign
the children out and pick them up they can't we don't bring children outside the door we don't
allow children to exit on their own they have to have a parent present at all
times and then what are the ages that you're currently supporting we support
ages six weeks to five years old okay and is the plan to keep that age range in
the future as well yes any other questions
you know we're gonna hold it we can't can't hear we can't we're gonna hold it michael all right
council feels comfortable too to hold this and just try to figure it out ourselves okay questions
from the virtual hands i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission michael gall
with the philadelphia city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the existing cmx1 neighborhood commercial mixed use zoning at this location though this property
has a documented history of variances for commercial uses going back to 1952 and was
remapped to a commercial mixed use in 1971 in a council supported action the proposed use as a
Child care center would not cause undue detriment to the neighboring properties beyond what may otherwise be expected at this location. Therefore, the city planning commission recommends the board grant the requested special exception for child care center use.
Thank you. Council. We're going to hold this till next Wednesday.
We're an executive session. We're gonna have a conversation. Just try to figure out some of the things that we need to go through. Okay.
Okay, is there next Wednesday at 930? And we will vote.
Okay, thank you. Thank you.
um um number five mr knockamson
i i think we'll we're going to see you a few times today correct
yeah yeah uh well we'll split between me and mr goldberg i would ask for your indulgence
Yeah, well, we'll split between me and Mr. Goldberg. I would ask for your indulgence. My architect, Rich Villa, who's here with me for 7340 Oxford Avenue, he's celebrating his birthday today, and he's going to Longwood Gardens, and he has a dinner reservation his wife made at 5 o'clock.
So which one's there?
That's 7340. I probably gave too much, 7040 Oxford Avenue. I probably gave too much information, but I don't want him to be late for his dinner reservation.
okay um we always want to well it's another just said can he celebrate his birthday here
number 11 number 11. we're gonna we're gonna move this to number 11. so
alan you always do find a way to get something like kind of different to come in here so i i
am different yeah sorry sorry council just so you know we're gonna hear but do a resumption yes we
are okay yes so not here and hold but here and we do that's right okay m m i 20 26 002 054 70
70 40 oxford avenue mr knockamson is the attorney could you um please state your name and spell for
the stenographer alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-i all right do
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um could you identify
a client a relationship to the property uh yes my client is 70 52 oxford llc and in the virtual
audience is josh matthew one of its members and to my left is rich villa the project architect
vice chair has a few questions for you good afternoon have you submitted your documents and
exhibits five days in advance of this hearing yes i have and did you waive the reading of the
refusals and stipulate to the accuracy to the extent that we will be receiving an updated
refusal after the hearing okay all right thank you to your screen and proceed with the case
all right thank you i just need to be promoted as a panelist please please
thank you welcome council
you okay yeah it's coming up yeah yeah all right here we go
so what we have here at 70 uh 40 oxford street is a rather significant lot uh which in totality
is over 116,000 square feet. Currently on this lot is a senior living facility of 57 units.
We're looking to put an additional 49 units by subdividing the property. And by doing so,
we're changing up the landscaping a little bit, and that's why I have rich here. And we're
increasing the amount of collective parking spots from 22 to 29 parking spots. We will be seeking
a resumption of this hearing because we're waiting for an updated uh refusal uh so we have 14 exhibits
here um i do have mr matthew in the virtual audience who's the owner's representative and
who's also the operator of the uh senior living facility i'll have him testify just giving you
what the day-to-day operations are like and i have mr villa here as the architect's representative
He can answer any questions about this project. So it seems a lot worse than it is from a variant standpoint. It really is not. But like I said, we have one large lot. We're subdividing it. Lot one, just think of that as the existing lot of 57 units, and we'll have 29 parking spaces. That's why we had to do some cleanup. I noticed when I was presenting this matter, and I was saying 29 parking spaces, but there's only 22 showed on the refusal.
And then lot two is the new structure or the new building that will be placed on there, and that has 49 units on here.
So let's just go quickly through the refusals.
For lot two, we have a roof access structure that's a little bit larger than is allowed under the code.
If you think about it, we have people who are senior citizens who may have issues with mobility, wheelchairs, walkers, such.
We don't want to have a cramped pilot house. We wanted to give a little bit more expansion to that. I believe there's an elevator, you know, going up there. And so, obviously, we wanted to have a little bit larger, no harm, no foul. You know, there's no light and air issues to nearby properties.
The next few have to do with landscaping. I'll have Rich show you about the extensive landscaping that we're adding to lots and also keeping within the lots as well.
and also keeping within the lots as well.
The next refusal has to deal with the 49 dwelling units.
So this is an RSA 3 property, I think in name only.
Again, we're surrounded by rather large apartment buildings.
The property itself has a 57-unit structure on it.