overcrowding and trash. And finally, there's no hardship. So we ask that the board
deny these special exceptions and and if i can respect respectfully respond um i appreciate how
she she she um couched her uh the council person's objection it is because there is a history of this
going on, that there's trash all over the place, and that we have no hardship. All three issues
are irrelevant to this. My client, this applicant, has had a history of always maintaining his
property. I challenge anyone to say that his properties have not been maintained.
We cannot speak for the other owners, and it is a problem.
I grant that.
Two, saying that there is no hardship, again, this is a special exception.
The burden here is to just show that we do not have a negative impact on the resources.
And we've already spoken to this issue by telling the board that we actually, if this weren't students, you probably will have a tremendous amount of vehicles and parking will become an issue.
regardless you take take our four take take our take uh one of our structures that only has four
bedrooms that's that's potentially four cars that's on the street so so but these are students
again we respectfully uh submit that we are we we are we are not creating any
We are not creating any negative impact, and although I do appreciate the councilman's thoughts, I do believe that his thoughts do not apply to us here today.
Thank you. Do you have your client, Mr. Bovee?
Yes, he's on the line.
It's Mr. Herbert Reed, if somebody can let him.
And please identify yourself, spell your first and last name, and I'll swear you in.
Good morning.
Can you hear me?
Yes, please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
All of a sudden, I can't hear you.
I'm sorry.
One second.
Can you hear me?
Please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Okay, can you hear me?
And I can hear you now.
All right.
I apologize.
No problem.
Please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Herbert Reed III, H-E-R-B-E-R-T-R-E-I-D.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you, Mr. Belved.
uh mr reed have you heard everything that i uh i discussed with the board today
i have and do you have anything to add uh simply just uh kind of starting from the
the beginning here uh these properties are anywhere from um six to 17 years old
uh the vast majority of them were built out of the ground not rehabs uh with us going through the
entire uh process um of getting approvals uh all of the inspections all of the rental licenses
uh for you know on average likely 15 years these have been in existence as far as a hardship um
simply we followed the rules as the rules were outlined at the time of of construction
uh to our complete knowledge and mr mr reed there is no hardship so there's no need to discuss a
hardship understood so we follow we follow the rules as were uh understood at the time went
through the zoning process was before this board all of these were approved they are built to spec
they are built to plans nothing was ever in in in any way shape or form built illegally
There is no overcrowding, as is evidenced by the structures having private bathrooms and so forth.
They are there's not you know, there's not a density issue within any of our housing was all built responsibly and thoughtfully.
We are not the landlords that are shoving kids in the small 10 by 10 foot rooms and just trying to get as many people into the building as possible.
as far as us for as landlords um we are very involved in the community continuously we're
on the board of the special services district which addresses trash within the neighborhood
as well as security within the neighborhood we're on the forefront of that and we individually
are responsible for our own properties on a daily basis when it comes to trash partying any of the
town and gown issues. We have been a non-nuisance landlord for nearly 20 years in this neighborhood.
So you directly manage the properties, that's what you're saying?
We do, very actively.
Okay. So with everything that you said and with everything I said, would you adopt all of my
statements as part of your testimony? I would. Okay. I have no further questions for Mr. Reed,
Mr. Chairman. Reed, as it relates to the newer structures that were built several years ago,
when were they completed? Between 2013 and 2014. And at the time those structures were
uh being proposed was there any objection uh from the community there was not
and those plans were shared widely because the land was bought uh from the city and those shares
were those those plans were widely shared and and seen by uh by many parties that that would
oversee this sort of thing thank you all right again any questions from the board no anyone else
to testify? Anyone else to testify? Please raise your hand.
Anyone else to testify, please raise your hand.
There are no further hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good morning. David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
Word for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends these properties for residential multifamily use.
The houses on North 17th Street were all approved as two-unit or three-unit buildings between 2009 and 2011.
We believe the cumulative effect of adding 83 occupants to the 1,900 and 2,000 blocks of North 17th Street
will cause more congestion than otherwise might be expected from a typical rooming house.
The US Census Bureau's latest estimates show that 52% of housing units in this census tract have at least one vehicle available to them. That works out to at least 46 new vehicles on two already congested blocks.
We recommend that the Board deny the special exceptions for North 17th Street and approve the special exceptions for the remaining properties in the applicant's package.
i um i would like to respond to that um they the not too long ago right there was a special
exception that we had presented in front of the board and and the same issues came up then and
and i think respectfully the court of common pleas uh rejected the the the mr effectos
our argument saying 80 the cumulative effect of 83 occupants at temple university is going to do
more harm than good what's stopping us from what's stopping a developer from consolidating lots and
building 83 units there the i i don't know how uh um how that makes sense given the fact that
the planning commission based on the exhibit i showed you that they are recommending that that
area be they have high density so but yet the planning commission just said well 83 is too much
where is that coming from he picked that number because that's our cumulative effect so we can
have high density, so long as it's not 83 being requested by special exception. Respectfully,
I asked the board to see through that. Under the code special exception, there has to be proof
that we are creating a negative impact. Numbers alone do not create a negative impact.
Again, he mentions the census tract creating 83.
I have testimony and logic that dictates that students do not have cars.
That alone creates relief.
If we were to have non-students, you will have more cars in the area.
Two, we also have a very active landlord.
My client, the owner, he will go in and he has created a whole system that he can pick up trash or any type of quality of life issues.
He can respond to it immediately.
So respectfully, I cannot agree with the planning commission.
And I hope the board does not agree with the Planning Commission.
Thank you.
With that, the record will be closed pending receipt of proof of tax compliance for the 14 cases that have been previously read into the record.
Any objections to that from the board?
Did I leave anything out, Tanya?
No, sure.
That's absolutely correct.
Ms. Cole, are we all right?
You're good.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Beauvais. Thank you.
Thank you.
I believe that completes our list, unless we have any updates regarding those
re-hearings, the resumption hearings.
No. What my suggestion would be is that we confer at our next executive session.
this afternoon and then we could go forward at 2 p.m. with all those cases that should have been
done this morning. All right thank you all and see you all at two o'clock.
all right thank you all and uh see you all at two o'clock
board executive session at 145 thank you thank you thank you mr chair chair of the
um the chair of the zoning board of adjustment i don't know if you got the first piece because
something can let me start again good afternoon everyone my name is frank de chico i'm the chair
of the zoning board of adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with
our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members, Mr. Thomas
Holloman and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and our Board Attorney, Ms. Sharon
Saleta, are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual
hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering
oaths to all participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your
agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be made available to the public on the
web or otherwise. Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must
raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for
anyone participating by phone. If you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star
nine and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google
267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat
that. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue. And I'd also like to remind everyone, please do not
attempt to testify in the chat. Any comments should be directed to our board administrator,
Mr. Jason Hand at this time I will read off the list of continuances for the two o'clock list
just bear with me folks I'm having some technical stuff problems today so um MI 2021-001113
2,012th Street is continued MI 2021-001-091-915 South 18th Street is continued did I leave
any help Sharon? As far as continuances? No, there are only two. Okay, and I will ask at this
time, does anyone disagree with the request for those continuances? Please raise your hand.
Mr. Chair, I have a way she but someone's hand was up but you put it back down again.
never mind sir okay thank you at this time i will ask if anyone would like to request
a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand
i see no hands mr chair thank you uh tanya and sharon i'm sorry before we get started i should
have asked this when we were in executive session did we not give the attorneys representing 1526
Packard and the uh opposition folks until 5 p.m today yes that's why you will be announcing that
it is and I wrote to them to let them know that you would be announcing today that the vote will
be continued until next Wednesday right so I don't need to read that in now is what I'm saying
Well, just in case anyone else is here for it, it's only the lawyers that I contacted.
MI 2020-001532, 1526 Packer Avenue, at the May 25th hearing, the record was closed.
And we ask that counsel for both the applicant and the protestants submit written testimony by 5 p.m. today.
at which time we will then, the board will take the arguments, review them, and a decision will
be made at the executive session, after discussion of our executive session next Wednesday. Is that
after discussion of our executive session next Wednesday.
Is that accurate, Sharon?
accurate?
Yes, Chair.
I don't know whether we decided
whether you were going to also request
that the Planning Commission
put its recommendation on record.
We can do that now then, I guess.
Oh, is the Planning Commission on?
Yes, we're here.
Please spell your full name
and I'll swear you in.
Ariel DiLiberto, that's A-R-I-E-L, D as in dog, I-L-I, D as in boy, E-R-T-O, with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
You heard my comments.
I don't know how familiar you are with this case.
I don't remember if the Planning Commission took a position at one of our three hearings.
So I'm asking you, does the planning commission
have any recommendations?
The comprehensive plan recommends this property
for commercial use.
We believe that the applicant has shown
that the proposed use will have no more of an impact
than might normally be expected for this type of facility.
We recommend that the board approve
the requested special exception.
Thank you very much.
Appreciate that.
Okay, having said that,
I believe we now go to the other add-on
and correct me if I'm wrong.
MI 2020-003086
1231 Federal Street.
That's right.
We heard testimony and the record was closed.
So it's for the board to conduct a vote.