the proposal is to install a fence that will also have a swinging gate. This is a representative
sample of the style of fencing so the board can see what we're going to put in. This is not
actually at the location. This is just for representative purposes to show you the style
of fencing that CHOP had in mind. In terms of the plan, you're just going to have a fence that runs
along, and then there's going to be a security gate here. And so the new fence is proposed just
to run along this Locust Street frontage here with a swinging gate that's located in this area.
We mailed our notices to the relevant community, showing you here all of the list of addresses
to which notices were sent. And as I mentioned, we had a virtual meeting with Cobbs Creek on
September 12th. At the conclusion of that meeting, they indicated that they would be taking a vote,
But they did not announce that vote to us. We excused ourselves from from the meeting room.
My impression of the meeting was that the only real concern from the community perspective was that there were members of the community who were utilizing the parking area within the facility after hours.
So there's this parking area here, and there were people parking there after hours and were concerned that the installation of the gate would restrict that access.
We explained during the meeting that there was a security purpose for this fencing, but CHOP is committed to talking to the near neighbors about ways that we might preserve some parking access, and those conversations are ongoing.
But I did not hear any objection to the fence itself.
It was really a concern about limiting access to the parking lot and what impact that might have.
If anybody's on from the RCO, we would be more than happy to hear their position.
But we made several requests to the RCO following our meeting, did not get any correspondence.
If I might ask Jonathan Hood to raise his virtual hand so he might adopt my testimony.
Mr. Goode, if you're in the virtual audience, can you raise your hand, please?
And if he is not able to join us as an officer of the court, I will
represent the factual accuracy of my statements.
That's fine. We will take your testimonies. Fine.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands now, Chair.
i see no hands now chair planning commission
Planning Commission.
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rm for multi-family residential at
dislocation we feel the proposed fence height and opacity is de minimis and the minimum necessary
accordingly the planning commission recommends the board grant variance thank you um hillary i
I think we should hold this for a week for the vote and see if we can get the correspondence.
I mean, Mr. Klein, we spoke before.
We're noticing some of the, like the 12th, it's not a lot of time yet.
So some of these RCOs have not been getting them out.
So why don't we give this a week, see what we can do, and then we'll approach this next week and have it done, okay?
Certainly.
Very good.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Is that okay, Hillary, Tanya?
That is fine.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
sounds great chair okay number seven mi thank you mr klein mi 2022-003-170-2300 north 18th street
no letter from the coordinating rco uh mr knockamson
uh good afternoon mr chairman of the board alan knockamson a-l-a-n knockamson n-o-c-h
UMSON, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19109.
Mr. Nachamson, could you identify your client
and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is 2300N, 18th Street Holdings, LLC.
And in the virtual audience is Brian Wise,
one of its members.
But, you know, we reached out to the coordinating ERCO on multiple occasions. We even asked them if they can't get a letter to, like, at least come on to the virtual Zoom meeting or hearing.
and unfortunately the community representative had a dentist appointment at two o'clock which
she couldn't make we also you know again I think this is a newer RCO they didn't know about the
fact that you had to give a summary report we gave them an example of what the approved summary
report that the CBA requests but we haven't received anything to date I will say that
our firm handled for another client the same property. And from their similar type of response
was, we want two commercial, we want two residential and one commercial, and that's
what we're offering. My previous clients did not want to add the commercial. They just wanted to
do two residential, and that's why that project started. Unbeknownst to me, one client sold it
to another client and this client that's what they want to do but this is a cmx one property
where we're allowed one one residential one commercial so we're asking for an additional
residential unit but you'll see from from the history of the property it's not out of character
So our notice of refusal. So this is a CMX1 property. It is on a significant size slot. It's on 1,261 square feet. So if this was a CMX2 property, which is not, we would be allowed as of right for this project.
But all we're looking to do is two residential units and one commercial unit, and we are being refused because we're asking for that one additional residential unit.
And the correspondence we met with, you know, from the coordinating RCO, we met with them last Thursday, September 15th.
I thought it was a very positive meeting.
They haven't responded, you know, in terms of giving a formal response.
Property history, you can see it's far back as 1972.
the last use of this property over 50 years ago,
this was a two plus one.
It used to be a bar there plus two residential units.
So what we're proposing is not our character
for this particular property
and falls in line with what the previous use was
over 50 years ago.
And that's why we're asking for the relief
from the zoning boards.
Then maps to the area.
We're in the corner of 18th and Dauphin right here.
And, you know, just maps from a Google perspective
of this model. And then photographs of the property, it's a vacant lot currently, has been a
vacant lot for some time. If you look at Google Earth, the oldest photograph is September 2009,
and you can see it was a vacant lot. There were some members in the community who stated that
that's been a vacant lot for as far as they can remember, over 20 years or more. So again, this
has not been a developed property for some time. I think there's an issue with the zoning. This
be more cmx uh two you know and you know given that this was a bar one point the cmx two zoning
would make sense and if this was cmx two two residential units would be allowed as a price
and then this is just 2300 north 18th street uh from the side of the property from the
dolphin street again vacant and then north 18th street to the right of the property
north 18th street to the left of the property west often street to the right of the property
west off in street till after the property and then our plants and drawings my client you know
again no dimensional refusals here they're trying to build something that fits within the code from
a dimensional standpoint brick facade a little more modern in nature a lot of light and air
you can even see from the bay windows there's light projecting from here the windows are
pretty open to provide a lot of eyes on the street. And then this is just the most basic floor plans,
but this is just, again, the commercial space and the rear yard sample, and that's where the
trash would be stored. There's actually, the entrance is on the Dolphin Street side for the
residential there is no basement use uh and there's three floors each floor has a residential
of the upper floors the second and the third floors and each are three bedrooms two beds
and then you know we had a meeting September 15th uh it was well attended I would say probably a
dozen or so people um other than the members of the coordinating RCO and the development team were
there 258 addresses were notified of the meeting these are listed the addresses
uh this is um proof of of mailing to those addresses of the notice
our application for appeal showing that 23 and 18 street holdings llc is the owner of
the property along with the notice of refusal and our project information and our deeds of property
uh with that being said uh and our certificate uh tax credit certificate that being said i would
ask that mr wise virtually raise his hands uh to virtual audience in the meantime there were
two provisos that were requested and which i think one of them is enforceable uh would be
commercial trash pickup uh the second proviso that was requested of us from the community
that there'd be no rooming units.
And as I indicated to the community,
if hypothetically my client wanted to use this
as a rooming house,
that's a completely separate zoning classification
and that we would have to come back to the board.
But if the board is so inclined
to put that as a second proviso,
no rooming units,
we would not have any objection.
We just don't think it would be appropriate
under circumstances,
but we have no intention to making this a rooming house.
okay sure client yep mr wise can virtually raise your hand
Mr. Wise, can you virtually raise your hand?
Mr. Wise, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Wise, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Yes, Chair.
Brian Wise, B-R-I-A-N, Wise, W-I-S-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Yeah, Mr. Wise, you heard everything I had to say today.
Yes, I did.
Is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt an issue of testimony?
Yes, I do.
Now, the one thing I did state on the record was that there was no vote taken.
I did leave as soon as the meeting ended, but you stayed until the end, waiting for everyone to disperse the meeting, correct?
Mr. Wise?
Hello?
yeah brian i'm sorry you had cut out for one second i'm sorry
can you repeat yourself oh i i asked the question i stated on the record that no vote was taken but
i left as soon as the presentation concluded um and you and mr goldberg waited to the end
until the the uh community dispersed from the meeting is that correct
correct i did stay i'm sorry you're cutting it out so i can't hear everything you're saying
okay did you did you hear or see any vote taken no i did not okay but when when we presented um
would it be fair to say that the community uh was was universally positive for the presentation that
we gave oh yes they were all right thank you any questions from the board no mr chairman no mr
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mary Jones with her hand up.
Ms. Jones, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hello?
Hi, Ms. Jones, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Mary Jones, M-A-R-Y-J-O-N-E-S.
Right.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
proceed um yes i was wanted to just uh call in today um because i was able to speak with the rco
leader um this afternoon um like mr knockamson said she wasn't available to get on the call
she did reiterate that there was no vote taken however she um rather than just
it's she what she didn't want to write a letter before because she felt like the conversation
needs to be continued she wanted some other items in writing aside from the proviso more
assurances from the applicant about you know just other issues of the development and so just with
that knowledge our office is just going to ask that this vote be held until those things can be
resolved with the RCO. Okay. Hi, Chair. This is Tanya. Yep. Is it okay if I can ask Ms. Jones
to put on the record the office she represents, please? Oh, yes. Sorry about that. Council
President Daryl Clark. Thank you. Thank you so kindly. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
chair i see no hands at this time hi planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing cmx1 commercial mixed use at this
location the applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship that would require an additional
residential unit and there is no hardship for vacant land accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board deny the variance. Thank you. So, Mr.
Knackamson, to be consistent with what we've done earlier,
we'll wait until we hear from the
RCO. Hillary will give it a few weeks
to see if we can't get this done, and then we'll bring it back. Okay? That seems perfectly
fair. Okay. All right. Mr. Chair,
can we have a date, sir? And then if, for whatever reason, we have to
continue discussion at least it gives a deadline what what um
so why don't we look for two weeks tanya is that okay
that's perfect chair yep two weeks thank you mr chair sure okay that's october 5th
perfect i think mr knox is going to stay when i think we may have another one of yours
i think mr knoxin mustay one i think we may have another one of yours heard
right continued
okay number 14 mi 2022 002 963 1701 south 25th street kristin occamson that's yours
um so yep all right uh again why don't you want it well well well first of all who's your client
and what's the relationship to the property uh it's h and m development lls developments llc
and then the virtual audience is is uh is the owner's representative gazi honest right um
And our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?