city's comprehensive plan which includes recommendations to promote mixed income
housing developments and to prioritize the infill of vacancies we believe that the proposed development
will not create unusual burden on the local street network the automobile traffic pedestrian
activity and parking demand generated by the proposed development can be accommodated by the
existing network along with the proposed parking lot for the residents of the building we recommend
the board grant the variance okay thank you mi2020-003174 4701-15 kingcessing avenue my vote is yes
my vote is yes revised plans three pages yes my vote is yes with revised plan three pages
approved today yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
thank you everyone for your patience thank you for your time and consideration
Sure. Calendar number MI-2021-001089-5400, Rising Sun Avenue.
I don't know if that's Gussie O'Neill or Ron Patterson.
We still have hands up. Let me just check.
Ms. Augusta O'Neill has her hand raised.
Promoted to panelist?
Yes, you can, please, Jason.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
She is now a panelist, ma'am, Mr. Moore.
Thank you.
Ms. O'Neill, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
My first name is Augusta, last name is O'Neill, O apostrophe N-E-I-L-L.
My address is 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
You also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or
referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met
with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to everything except that the RCO didn't provide
anyone in my office with a copy of their letter. I'm not sure if they sent it directly to the board.
I did try to call the RCO person that we've been in contact with during the previous hearing but
I wasn't able to get in touch with her. Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you very much.
I'll be really brief.
I know that the last application went for quite a while.
I'm here this afternoon on behalf of SEMA Network.
They are here with an application to install and upgrade some signage at an existing Rite Aid at 5400 Rising Sun Avenue.
The current signage, as you can see on the page on my screen, is what I guess the quote-unquote old Rite Aid signage looks like.
The current signage, as you can see on the page on my screen.
Rite Aid has updated and modernized its signage so that it's not the pure blue and white signage anymore.
It's now a more modern blue, green, and white.
This property is currently zoned RSA 5, which means that Rite Aid is very limited in the type
of signage they can put up in this residentially zoned neighborhood. As a result, our application
received a refusal due to the size of wall signs that were proposed. As you can see on the refusal
that's on my screen, we are only permitted to have 15 square feet of signage. We are proposing signage
approximately 105.33 square feet. I'm going to take you to page 37 of my exhibit package,
so you can just see a rendering of what the signage will look like. This is the signage
as it currently exists. This is the proposed signage. The buildings southern and eastern
elevations are where these signs are going to be replaced. So this is the southern elevation
of the building. Take you to a picture of the eastern elevation. Again this is the current
existing signage. This is what we are proposing. Ms. O'Neill interrupt not to interrupt but it's
basically a redesign? Yes. So you can summarize that would be helpful. Sure absolutely. So we met
with the RCO on April 29th. The 42nd Democratic Ward is the RCO. They did indicate that they were
in support of the application. They thought the new signage looked great. They appreciated the
fact that they were going to have signage that was more modern, similar to what other Rite Aids
in Philadelphia have. With me this afternoon is Jerry Canavan of the SEMA Sign Network Company.
He's available should the board have any questions about the materials being used for the signs.
And with that, I would like to call Mr. Canavan forward.
So, Mr. Canavan, if you could raise your hand.
Good afternoon, Mr. Canavan.
Please identify yourself, spell your last name, first and last name, and I'll swear to you.
Can you hear me?
Okay, great.
Yeah, first name Jerry, J-E-R-R-Y, last name Canavan, C-A-N-A-V-A-N.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Ms. O'Neill.
Thank you.
Mr. Canavan, did you have an opportunity to hear my testimony this afternoon?
I did.
And was everything I said true and accurate?
And do you wish to adopt my testimony as your own?
Thank you.
And Mr. Chair, I just wanted to note for the record that Hillary Emerson of the Councilwoman's Office did provide me a letter of support that did not come directly to me but was from the RCO.
So we do have a letter of support.
So noted.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else like to testify in this case,
please raise your hand.
Chair, I have a Ms. Cassandra Snover.
Was her hand raised?
I won't allow her to speak at this time.
Oh, no, I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
If we could get Hillary next, please.
Okay, Hillary, Ms. Emerson.
Yes, can you hear me?
Yes, we can, please identify yourself.
Sure, good afternoon, I believe it is still.
mr chair members of the board um hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle parker
we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed yes um i apologize i may have some interns in the background
um the councilman is not opposed to the requested variances for signage at the site it is a
commercial property despite its residential zoning on the Rise and Sun commercial corridor.
I do want to note in the meeting that the RCO members did mention some concerns about the
exterior conditions of the store, that they had observed litter, overflowing trash receptacles,
parking lot needed to be cleaned, and the landscaping improved.
I think you're conflating this application with the application on
North 5th Street. These are the notes I received from my
colleague. There may have been discussion after
you left the meeting, and that's where these notes came from, but
these notes came from a colleague of mine who attended the meeting. I did not
attend the RCO meeting for this one. Just because I attended both
meetings that Rite Aid is presenting, I know these are all the concerns
that Rite Aid is presenting. I know these are all the concerns that a different RCO had raised about
that a different RCO had raised about
a different rating. Right, right. No, they were raised, they were raised, according to my colleague
who attended this meeting, they were raised at this, at this meeting as well, and she didn't
attend the other meeting, so, but I understand that there was, there was a note that, or some
communication that the RCO would be connected with the district manager, so I just hope that that will,
we'll move ahead um because there are concerns about the the exterior of the property
thank you okay thank you uh anyone else to testify no thank you planning commission
good afternoon ariel de liberto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
a zoning map change to commercial auto oriented one at this location uh ca1 zoning it does not
have a maximum number of flat wall signs permitted and permits one freestanding sign per lot we
believe the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship as this lot is the only residentially
zoned lot on the block we recommend the board grant the variance uh sharon are we okay if we
approve this without the uh rco letter based on testimony of the councilwoman's office yes thank
Thank you. Okay, MI 2021-001089, 5400 Rising Sun Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Chair, I should have added that Hillary did send me a copy of the letter, so we do have it for the file.
Okay, so noted. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. O'Neill.
Thank you, everyone. Thank you, members of the board.
Thank you.
Calendar number MI 2021-001110, 634 North 40th Street.
The attorney is Meredith Verliger.
There is a letter of support from the Belmont Alliance Civic Association.
And if approved, there's one page revision.
One revision.
One page.
Meredith, name and address on the record and spell your last name, please.
Sure, Meredith Ferleger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, of Dilworth Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite
3500E, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I sure do.
Do you also agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or 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?
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Yes, yes, yes.
Good evening, members of the board.
Again, my name is Meredith Ferliger of Delworth Paxson.
I'm here today with the owner of the property at 634 North 40th Street, Rami Shrine.
We come to you today with a request for a variance for a property on North 40th Street,
which is in West Philadelphia, that did receive unanimous support from the Belmont Alliance
Civic Association during a meeting held just last week. To orient you briefly to the particular
property, if you refer to the zoning map I have up on the screen and at Exhibit 7,
you'll see that the property is on North 40th Street between Fairmont Avenue and Wallace Street.
unusually the property is split zoned along with the entire block so half of the properties rsa3
the other half is rm1 as i'll explain it is the split zoning that brings us before you today
as you can see in the aerials that are at tab 9
the west the there are four structures on this west side of the street with the remainder of
block as vacant land. Again with the photographs you'll see that the existing structures on this
block are not uniform in their style or how they're oriented to the street. Now the lot
that's before you today is fairly large at just over 2,500 square feet. As far as the proposal is
concerned. The project is for a three-story structure that will have six units. The intent
is to sell the units as more affordable condominium units. The owner has also agreed at the request
of the councilwoman to work with the local housing counseling agencies when it is time to sell these
units. Two of the units are bi-level three-bed, three-bath units at around 1,500 square feet.
The remaining four are two-bed, two-bath at around 800 square feet.
Trash will be stored in the large rear yard and will be collected by a commercial hauler.
Now, the proposal was very slightly revised from when it was originally submitted to L.A.
Now, the proposal was very slightly revised from when it was originally submitted to L&I.
This was done in response to discussions with the immediate neighbor at 636 North 40th Street.
Ramy did agree to redesign the front of the structure to include a front porch,
which I'll show you in the renderings that we have of the project.
So this changed some of the zoning calculations very, very slightly.
the rear yard shrunk from 15 feet to 13 feet, and the open area calculations changed by half a
percentage point. So I did submit a revised plan proviso form, and if the board is inclined to grant
the variances today, that would be with a proviso one page. So regarding the refusals, we received
several that I did reference stem from the split zoning. Because the RSA3 zoning makes up 50% of
the property and is more restrictive than RM1, the proposal was reviewed as if it were entirely
zoned RSA3. I will note that if the property were reviewed under RM1, it would be by right.
Regarding the use, we submit for a hardship for two main reasons. This side of the block of North
40th Street includes 12 total lots, eight of which are vacant. Now of the four existing structures,
three contain multi-family uses at 642, 640, and 638 North Fortia. Across North Fortia Street,
on the other side of the block here, all of these are multi-family uses. So erecting a new single
family home in this location would be quite out of character with the nearly exclusively single
multifamily character of the street. Also, as you can see in tab 8 here that I'll show you on the
screen, and based on the discussion I had with the district planner here, the Planning Commission
actually contemplates this block for RM1 zoning, not for RSA3 zoning. They did indicate that their
desire here is to increase density along arterial and transit nodes, such as 40th Street. So,
at some point this entire block and the block to the north should be rezoned RM1. It's not
clear when that will be done. We did receive several dimensional refusals for proposing an
attached structure, insufficient side yard, and insufficient open area. Again, all of these are
based on the RSA 3 district, not the intended RM1 district. So on this point, if you briefly