which you'll see right here. In addition, Ms. Woodruff, the immediate next door neighbor at
1128 South 24th Street is in support of this proposal. Here is the plan of subdivision. In
the left you see the double wide lot to the right where I've highlighted you're
seeing the two 960 square foot lots that are proposed this next page CN1 shows
the two proposed lots on each lot a three-story single-family dwelling
again we have revised the plans to take off the proposed accessory parking which
was originally proposed and had generated a couple individual variances. If the board is inclined to
grant the requested relief, we would ask and we made a commitment in our presentation before the
community that these revised proviso plans would be submitted. And the community is quite pleased
with the proposed single family homes, which are in keeping with what I showed you in the original
photographs in the surrounding area we believe that this certainly meets the scope and spirit
of the code we're left with one very technical refusal mr frederick is here to adopt and affirm
at the appropriate time and i'm pleased to answer any questions we are not aware of any opposition
or concerns with this proposal does the board have any questions no
no would you ask your uh client thank you uh mr frederick would you kindly raise your virtual hand
so that uh mrs tenere the vice chair of the board may swear you in
hello hi can you put your name on the record please yes my name is jeffrey frederick
okay and do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Frederick, have you had the opportunity to hear
my entire testimony before the board this morning? I have. And would you adopt and affirm it as your
own? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wants to testify including
representatives of RCOs, council reps, and members of the public? If so, please raise your hand.
Hi, Chair, we have a caller.
Hi, Tiffany Green, Concerned Citizens Appoint Brief.
Do you swear or for Tiffany, Tiffany, do you swear or for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. You may proceed.
First of all, I want to make the point that this particular lawyer developer was non-responsive to our RCO.
So we never received notification of the second meeting.
There was a second meeting.
We never received any notification of the first or the second meeting from this particular applicant.
And also we requested their ZBA packet.
We never received their ZBA packet, and we don't understand why they were being so nonresponsive to our RCO,
which is noncompliant with the zoning code regarding how to, you know, address RCOs.
WHAT IS YOUR RCO? CONCERNED CITIZENS OF POINT BREEZE.
Okay. They have met with the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
OKAY. THEY HAVE MET WITH THE POINT BREEZE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COALITION.
That's the coordinating, but we're RCO too. We've been here longer than that, but I'm saying you're supposed to, under zoning code 14303, the applicant should notify all RCOs in the area and provide them with the information, his information, for us to be able to assess.
It's not just the coordinated RCO that has a say in this particular case.
Mr. Laver, do you want to address this?
I'm confused in hearing this.
I was just pulling up my records to confirm that we did certify mailings, and I was just
taking a look here, and I see that Point Breeze Civic Association, 36th Ward GOP, Point Breeze
Community Development Coalition, Tasker Morris Neighbors Association, South Philadelphia Homes
Incorporated, Concerned Citizens of Point Breeze, as well, of course, as the Councilman's Office,
we're all notified by certified mail in December, December 9th of 2020. I've shared that
uh certification with council for the board and i am not aware i haven't received any
um requests for information from any other parties we've had several meetings actually
with the community i i believe it was three or four and nothing has been hidden so um
i i don't know respectfully what is being raised before the board at this late hour
Well, my point is that you had a second meeting on February 22nd, correct?
That sounds right, ma'am.
Okay, when we learned about the meeting, we sent you out an email.
I'm trying to get the date.
We sent out an email because of asking you to send us your CBA packet or any revised plans so that we could see if there was anything done or changes.
We never got a response back from you.
I need to find that date.
I don't have it from me right now.
I would have been happy to have shared any information. I didn't receive that email.
Okay, well, I sent it out to Mr. Layer. Is that your name, sir?
Adam Lever.
Lever, that's who I sent it. But anyway, the point of it is, at this point, is that you were non-responsive at this point.
Please do not talk over each other. Please do not do that.
I couldn't hear her. Sorry. Go ahead, sir.
Respectfully, it's very important to me as a member of the zoning bar to only represent clients who will be fully open
and transparent with anyone in a neighborhood who has any questions. This could be an error in
technology, but as an officer of the court, I'd like to say to you, ma'am, and also to everyone
who is here today for this public hearing, that I did not receive a communication. I am sure, ma'am,
that you tried to reach me in some way, but I did not receive it. I wish when you hadn't heard
from me that you had picked up the phone and tried to call uh the the the thing that is so
nice about this particular case is to this point in time everyone has been very pleased with the
developers efforts to try to make this project welcome a welcome addition in the community
and uh we would have been happy to have spoken with you at the appropriate time
and we're happy to speak with you moving forward.
We sent it on March 2nd to B-L-C-O-L-O-D-N-E-R at KentBarr.com.
That was the email that we had on file.
And we sent it on March 2nd requesting confirmation of a public second meeting
and information.
But, however, I'm not going to go back over that.
I just want to make the note and I want to put it on the record.
The thing about it is that we're opposing this variance because, first of all, there's no hardship here.
And that's what we talked about this before.
There's no hardship, and you're setting a presence of putting, we're saying one house per lot, okay?
And according to the refusal, you do not have a hardship at this point.
You can bill on a 14-4 square foot.
square foot um that's advantage even if you put you have the right to build uh
Square foot. That's advantage. Even if you have the right to build houses in that area can go from 960 all the way up to 1,152 or up to 14 square footage. So you have the right to build a nice size house on that particular lot.
also, or you can do
what you want to do, or do a side
yard and everything, but
you want to split the property when you don't
have the actual square footage
into two properties. We don't want to start that
because that's something that will be starting all
the way down the line. That's something we will have to
deal with in the
community. We did not receive
your certificate of mailing, so I'm not sure who you
mailed out to, and I can't say who the support
is because they only have
three people down who voted
at the public meeting.
um excuse me i'm sorry this is sharon's let it miss green just to clarify this for the record
you initially said that you emailed mr laver you then read another email address into the
record are you acknowledging that you did not try attempt to contact mr labor well i i i assume no
they're not mr is that his is that the law firm is that the law firm um uh b k o l o d n e r who
would that be? I thought that was the law firm of Mr. Lager, but
correct me if I'm wrong. Can you repeat that again? B-K-O-L
D-N-E-R
at klinebart.com? That's Bernie Kladner, who's another
lawyer not related to this case. Well, that's what we had.
Okay, well, that's what we had down
under the email that we sent
that we were sent under the RCO notification
for my understanding.
Okay, so that obviously was the wrong email.
And Mr. Laver, can you just state again
what RCOs you met with?
Concerned Citizens, Tasker Morris.
We met with Point Breeze Civic Association,
36 Ward GOP,
Point Breeze Community Development Coalition,
Tasker Morris Neighbors Association
South Philadelphia Homes Incorporated
Concerned Citizens of Point Breeze
and this was all under the auspices
of Point Breeze Community Development Coalition
the coordinating RCO as identified
by the Philadelphia City Planning Commission
in public community meeting notice
that was sent out on December 9th, 2020.
well in the summary letter it only has one and the summary letter only has
vice chair you can continue um the summary letter only has one rco listed i'm sorry miss green i
muted you the vice chair was questioning the attorney um i'm asking the board if the board
has any questions? No. No. Is everyone prepared to vote this? Yes. Yes. Yes. Planning Commission?
Thank you, Vice Chair Tenari. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
i-a-n-h-e-g-a-r-t-y. Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single
family at this location. However, the proposed lot dimensions and single family use are equivalent
to all the adjacent properties on this block front, and so therefore the City Planning
commission would recommend that the zoning board grant the variance thank you calendar number 2987
1124 south 24th street my vote is yes with revised plans consisting of one page
yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you thank you madam
I'm pleased to share members of the board
and have a good day.
Thank you.
Calendar number 2964, 1301 West Cumberland Street.
Mr. Clinton is the attorney.
Yes, he's just been promoted to panelists.
Thank you, Fatina.
good morning madam chairman hi mr clinton name and address please and spell your last name
sure henry clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n 1313 south 33rd street queen memorial building
photo ppa 19146 and do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth
photo ppa 19146 and do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth
i do do you also agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
refusal referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter i have done all those things
accepted tax certification. My client paid a tax bill yesterday of about $1,500 and we're waiting
for a receipt, which I think I'll have during the course of this hearing. Okay, you may proceed.
Thank you. Can I share my screen? Yes, please.
good morning madam chairman members of the board i'm henry clinton for the applicant 1301 west
cumberland investment llc the principal of which is victor goer who is on the call with me and the
architect is frank cuthbertson c-u-t-h-b-e-r-s-t-o-n he is also on the call this is my presentation
binder which contains a table of contents which is aa through a10 my appearance statement the
refusal this refusal concerns uh an i2 zoning district which is industrial as the board knows
and the request is to convert this industrial building into 24 dwelling units if you notice
on the refusal the board actually granted 24 units the exact same application now that it did in
2014. Zoning permits, as the board know, really are only in effect for three years. My client
tried to obtain financing during that time, was unsuccessful. In the process, he obtained an easy
permit, boarded up the building, repaired the roof, secured the first floor, and basically waited
until the climate got better from a financing perspective for him to move forward. That time
period has now arrived, and he has financing in place, and he's ready to move forward.
We met with the various community groups, in particular the 37th Ward RCO. They were aware
of the prior application, and there were many of the same people on this call who were involved in
the original zoning pyramid of 2014. So there's overwhelming support by the community, 14, excuse
Excuse me, 16 folks voted in favor with the understanding that the developer was to do a few things, which they've asked to be provisos as part of this application.
I'm sure Sharon can weigh in on this, but one is, and I'll show you from the aerial photographs when we get to it, my client owns adjoining parcels.
And on adjoining parcels, he's going to carve out parking spaces for the sole use of the tenants of this building.
We've also agreed to install lighting and cameras to light up the building, especially
in the area of 13th Street, because there's an overpass there, which gets kind of dark.
That's something we would do anyway, because it's advantageous for our building.
And also, we're going to have a sanitation company for trash pickup, and also a property
management company.
These are the photographs of the building.
you can see the train tracks here a little underpass here which needs to be lit up and
that's why there's going to be lighting on this side of the building and we'll also have lighting
on the other side of the building my client owns this vacant ground here and he's going to have
parking from this building on an adjacent parcel behind this building there's a closer view you can
see it's an old industrial building we're going to maintain the same footprint maintain the same
stories, four stories. There will be six apartments on each story, 10 two-bedroom apartments, and then
14 one-bedroom apartments. These are the plans which I can go through if the board so desires,
but you can see it's kind of an attractive building once it's restored. It has nice arch
window areas, a nice turn here on the left side of the building. Here's another elevation from
the rear of the building. And this is the elevation from the two sides. Floor plans,
again, as I said, four, excuse me, six apartments on the four stories, and the next of one and
two bedrooms. This would be the front of the building on Cumberland Street.
so again the rest of the documents are concerned