Thank you.
chairing is 32 attendees and you can start as you wish thank you good morning everyone my name
is bill bergman i will be chairing this morning's meeting with me is our vice chair ismail shaheed
president mr chairman our board member cheryl l gaston present mr chairman our board member
Tenetta Graham. Present, Mr. Chairman. Our board member Michael Johns. Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member Taya Nguyen will be joining us shortly. Also present is our attorney Hillary
Emerson and our executive director Ian Haggerty. Here's our virtual format. The proceedings are
being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded. A video will be available
by contacting zbaexecutivedirector at phil.gov.
For our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses
to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand
and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All questions should be directed to our ZBA Executive Director at phil.phil.
Let's look at our schedule this morning.
Number one, MI 2021-004-541-251 Ripka Street.
That case is continued.
Mark must be heard.
Number six.
MI 2023
7250 Woodland Avenue
Cases Continued
Attorney Moving Party
Number 8
Oh, I'm sorry
8's okay
Number 11
MI 2024-001-273, 2000 South 21st Street, that case is continued.
Number 15, MI 2024-001-5915, MI 2024-001-571-809-42nd Street, that case is continued.
Number 16, MI 2024-001-591-803 North 42nd Street. That case is continued. Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Handel. I'll be your co-host for the session. I have a hand up from Vern Anastasio. He has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the courts in honor?
Yes, sir. It's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What location are we talking about?
Well, Mr. Chair, I can bring an explanation with this, but I'm here to talk about 549-51 North 10th.
I know this is several listings out, but a letter was sent by the RCO.
We have come to an agreement on a development plan for the property subject to a CBA.
So I am respectfully requesting just one final continuance to get the CBA in writing.
And then Mark must be tried, please.
Laurie, what number is that?
That's number two, Mr. Chair.
And we had not received the letter yet.
Mr. Anastasio, you said they had issued a letter?
They sent us a letter.
I just assumed they had copied you on it as well.
We have come to an agreement on a number of units for the building.
for the building uh it's just but it's subject to you know working through a cba which shouldn't
It's just, but it's subject to, you know, working through.
take more than you know 30 days um but nevertheless the other reason why there's
several listings is because this rco is unique in requiring a walkthrough
in addition to a regular meeting so scheduling that um has of course added to the several listings
Not that I'm throwing them under the bus.
I'm just explaining.
So MI 2022, 002-928-549-51 North 10th Street.
Cases continued.
Mark must be heard.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuances?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
We have Craig Mecledosi with his hand raised.
Good morning, Craig. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Craig, C-R-A-I-G, last name Melodosian, M-E-L-I-D-O-S-I-A-N.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do, Chair Bergman.
What's the location?
Looking for clarification on 2105 South Simpson.
mr chair that is number seven on the list we did receive a request for continuance from the
applicant but because it was the third listing we asked them to appear i don't know if they are here
today all right um i i'm unaware i just received his email uh i know he's out of town i'm not sure
what the problem is we did help him compose his last continuance uh we are uh you know we're
looking to get additional clean dwelling units in southwest and he was uh apparently in one of
these people who bought a duplex that was illegal so if uh if you so choose we would be supportive
of one last continuance i will privately admonish him and make sure he secures counsel we believe
he's out of town yes yes sir vince sorry yeah sorry and uh mr melodosian do you believe that
he has secured counsel at this point or no i i sent him a a list of attorneys who work regularly
in southwest philadelphia i i don't know if he's done that okay all right sorry go ahead
Vince Thonkath, Vince Thonkath, is he in the audience?
Yeah, I did not see that individual in a virtual audience.
So, MI 2023-006-092-2105 South Simpson Street, cases continue marked, must be heard, will
be heard next time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuance?
Yes, Jennifer Taylor has their hand raised. I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Jennifer Taylor, J-E-N-N-I-F-E-R, T-A-Y-L-O-R.
Where are you from? To tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
What case are you talking about?
I'm talking about 251 Ripka Street.
so that was uh number one um that case has been continued and i mark that must be heard the next
time yes sir and and i'm an owner of an abutting property so i'm just curious as to um this has
been continued four times and i'm just so it ends it will end the next time okay thank you sir i
I appreciate it.
And thank you for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate it.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
I don't see any further answers.
Number five, we do not have exhibits.
MI 2023-005-774-1616 North 2nd Street.
Hamas Al-Adha is the listed applicant, third-party professional.
NH Import Incorporated is the listed owner.
No exhibits, third listing.
Hamas Al-Adha, if you're in the audience, please raise your personal hand and wait to be sworn in.
Hamas Al-Adha?
you can proceed mr chair is he there
You can proceed, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair.
no i'm not not seeing him in the audience
okay so can you hear me i was asking can you hear me i didn't see him in the audience
All right. Thank you very much, sir. So MI-2023-005-774-1616 North 2nd Street. This is the third listing. We still don't have exhibits. The case would continue prior. I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johnson, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tynetta Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
And number 14, MI 2024-001-335-4752-54 North 11th Street.
David Rowe is the listed owner.
E.B. Alazbel is the listed applicant.
This is the second listing.
Was marked must be heard.
No one appeared the first time.
There is a letter of opposition from Logan Civic Association.
Do we see anybody?
No, Mr. Chair, no hands raised.
Number 14, MI 2024-001-335-4752-54 North 11th Street.
The second listing, no one appeared the last time. We still don't have exhibits. I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tana Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
We're going to go to our add-ons. So number one, MI 2024-001-17.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. I'm sorry. Can we call?
I was going to do number four. Yeah, let's we can do number four right now. Yeah, we can do that number now. We do not have an interpreter. So we just need to see if anybody is here for that case. So and we're just going to have to continue it because we do not have an interpreter.
MI 2023-002-377-2655 South Hutchison Street, owner-applicants Ming Hong and Chow Cheng.
Is there anyone in the audience?
no answer is for this matter message so m i 2023 002 377 2655 south futterson street
cases continued mark must be heard
thank you going to go to our add-on list mi 2024 001 174 1819 natrona street this case will be
voted on at 2 p.m.
Number two, MI
2023-007-092-789
South 2nd Street. The vote in this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday,
January 8th, 2025 at 9.30 a.m.
One, two.
We're going to start number two, MI-2022-002.
That was the case that was continued by Mr. Anastasio, number two.
Oh, that's the 16-unit, sure.
Number three, MI-2022-005-549-1500 Winsome Street.
Al Shermer is the attorney.
No RCO letter.
There is a proof of mailing.
was provided but we need copy of the notice
Mr. Shermer
They're coming back in as a panelist
Mr. Chair
Morning Mr. Shermer
Mr. Shermer
Mr. Shermer you're on mute
let me try that again good morning mr shirmer could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer yes name is hal h-a-l last name shirmer s-c-a
Yes. Name is Hal, H-A-L, last name Schirmer, S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R, here for Lillian Samuel, owner of 1500 Winsome Street.
This is a request for a variance.
So, Schirmer, could you get closer, Mr. Schirmer, get a little closer, a little hard to hear.
Oh, sorry. Let me get the mic up.
Yeah, please.
Okay. Any better.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And what is the relationship of your client to the property?
My client is the owner of the property.
The property was initially purchased by her now late husband.
So this is the widow picking up the property that her husband had owned from 2008-ish.
Vice Chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Of course.
Good morning, Counsel.
Do you agree to waive the written of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I agree to the refusal. I did want to mention with one caveat that this is or can either be looked at a request to legalize a pre-existing 1941 property built as a two-unit. The other option is to simply view it as a non-conforming use since it was constructed as a two-unit back in 1941.
one. Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed and
required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing? Actually, they went in
on Sunday because on Thursday, and this is going to be the interesting part, I always get the
interesting ones. On Thursday, I found out that Isabella Fitzgerald, who is the RCO 10th ward
leader had passed away which is why we don't have an rco letter because of that on friday i ended up
reprinting 170 notices to the nearby neighbors and reposting the property inviting the neighbors to
neighbor hearings zoom hearings on friday on monday and tuesday yesterday and the day before
so we have all the information in it has been accepted i do need to get a tax clearance because
for some reason the tax clearance website does not like the information that i've been feeding it
i do have the proof of mail i do have the uh photos for the mailing which will be submitted
in a little bit i just have not scanned them yet otherwise we have all the information
and it's the same information from okay hearing before and the hearing before all right please
please proceed and share your screen you hillary hillary are we okay with where where we stand with
So, I kind of wish we had known this in advance. I mean, I knew, unfortunately, about the passing of Ms. Fitzgerald. I did not realize that her RCO was the coordinating RCO for this case.
um the only things that we had received so far was just proof that a mailing was done we had
no information about when a meeting had been scheduled if a meeting had occurred and i know
you're saying now that you have put some notices out to let people know you had zoom meetings we
didn't we haven't received any of that um we also don't have proof of posting for today's hearing
so we would need to see all of that before we could proceed any further with the hearing
let me share my screen
Mr. Shermer we're still having a hard time
hearing you you might want to
all right give me a minute
Hillary you said we cannot
proceed correct
I was explaining
the information that we did not have that we
need to see in order to proceed
and if Mr. Shermer has
that information we may be able to proceed
understood which i do which i do have uh i'm still not seeing the prompt to share the screen
mr sherman why don't we mr sherman why don't we do this why don't we move on
get together and we'll come back okay and that by that time you'll be able to have to share
the screen too i think you heard what hillary said you need and we'll come back to you okay
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I know.
Thank you very much.
Number nine and number eight, MI 2023-006-568-216 South 52nd Street.
Roger Perry is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from the general list of Philadelphia Cobbs Creek RCO.
Roger Perry has been promoted to panelists.
Roger Perry has been promoted to penalist.
Yeah, good morning. I'm here.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
Yes, Roger Perry, R-O-G-E-R, last name P-E-R-R-Y.
Where or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, I represent both the owner and a proposed tenant. Philadelphia Biz LLC is the owner of the property, and that's Eunice Sabir, representative of the LLC.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, with the explanation that this is a resumption hearing, and we just added the reposting photograph and an updated tax clearance certificate.
And I also think we added interior photographs that were requested.
So all of those are with the board at this time.
I just wanted to clarify, Mr. Perry, we actually are not considering this a resumption hearing because the property was not posted at the last hearing.
So we basically need to start from the beginning.
Go through the whole thing.
Okay, no problem.
Yes, thank you.
Okay, let me try to share my screen.
So Hillary, you did receive the updated?
Yes, we have all the information that we need, yes, to proceed today.
We are fine.
I was just explaining we're not considering it a resumption
because last time the property wasn't posted.
So we have to have the hearing start over again.
Okay. Okay. I shared my screen. Can you see that? We do. Okay. So I'm going to start over. We had a presentation, but I'm going to start over as if we haven't. This property was posted originally, and those are attached at the bottom of this.
But the request here at 216 South 52nd Street, it's a small commercial in the commercial
strip there on 52nd Street.
And the request here is to put in a, it's a request for a special exception.
I should note that first.
This is the refusal.
This is not a variance request.
It's for a takeout only restaurant.
And we've had several meetings with the RCO.
And that was one of the issues at the last hearing.
but let me just run through it's been fully posted but then it was reposted for today's hearing as
well and this is the reposting this is the front of the property and so forth main entrance is here
this is the strip on 52nd street and so forth this is an updated this was added an updated
impact clearance certificate paid through 2024.
As I indicated, I represent Philadelphia's LLC,
and we probably have several people here.
The architect for the project was Group G by Jerry Gutierrez,
who's been before the board many times.
Refusal, the appeal, project in a sheet.
There was an initial notice in the mailings,
And as I said, we had several meetings with the RCO. The result of those meetings just for the boards, and I don't know if anybody's here for that, was that they requested a sit-down restaurant with several booths.
And our response was that with a view with Group G and visiting the site, these are the original postings from the original hearing, was that the site was too small and that we were going to be unable to note it.
They asked us for a diagram of the layout with a booth in here, and then they asked for two to three.
But as you can see, this is not viable.
Our position is that we cannot put in booths for three reasons here.
One is the application is for a takeout restaurant, not a sit-in restaurant.
That is a different category and so forth.
But as you can see here, if we put in booths along here, this is a small site, about 14 and a half by 50 feet.
and it would be, you know, it would be inappropriate to have people trying to sit here
and take out people coming and going, standing next to the booths and so forth and so on. Very
small. It would also require a new bathroom, maybe a compliant bathroom and so forth. So when we did
the walkthrough and everything, the problem was that we didn't feel that it would be appropriate
to try to have a sit-in restaurant when a take-out restaurant was what was requested.
We did do, so when we met with the community and this has been going on for some months
We did do, so when we met with the community, and this has been going on.
now, we did indicate that the hours would be from 10 in the morning to 11 at night,
seven days a week, commercial tracks pick up and there's storage for trash in the back
here and so forth.
We agreed to put in security cameras, sconce lighting in front.
This is 52nd Street here.
They wanted a new tree here.
We agreed to that and so forth.
This was the original posting.
And we were going to put a tree, sconce lighting, main entrance is here.
There's a stairs that goes up and down 52nd Street corridor.
Let me see if I can show you the, if you can see this, this is the interior photos that
I believe Ms. Gaston asked for at the last hearing as well.
So what we're looking for is a takeout with a counter to be in here, kitchen to be in
here, and a non-ADA bathroom, which is already plumped.
They had asked for booths along here, but it made it impossible to have a substantial takeout.
And, you know, we did studies and so forth.
This is the front where the stairs are.
Stairs are here and so forth.
So, you know, we've indicated at our meetings that this would be appropriate for a takeout restaurant.
There's been a lot of vacancies along the 52nd Street corridor.
This would add a spot of activity and so forth.
This has been to city planning, which I believe also approved it and so forth.
So in conjunction with actively putting a restaurant in here under a lease, the menu is going to be sandwiches and chicken wings and things like that and so forth.
Limit the hours to no later than 11 o'clock at night.
We feel that this would be an appropriate addition to the 52nd Street corridor here.
and we're asking for the special exception in this case for a takeout only restaurant
with that i can i don't know who's here in terms of uh you want to bring your client on this to
is nasir here or yonas one of those two may be here because they were
from the sign-in this morning.
Do you see anybody, Jason?
Okay, Naseer Shabir has the hand raised.
I won't let them speak.
Yeah, that's my client.
Hi, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is Naseer Shabir,
N-A-S-I-R-S-H-A-B-B-I-R.
Where or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed counsel thank you uh monsieur have
you uh heard my representation of uh requesting a takeout restaurant at this site uh yes i heard
that okay and uh we met several times i guess with the uh the neighborhood and it's your position
still that this would be uh inappropriate for a sit-in restaurant and you're still continuing
to request that it be a 100 takeout restaurant yes i'm going to do the 100 takeout restaurant
okay and the rest of my representations were true and correct to your best of your knowledge
information and belief uh yes thank you questions from the questions from the board so can you
CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE RCO'S LETTER OR WHATEVER THEY
THEY DID SET THE LETTER TO THE BOARD. IT SHOULD BE IN THE FILE THERE. IT SAYS THAT THEY'RE
REQUESTING SEVERAL BOOTHS, UP TO THREE BOOTHS FOR A SIT IN RESTAURANT. AND WE DID HAVE
THE PRELIMINARY MEETING WITH THE ZONING BOARD INDICATED WITH HILLARY AND BOARD MEMBERS THAT
Having a sit-in restaurant does not fall under the same category in this commercial district as a full takeout restaurant, so we wouldn't be able to get a special exception.
So the board couldn't approve the booths.
So we had a walkthrough with the RCO, and we explained to them that it would be really complex to try to have people standing next to the booths.
Yeah, I heard you.
I heard you.
Thank you.
Thank you. So they just wanted to try to get a sit down restaurant. And we just said, you know, that's very good. But let's, you know, yeah, I got just wanted. I understood. I got you. I got you. Yeah, thank you. Do you know how many takeout restaurants are and that are selling the similar type food?
I don't know if Jerry is here. Jerry did a little survey for us. What's been happening, unfortunately, in this area is two or three of the
So what's been happening, unfortunately, in this area is two or three of the restaurants have closed. There was a diner down on the corner towards, I want to say Chestnut Street. There is one across the street that is a combination.
And I think that's here. Yeah, here it is here. There is one across the street that has some booths and so forth and so on. But the problem is that in the last few years since COVID, we've been losing both restaurants and other types of shops on the 50th.
I'm sorry.
I don't know what that was.
Any other questions?
Bye, Ty.
Was there an agreement about hours of operation as part of it?
It was 10 a.m. to 11 p.m.
And how many days a week is it?
Seven days a week.
I'm sorry?
Seven days a week.
All right.
Thank you.
the questions
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson
not at this time mr mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i don't see any hands raised mr chair planning commission thank you chairman and good morning
David Fecto, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Please proceed.
Thank you, sir.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location
from commercial mixed use 2.5 to commercial mixed use 3.
We'd also like to note that the appellant's attorney mentioned a city planning approval.
we do not issue approvals for this type of proposal the appellant has shown that the
proposed takeout restaurant will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond
what might normally be expected the city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed
special exception for a takeout thank you mi2023 006 568 216 south 52nd street i vote yes
Michael Jones, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, members.
So, thank you.
So, number nine, MI 2024-001-175-1517 West Indiana.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
There's unanimous support from Allegheny West Civic Association.
They're coming back out to the panel.
Good morning, members of the board.
Good morning, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Sherman Toppin.
Last name is spelled T-O-P-P-I-N.
where or a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do i do could
you identify your client the relationship to the property yes my client is lolita maddox
she is the sole member of zanus creations llc and uh she should be in the virtual audience with us
today our vice chair has a few questions sir good morning counsel do you agree to either
the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits this need to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
OK, my screen should be before the board at this time.
Is that a?
OK, great, great.
And again, what we're looking at on my first screen here
Here is the subject property that we'll be talking about 1517 West Indiana Avenue.
It's my pleasure to miss Maddox is a new relatively owner of this property.
She purchased the property and proceeded with renovations with a contractor and attempting
to get rental license learned of the issues with the zoning and the need to come to this
process.
So she was not aware of it beforehand.
And as a result, she is here before the board to legalize the existing two-unit configuration
that is present in the property at this time.
I will go through my typical exhibit package that's in front of you now.
That's in front of you now. We'll deal with the refusal, the application, the project, but we'll focus on the maps, the photos, the plans, the RCO meeting, and, of course, coming into the support we've received from the RCOs present.
We'll deal with the refusal, the application, the project, but we'll focus on.
So here, again, the only refusal we're dealing with today is that we are proposing a two-family household living in the existing structure, as the refusal suggests.
The deed shows clearly here that Zanus Creations is the owner of the property as of June 14, 2022, just a few years ago.
And we have the application for appeals suggest what our hardship is.
And that's really that this area, and you'll see in the pictures later, is relatively blighted.
A lot of vacant properties and a lot of older and dilapidated housing stock in this property actually presents one of the only rehab properties in the area.
And I think that's why it's gotten such approval from the RCOs in the community.
So let's just get a closer look at it.
Here we are at the ZBA map showing that middle of the block, just left of the middle of the block is our subject property.
It's all RCA5 here.
All the property stock in this area is two-story single-family, but most of the homes that are in this area are, in fact, rentals.
either not with rental licenses or just single-family homes that are rented.
And this gives you a physical, a visual of the property as it sets.
As you can see, vacant lot here, vacant lot here, vacant lot here.
Vacant lots peppered throughout, vacant lots right across the street.
And amidst these vacant lots, you have housing stock that, as you can see, has a very aged condition.
We'll call it that.
This is the subject property here.
and the houses on either side and as well as on the further up you can begin to see that
the the care and the age showing on the housing stock in this particular neighborhood looking
down the street towards broad street you're getting this visual and this is the visual
looking the other way again our particular development will not change the the configuration
or the appearance of the property it will simply it's simply upgrading the and and offering a
affordable living for rentals in this particular area. And these are just pictures of the
neighborhood. This is immediately across the street, an entire blighted block with nothing
there and has had no construction or renovation for over two decades. So we're in an area
that needs urban renewal, that needs investors and owners like my client to come in and change
the configuration and change the status of this neighborhood and present something that's
present a livable and affordable options for people. And so this is again our subject property as you can see nicely done on the outside the corners matches the same height and appearance of the others, except it is just simply well done.
and now as we look into the when you open the front door you'll see steps
going up to the upstairs unit and and a door entering the first unit this is the
appearance that you'll see when you open the front door kind of has open concept
with a nicely done kitchen and here's just more rooms and visuals of the
bedrooms and bathroom and then you go into the second here's like a door to
the second unit you come around you see the same similar quality of appearance and finishing
throughout that you know and this is again completely well completely done there'll be
no nothing but mechanicals in an unfinished basement no living here no bat no not even
storage really or or any bedrooms in the in the lower level simply that and a small patio
in the outside which is the same for all of the owners along that block so just
coming down to the plans and I'll make this a little bit bigger for you a
little smaller I should say for you let's come down to 50 and the layout so
here here just centering this on the screen in front of you this is the first
floor this visual here as you walk into the first floor you'll see well actually
I think, let me just scroll down to the other panel. I think it's, oh, here it is.
This has the detail of what the rooms are as we move through.
So as you enter into the first floor, you'll see steps going up to the upstairs unit and steps in this doorway entering into the first floor unit.
First floor unit has a bedroom in the front, a bathroom is sort of in the middle, and then kitchen and living room in the rear.
That is the first floor unit.
unit, the proposed second floor unit, which is now existing, as you move upstairs, you
enter into where you have the kitchen area, living area in the middle, a bedroom in the
front and a bedroom in the rear. So two bedrooms for one unit and one in the lower level unit.
in the lower level unit there is no there's no nothing in the lower level but utility and storage
There was no, there's no, nothing in the lower.
and of course no roof deck or anything proposed at the top so that is what we are having as far
as plans we brought this to the attention of the rco let's make this bigger again
and let's make this center this for you so in our exhibit eight we sent this notice for the rco we
We actually had two RCO meetings in this particular property.
We noticed 149 different folks.
These are their addresses.
I'll just push through this, and our certificate of mailing goes on for several pages, as you
can see, and our notice of this particular meeting.
The RCO meeting was attended with a lot of people, but a lot of people there for various
types of various other presentations and other meetings.
but there was four members that were there was four members of the board and one attendee
from the community um so we had support from the board this in fact we had two rco meetings but
this was the latest one one that took place uh most recently in november 20 november 19th and
not only that rco supported us but the the swan poodle also did as well and i think we have a
letter of support from Swampoodle and they provided that email to the board this morning
supporting us. So the community is in support of this being a two unit. They see what this
young lady has done. They see that she's come to the table to legalize her units. They see
the quality of her of the construction and they have approved it because they know that
this is the type of renewal that's needed in this particular street. So this point with
With that having been said, I'd like to bring on Ms. Maddox to adopt my testimony.
She could be advanced to a panelist.
Excuse me while she does that cannot.
Can you lift up that screen a little bit more so I can read the three provisos?
Oh, let me go.
Let me go.
Let me go here.
All right.
All right. I just, all right, let me get to the bottom of the letter. Okay, so there's
three, in the meeting, there were three provisos that were spoken of, and we already agreed
upon all of this. There would be no more than two units. We're only seeking two units. The
trash and recycled goods will be stored inside, except for the, and that's exactly what we
proposed, and we said we'd be doing that, and there'd be no basement living, and we
We clearly, as you can see by the pictures, don't intend there to be any basement living and mention that in our presentation.
So the provisos really confirm what we already presented and seek nothing more or any variance from what we originally requested.
We only want two-family living, and both units will store their trash recycling indoors.
In fact, the bottom floor unit will store it outside in the back.
The upstairs unit will store their trash in their unit and bring it down on trash day.
And of course, there's no basement living.
So that would be, those are the provisos
from the Swampoodle organization.
And I think these were the same conversation
that we had with the other.
I think here's, I think some of the things
that were mentioned that there would be,
we talked about some of the rental amounts,
trash in front, there would be no trash in front,
and no trash out before trash day.
I think these were the things that Ms. Smith wanted
to be sure that we would commit to, and we absolutely did.
You want to bring your client on, Sherman?
If Ms. Maddox, if she's in the virtual audience, if you can raise your virtual hand, Ms. Maddox,
we can have you to testify.
It would have been hard to speak.
Could you please state your name?
It's spelled for the court stenographer.
Lolita Maddox, L-A-L-I-T-A-M-A-T-T-O-X.
Where are you from to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Ms. Maddox, have you been listening to my testimony for you on your behalf these last few minutes?
And would you adopt, first of all, is my testimony true, correct, and accurate as far as you're listening?
and would you adopt my testimony as your own yes if there's any further questions from the board
we can entertain them at this time chairman was was the was the property already uh separated
with utilities when she purchased it i do not believe so but miss max can you confirm that
whether or not the the property had separate utility service when i purchased it um it was
separate utility services for each floor so you have any idea how long this place
You have any idea how long this place has been a duplex?
Oh, there was a question to me, Ms. Maddox.
My client only has a short duration of ownership,
so she only bought it with it the way it looked,
and it was very low in horrendous condition at the time she purchased it.
But prior to, we don't have an understanding of when it fell out of, whether it ever had legal two-unit status.
I guess that is the question to the board.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
So your client did the repairs that we saw on the pictures?
Yes, yes.
But she didn't know that it was not legalized as a two-unit dwelling?
yes her contractor basically advised her that they could just re re restore it as it was if you put if
you will and so her she didn't have the experience with the zba and all this process and when she
sought to get rental licenses is when she learned and got our office engaged to help her get through
this other questions from the board mr sherman do you know permits were pulled when the work was
done then i'm not certain and i don't think permits were pulled because i think what she did was she
did they did not read they didn't change the layout at all they simply just put new floors
new you know they just re basically renovated what was there so you know how contractors have
been in the past they basically you know they will tell the client well we'll just finish we'll make
your property look great um it's already looking like it is and we'll just make it look the same
way but great that's what that's sure but that that does require easy permit in the city of
philadelphia yes we do know we do know that and miss and miss maddox knows that as well now yes
the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I have Charles Richardson with the hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak.
Morning, Mr. Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer.
Certainly.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
please proceed sir the councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance for this
property thank you anyone else in the virtual audience
no further hand planning commission thank you commission thank you chairman and good morning
david fechter with the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this location
The city changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 2006, and a community requested map change.
Despite the presence of two mailboxes, this property has no documented history as two dwelling units.
We are aware of one duplex on this block face, but the rest of the block face is single-family.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units.
mi 2024 001 175 1517 west indiana avenue i vote yes with proviso trash stored inside
no basement living michael johns my vote is yes with proviso so gaston my vote is yes with proviso
tanetta graham my vote is yes with proviso i win my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is Jesper Proviso.
Mr. Toppin, could you please stay on?
So number 10, 2024-001-176-5101 Funston Street.
Mr. Toppin, could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, my name is Sherman Toppin, last name T-O-P-P-I-N.
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Yes, my client's name is Amber Berry, and Ms. Berry Real Estate, LLC is her sole member, LLC, and she should be here with us in the virtual audience.
Vice Chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning, Counselor. Do you agree to wait a reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
thank you council please proceed and share you've already shared it yes and um so this property uh
Yes. And so this property, it will seem very much like a repeat of what I said. In fact, the three I have today, ironically, have the exact same arguments and the exact same situation.
it will seem very
Here, what's in front of you is 5101 Funston Street. This property was a corner property completely restored to what you see today.
um this property and i'll go through my typical exhibit package as you have already received
there there's the the refusal again the same situation two-family two-story block but we're
seeking a two-family household living in this existing structure the particular deed was this
property was also only purchased two years ago january 20 31st of 2022 so miss miss barry purchased
this property with the intention of restoring it to a condition that was livable and hired a
contractor to do so. These exhibits that I'm pushing through are basically the application
for appeal, bringing us to this point. The same part of the same issue that this particular
owner has had is that to take the property from the condition that she founded and she bought it
to market would be economically not feasible. And then there's a great demand for rental,
affordable rental in this particular area that she notes. And these are the reasons that we
feel the property's configuration as single family really doesn't satisfy my client. It
really doesn't make sense for this particular street based on how it is. We'll see some pictures
of what the street really looks like. Here's our project information sheet that I'm kind of moving
through as I'm speaking. So this property is also RSA 5, all the streets around it. Our property
sits here on the corner as we've seen just now going further down
from the top you'll see that there's just a few um in all the around the different
if you can look at from the different lots there's a lot of vacant lots in this area
you can look at them all from above and going further down this is just another street another
area in philadelphia that needs renewal that needs renovation this is the subject property here
that's been renovated and here's the two properties next to it but let's look down the block
and this is what you see so vacant lots vacant lots boarded properties you know that kind of
continues down this street of the same way so again the client purchased the property with
belief that this is a property that she could re redo and return to livable and attractive status
for rental so let's go inside and see what was done there and this is again a application to
legalize an existing two unit configuration as it's been redone this is a side view of the property
and this is the rare view of the property it's completely redone all around now this property
has two units this is a mechanical there unit one when you open the door kind of gives you
this look wide open concept straight to the back and further down you know the kitchen
new kitchen there bedroom one that's the master facing the street in the front you can see the
bay windows. Bedroom 2 needs a little fixing up. There's folks there. Bedroom 3. The one
bath surfacing the upstairs hallway. And then second bath. And then this is the rear of
the property on the first floor unit from the outside. And this is also where trash
will be stored for both units now looking here the second unit will be accessible down these steps
so it's a it's a front facing first unit for the top two floors and a rear-facing
basement unit and this was the so when you go into the basement unit here or i should say the
lower level unit this is all electric for example there's no there's no furnace in this entire
property so there's no issue carbon dioxide as far as that goes so this is a a studio small
straight through studio this is what it will what it looks like when you look at
and this is the reverse of that same view so it's one long studio as
apartment number two and this is the bathroom and as I mentioned before is
entered down through these steps so they were doing some work with this ladder
and they took the picture but so this is the rear door of unit number one but the
unit number two is accessible down these steps.
So we took, so I'm going to look at some plans and I'll make this smaller so the board can
get a closer look at exactly what was done here. So here is the plan. So again, the basement unit
get a closer look at exactly what was done here.
is accessible from the rear, concrete masonry steps coming down here. In the RCO, meaning they
wanted to be sure that there would be no issue of flooding of this unit. So there is a drain
here at the bottom and in the window well in the front, there's a drain also, and there's a sump
pump in there um and you walk in there's just a a doorway closet and in wide open space kitchen and
bath in the rear of the unit which is what we saw um the front unit is accessible through the front
door when you walk in open concept right to the back like we saw um and then for so living room
dining room kitchen is all open and with with a powder room and as you walk upstairs you have the
three bedrooms and the bath for those three bedrooms so pretty typical layout nothing nothing
no exterior construction was done and that is um and this was also our they they asked us about
whether or not there would be drainage and so there was no so in the basement area there's
there's this drain here that would create so that there's no if there was any flooding or excess
water coming that in that window well it would come it would come through that drain so this
is what we're let me push this back to the right size for the rest of the our talk so we noticed
we sent this we sent our our zba letter our notice of rcrs rco letter to the community
to the 188 affected neighbors around and these are our addresses on we're on the envelopes
certificates of mail which goes on for several pages in our exhibit package and of course notice of this hearing and was posted properly on the front door on the property and our tax cert.
And in the ZB in the in this particular meeting we had we don't have as a 14th exhibit the the letter from the RCO the 44th Ward.
But in that meeting, they were most concerned about just the ability of the lower level unit to be not subject to flooding or not subject to any carbon monoxide, again, because the units are electric and there's adequate ways to relieve any water that would go into that unit.
They were satisfied, at least in our RCO meeting.
We haven't seen their letter of support, so it's not attached to our exhibit number 14.
but at this point i would like to bring my client on so that she can
answer any further questions or adopt my testimony on her behalf
and this is amber berry she could be advanced to panelist
thank you miss burry hello how are you i could you please state your name and spell for the
stenographer. My name is Amber Berry, A-M-B-E-R-B-E-R-R-Y.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes. Please proceed, counsel. Yes, and Ms. Berry, have you been listening to my
testimony on your behalf up to this point? Yes. And would you accept my testimony as
accurate and complete as representing your experience with this property? Yes.
there was a question one of the board members asked for previous property well i'll ask you
that now uh upon obtaining this property were any permits pulled to your knowledge by the
contractor for the renovation of this of this um unit no the and was there an explanation given to
you as to why not um well the property was already configured this way so we just i just uh they just
painted and like put new floors and things like that down so i when i went to get my permits
meanwhile my license that's when i was told that it was a single considered a single family
this was like maybe my second property i had ever bought so i wasn't really aware of how to go about
uh like plans and permits i kind of just left it in my contractor's hands so i didn't i wasn't
aware of it when i was going through this process okay that that's understood that's what we that's
what i had represented just wanted it to come from your mouth as well so um that being the case if
there's any questions of the board we'd love to handle answers questions at this time so so um
mr toppen what what this is is a two-story home right yes and the basement's created into a
a small apartment.
Is that right?
Yes, that is correct.
And that's the way the property was when it was purchased?
And were the utilities separated?
They're separated now. Yes, questions on the board.
They're separated now?
Questions from the board?
Yes, can you go back to the picture of the.
Of the unit okay, this is the going into the pictures exhibit 6. here's the front. No, not that 1. the 1 of the original.
the you had a picture of the building before the original building oh the original i think
that was in the plans i think that was on the plans mr johnson hold me let me scroll down
ah here so if i look at this picture the window well was put in afterwards
dug down looks like it was dug down yes so and now you don't have a picture of the side so it's
hard to see you know whether or not it was configured like that i have a concern of having
this basement as an apartment the difference between this project and the one that you
presented previously is that at least they were one was one unit was on the first floor the other
unit was on the second floor in this condition it's literally a three-bedroom house with a
basement space um and on your plan it says recreation it doesn't say apartment or anything
that's that's so that's that's an issue for your plans um but again my concern is really
um i don't think this is an appropriate location for apartment of the basement
other questions from the board you want to answer that mr top oh yeah i wasn't i wasn't sure that
was a question mr johns uh i think it wasn't it wasn't it wasn't a question that was really
but statements have been made that it was configured like this when it was a purchase
but this picture clearly shows that it doesn't it didn't have a window well right so it wasn't
quite the way that it was when it was purchased right i think yes i think it was the masonry
what what you saw was the plans for the masonry because the concern was just so you know mr johnson
this is what we this actually issue came up in the rco meeting the concern was egress out of this
particular out of this basement unit so what no no no what i'm what i'm saying is that what was
stated was that the the building was laid out as it was the only thing that was done was painting
right and the comment it was completely renovated as far as finishing if you were if you were right
and that's right well finishing right well finishing but uh and uh egress well was put in
to the front so yes yes that wasn't so it wasn't configured like it was when you bought it
it is then i don't have it then there's no picture of the rear so i don't know whether the back
stairs were there when you bought it because there's no picture of you know when you bought
it i can i can i can tell you that it was modified to have the concrete masonry steps going down
as rather than just the typical it was made nicer and the front were there were no stairs
going down to the base there were steps going down but they made that they made it nicer and wider
as would i'll go back to the picture but the reason for the front the reason for the digging
out of the front was so that for egress there would be two ways to get out of this the basement
if there was emergency that that's what they did that for so you can walk out so here this is this
would this was a high window the window now goes twice the left i understand why i understand it
was why it was done okay all i'm saying is that what was said was this was considered the way that
we see it now when it was bought and i don't know that that is true because when you show a picture
that doesn't show what is what is what is there now right and you say i bought it like it is now
i can't in my mind know that everything is is that's true yeah well this is new that this is
new masonry here right that's new masonry it's a new step clearly there's new steps that go down
to the basement and in the front i don't know whether there was a there was steps that went
down to the basement. Oh, I understand. You understand what I'm saying? Because everything
that you're showing me is new. And let me finish. And you've got an entry to this unit from an alley.
Yeah. It's not even from the street. It's from the alley. You know, so I don't know. I'm not
comfortable with supporting a basement apartment in this particular location in this configuration.
it concerns me okay okay other questions from the board I just have a quick question
what could it be a thought that the storage for the unit could take place in that basement space
storage for the unit uh could could take place in that basement space instead of a apartment
instead of
because it seems like I didn't see any lot of storage space for the units on this first and
second floor I don't believe there's access from the from the unit to the basement from the from
this from this if you go in this first floor here you can't get to the basement so if that's that
what you're asking Ms. Graham because there's no there's only rare access to the that's why I think
she said it was configured this way because there's not a there's not a way to go from this
floor into the basement i think that's i think that's the issue we have other questions from
the board yes um question uh what happened at this rco meeting was there was it well attended
was there uh did they approve this um the rco meeting they didn't have i think the the sentiment
of the board is it was somewhat the same they want most of the questions circled around the
lower level unit with the basement unit and how is it how it is safe that was the most of the
conversation and the two issues of what was egress and how one could get from the front
out here. And so one of the RCO meeting, they wanted us to put a, I guess, some cover over
this space because they liked the fact that there was an egress window that if there was a fire or
whatever, you can come out. But they didn't like the fact that it was open, that if someone from
the outside could get in, a security issue, even though there's security lights here and ring on
the front door, they were more consistent on, they wanted something to cover this space here.
And we agreed to that, that there would be a—actually, it's probably installed already now.
But that was one—that was all of the questions that they really had was about this.
And they weren't concerned about this rear access?
I'll go to it so we can talk about it.
So, yeah, this rear—this is existing.
All this was here.
So, basically—
All that fence was there?
The fence was not here.
But what was there before was steps going out, and you could go right into the basement from here.
And they just made it more, I guess, nicer, if you would.
And the masonry was done to create a wider step and a more, and let's just go to it.
Let's just go to it.
So they wanted the steps to look nicer, and I think that was the issue.
So they did this new masonry here, and they enclosed it with this security fence.
So there would be some entertaining space back here, and then there would be a fence, you know,
that's really it um that was the decision that the that the that the uh owners made i think that
the quandary was how you get to how do you make use of the bottom space because it's not usable
because there's no access from the top to this space it was always a room down there
that was rented and again these were not legal rentals at the time so what my client did when
when having the in having this brought back into is to just make it proper and seek this process
what's that back door that we see what does that back door go to the door this is the back door to
the front let me let me come out okay so there so the there is access to the front the front can
but they have to come through the back they got to come through the they have to come out
to the basement internally internally internally they would have this was this is the this is the
kitchen i'll go to that picture here it's the kitchen it's the other side of the kitchen so
so the person who has this uh basement unit would come through this alleyway or to the side of the
property they would enter from the side and then down some other steps here is that that is correct
let me go to the picture um let me go to the picture so you can see exactly what is envisioned
so they'd come in through this door and they'd enter through the steps to get to the rear this
is the kitchen of the first floor unit that that door yes yes and this is the unit so this is this
here is the the door this is actually a closet here um this is the window that you would see
how low it is this is a three foot here it's two it's two and a half feet so basically you
could just walk out if there was a security issue and get to the outside but um and that's why
let's see here let me let me go to the so here
i wanted to go to the further i think there was a picture showing the further
that you said two sets of steps but there was there's they just want to walk up to this platform
and down correct okay um and i guess uh my other
Okay. And I guess my other question would be, so when this property was purchased, there was, it was, was there any effort to look into what the zoning for the property actually was?
no i think that as i mentioned before as as mrs uh as miss berry mentioned her thought was let's
just do it the way it is let's just redo it the way that it is it's got it's it's separated into
two units it's got two meters let's do it that way and i think that's i don't think we're here
because these things came up in the pursuit of rental licenses that's when the um that's when
she learned of it and so that's kind of why some of these questions weren't addressed beforehand
okay thank you other questions from the board yeah another question for you mr tabin can you
talk me through the electric and the um the heating and cooling systems for each unit
okay so here's the both both units are electric all electric and so these are the as you can see
this picture here is where their meters are um and so when you said heating and cooling i think
there was a picture here so these are the units that provide that one for each
okay so if it's all electric is it radiators are they using tax is there central air okay
these are central these these i'll show you so you can see these units here
Yeah, I know what they are. I just haven't seen it.
Oh, I'm sorry. So you can take a look at it right over the front door.
They've got one unit here that's blowing.
And I think, and let me go to the other bedrooms.
I think there's, I think there was some.
And was this system pre-existing or did your client add it?
AC unit is a supplement. I'm sorry.
Was this system pre-existing or did your client add it?
they added that they added that i just want to point out that that is more than floors and paint
but oh yeah this is no this is complete renovation this is not touch up this is complete you know
to the studs completely be done walls floors and bathrooms and kitchens these are all this is all
new in the inside and yeah that's one unit i want to see see there's there's ceiling fans
There's a window for there's an AC unit here, window for cooling fan on the ceiling there.
I think the same is true for most of the rooms.
And I thought there was another one that could see in a picture.
Yeah, here's the unit for the basement apartment and electrical panel.
Thank you.
questions from our attorney hillary amberson
mr topton did you receive a letter from the rco we did not we requested that from from um you know
the 44th ward and we didn't get one we didn't i don't know if they just sometimes they'll send
it directly to the board we learned today whether or not there's a approval or any questions but
Okay. That's fine. We did not receive one either, so it's always just checking. All right. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5,
residential single-family zoning at this location. This property has a documented history as two
dwelling units in a beauty shop dating to 1958. A later use permit from 1966 shows that it was
reconfigured into a single-family dwelling. The City Planning Commission recommends that the
deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units.
MI 2024-001-176-5101 Funston Street, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Senator Graham, my vote is no.
Eowyn, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 12, MI 2024-001-329-2330 North Reece Street.
Ron Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of unanimous support from Norris Square Community Alliance.
Applicant also has 11 signatures, 10 from that block.
10 from that block.
Coming back.
Coming back, one as a panelist, sir.
Vern Anastasio, you've already been sworn.
Just for the record, could you please state your name?
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair.
Members of the board, Vern Anastasio, representing Nemea Thomas.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Good morning, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you, Counselor. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
okay 2330 north reese street is uh the legalization of a pre-existing non-conforming
to family dwelling in an existing uh building my client purchased the property from dance
Realty LLC. When she purchased it, it was in fact a legal, I'm sorry, a non-compliant two-family
dwelling. As it says here in the application, the property was purchased already converted
with separate units, separate electric meters, and complying with the code would cause her
to have to convert the entire family back to a single family, remove an entire galley kitchen.
She only purchased the property for $50,000, so the property wasn't worth a whole lot.
So having to put in another, doubling that just to get it back to compliance would bring the property underwater.
And she truly believed at the time because she bought it from a real estate company.
It presented itself as a two-family dwelling, and of course it had the two electric meters.
she thought that it was legalized. So with that, here's the ground floor is a one bedroom apartment,
as you can see with ample living space. You come in from the front door, you make a left
and you've got your apartment, living room, eating kitchen, bath and bedroom. Out back,
there's trash containers, the yard. Second floor is more of a, let's say a junior one bedroom.
You come up the stairs.
The back of the property, you have a full bath.
You have your landing.
On the right, you have your eating kitchen.
Then you have your large bedroom.
That serves as sort of a living space as well, the way it's set up.
With a bed, a television, a small love seat.
And we have photos that show that.
There's no living space in the basement, by the way.
Just some storage and utilities.
The block is all residential.
This is not the only duplex on the block.
Here's the rear of the property, we have photos of the basement.
These were, this is the photos upon purchase.
Second floor being occupied.
there's that back bedroom as you can see there's like a sofa a little side table a
bed television so it's for a bedroom it's pretty large and then it has the galley kitchen that's
also eat in we had our public meeting with the RCO after full meeting the RCO
unanimously supported it.
Here's the flyer.
The poster
and the refusal.
Proof of posting.
Taxes paid.
Here's the deed.
Here's an aerial.
there is some rm1 towards the end of the block but in fact there are also in the middle of the block
Other two family dwellings. It's not the only one Nara Square Community Alliance had the meeting again
other two two family dwellings it's not the only one narra square
unanimous support
Everyone in attendance voted to support it
And then my client went down the block and collected signatures
Most of which are from folks right on the block over East Street
because my client reasonably relied on the seller's representation
and the fact that it had two separate electric meters and two separate units fully
and because we have overwhelming support from not only the rco but the neighbors on the immediate
block itself respectfully request the granting of the variance and with that i'd like miss thomas
to raise her hand.
Miss Thomas.
Namaya Thomas.
Jason, did we see her?
No, my name has been allowed to speak.
Thank you.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hi, my name is Yama Thomas.
My name is spelled N-Y-A-M-A-H-T-H-O-M-A-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yama, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Yes, I did.
And it's true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
I have nothing further.
Vern, could you show photos of the basement?
You went by that real quick.
I just want to see what the basement looks like.
I think it was the first photo.
There it is.
The basement there?
Yeah, it's the first interior shot.
Hold on.
Looks like a pretty low ceiling, Mr. Chair.
But, yeah, that's what it is.
And there's the utility room, and then there's the storage.
Washings from the board.
Is that carpeting or linoleum?
No, it looks like linoleum down there.
I guess you would call that semi-finished.
But there's no kitchen or bathroom in this?
Nothing.
Nope, it's just empty. We have utilities on the left, storage on the right, in the rear, or front.
Quick question. When you were telling us about the history of her purchase, did you say that she had to rip out a kitchen?
No, no, no, no. I said we're trying to avoid having to do that.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Questions from the board.
it was just the first
do you know the basement is heated
oh sorry Mike
I don't
I just want to state for the record
that if the ceiling is below 7 feet
this cannot be legally occupied
I know that's not what you're seeking but I did want to
say it while your client's on the phone
to hear
is it 7 or 7 and 3 quarters
good percentage of the that's a certain percent for three quarters of the basement
it has to be at least that that's cool yeah michael that kind of went left um access to
the rear yard is it just the first floor unit yes sir okay and they have access to the basement
They do. And the second floor unit, there is a small vented trash closet.
The questions.
Questions for our attorney, Hillary Anderson.
Just clarification, Mr. Anastasia, your client, Ms. Thomas, did you say she was part of Dant Realty or she purchased the property from Dant Realty?
She has nothing to do with the realty company.
nope she she purchased it from them okay because all the information that we have says they still
own the property i did i don't know okay do you have can you pull up the deed that was in your
exhibit packet yeah okay i'm sorry she's doing business as dan realty my apology okay she is
okay i just wanted to clarify she purchased right there you go yes she purchased it from a real
There you go.
She purchased it from a real estate company, but not Dant.
estate company, but not
She's Dant.
Got you.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands, Mr. Chair, raised.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this
location from RSA 5, residential single family, to RM 1, residential multifamily. The city rezoned
this neighborhood in 2017 in a community-supported map change. At that time, the property was zoned
RM 1, and the civic associations requested RSA 5. This property appears to have been converted
without the benefit of permits through no fault of the appellant. The City Planning Commission
recommends the board grant or proposed use variants for two dwelling units. MI 2024-001-329-2330
North Free Street, I vote yes. Michael Johns, my vote is yes. Charles Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes. Zion Wind, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you.
you um let's go back to mr shirmer
mr shirmer
And Mr. Chair, Mr. Shermer in the interim did submit proof of posting for today's hearing, updated proof of tax compliance and photographs showing that while a meeting was not held,
They had advised the neighbors that they could connect, advising the neighbors about today's zoning hearing, as well as the meetings that he referenced in his prior testimony.
Thank you. Mr. Shermer.
Mr. Shermer.
all right let me try again good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members
I think you were sworn and you know you why don't you start your presentation
okay uh as I said before unfortunately uh Isabella Fitzgerald was the chairman of or
actually was the state rep and also the RCO she passed away during the pendency of our appeal
which means we did not have an RCO meeting I did put through to have RCO meetings on Monday and
Tuesday day before day day before and we had no information nobody signed up uh this is basically
a property was built in, according to the L&I records, 1941. It was built as a two-unit.
It's been licensed as a two-unit. Mr. Schirmer, why don't you share your screen?
I am trying. Oh, you're going to need to share your screen.
And again, I don't have a prompt to share the screen, which is...
So, Mr. Shermer, we're going to go on to another case.
We'll come back to you at the end of the day and see if you can't get that done.
All right.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, sir.
All right, number 17, MI 2024-002-123, 1524-38 Germantown Avenue.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
We were joining as a panel shortly, sir.
There's a letter of support from South Kensington Community Partners.
There was a CDR required and completed in July of 2024.
good morning mr chairman morning mr demarco could you please state your name and spell
for the court stenographer yes richard demarco last name d-e-m-a-r-c-o
Yes, Richard DeMarco, last name D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I swear.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property, sir?
Yes, T.R. Phila LP there. Mr. Rufo Jr. is with us for testimony.
Vice Chair has a few questions for you.
Counselor, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I can.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your name.
Mr. DeMarco, Michael Johns has recused himself from this hearing.
Okay, fine.
I'll go ahead and share the screen, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Good morning.
This is a matter that was actually heard by the board five years ago in 2019.
This board granted numerous variances for the adaptive reuse of the former Gretz Brewery property.
It's a historic property.
There's been historical commission approvals for both the original case and the current case.
The main reason why the current case is before you is simply because when the owner pulled the zoning permit for the project that was approved by this board five years ago, the pandemic hit and the owner could not pull off the development of the property and the permit.
He did get an extension, but the permit expired per the code provisions.
But the proposal before you, it was presented originally as the identical proposal to the prior case, which this board granted unanimously back in 2019.
So let me just get out of the way that we would, of course, argue that the decision that the board made five years ago is res judicata.
the proposal is identical, with the exception that it has been improved significantly from
the original proposal through the meetings with the neighborhood group, which were extensive.
And there was a change to the curb cut, which we'll talk about in more detail, which
really, I think, was asked for by the neighbors. It was moved from the Lawrence Street side to
germantown avenue i'll show that on in a moment um so additionally with additionally for legal
argument purposes just to get it out of the way because i i know you want to move quickly um we
have dimensional variances as well we would suggest that those were subject to the hertzberg standard
the main and let me show the refusal now we'll go through the variances very quickly
The main use variance is over here on my screen. It's the IRMX, Industrial Residential Mixed Use Zoning. There is a requirement that the ground floor frontage have at least 50% non, other than you can't have more than 50% not residential, not parking.
But what you'll see is because of the unique configuration of the existing structure, it creates a challenging aspect.
And we put the commercial or non-residential wherever we could and wherever it was viable.
So there's commercial uses along the first floor, but we don't meet the 50% standard.
But as you'll see, when our architect testifies, we really did the best we could considering the structure that we had.
The other three refusals are, and we're not refused for density, we're not refused for parking, but we are refused for FAR.
But I think you hopefully you'll agree with me that if you see it right here, it's a requirement of 500 percent FAR floor area ratio.
We're at 504. So we're really, really just barely above the requirement.
So we would suggest that's a de minimis issue. But we also I'll skip over here.
we do have an occupied area variance. 80% is the requirement. We're at 89%. But as we go through
the testimony, I think you'll see that that is necessary and clearly necessary in light of the
fact that the development is so challenging and so unusual. And we're also keeping a very,
while it's been empty for decades, through no fault of my client and the prior owner, it was
empty. The building is a beautiful building, but it has certainly suffered over time and lack of
use. So obviously, we're going to be arguing that the hardship is caused by the existing structure.
The remaining variance is a height variance. However, I want to point out
The remaining variance is a height variance.
However, I want to point out to the board that even though it looks to be a substantial height variance,
the existing structure is many portions of it are already over the 60 feet.
We have a variance for 60 feet because we do have additions to the structure that do extend to 75 feet.
But many parts of the existing structure are already over 60 feet.
And in fact, the smokestack is over 100, I believe, 105 feet, maybe even 110 feet.
But Tony, our architect, will provide more detail about that.
So that's the refusal.
Again, we met extensively with the neighbors.
We have their support.
I do want to go through some testimony because it is such a significant case.
I'll move as quickly as I can.
I think the only other thing I wanted to point out before we get to that is, oh, and let
Let me, of course, point out, here's the zoning board's prior case.
This is the calendar number of the 2019 case, 36341.
CDR has been completed.
And, of course, you see here the L&I agrees the permit was expired, and that's why we're here.
Excuse me, I misspoke.
I said T.R. Phila-Elpe.
It's T.R. Gretz-Elpe, my mistake.
But they're all here, and Tony Rufo, Jr. is here to testify.
All right, let me just show a couple pictures.
It's a very unusual intersection.
It's the intersection of really four streets, really.
These are older pictures.
The building looks much nicer than it does.
This is dated to August of 2019.
It's actually a lot nicer.
Let me show you that real quick.
Oh, this is our change form.
We did move the curb cut, as you'll see, when we get to the plans.
So we took care of that.
So here's the, as you can see, the existing structure is a little bit better shaped than
those older photos.
This is how it looks today.
This is our site plan.
And there's the smokestack right there.
Here's the very interesting architectural features.
This one, this particular building, we're keeping.
And again, Mr. Chairman, there's a lot of money and time and effort that have gone in
to preserving the structure and, of course, beautifying the structure. We are keeping the
structure. We're not demolishing. Obviously, we're not allowed to anyway because of the historic
nature of the property. But obviously, significant resources go into maintaining that structure.
Obviously, a developer would prefer to demolish and build anew. It's much more efficient to do
that. But because we're keeping this historic and really interesting structure, obviously,
we're going to be arguing that that creates a hardship. Here's the new curb cut coming off of
Germantown Avenue. It used to be over here on Lawrence Street. Obviously, that was very
controversial and upsetting in the earlier case. But even though we did get support in the earlier
case, we still engaged with the streets department and agreed to move the curb cut to right here
along Germantown. And we have streets department approval for that. You'll hear the architect,
and that's over here, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Here you have the streets department
stamp. But it took some meetings and we got cooperation from the streets department and
they agreed to that significant change. And I'll get Tony Ruffo on in a moment. Let me just show
you a couple quick. So there's commercial use along here, along that. Let me go back to the
site. This is where the commercial will be along Germantown Avenue. There's commercial retail space
here and here. I'm sorry, that's the curb cut. The curb cut actually interrupts our ability to
provide the commercial, but we have commercial along here. Obviously, it's not viable down here
along Lawrence Street or this portion of Oxford, but we don't, the community did not want that
anyway. Let me show the unit count. Oh, here's the parking. We do have 42 parking spaces. We
are not refused for parking. We utilized some of the bonuses in order to provide that.
The layout's a little bit challenging, but there's a turnabout within the first floor,
and that's how the parking will get in and out. This is all new. As we said, we worked with the
neighbors. The neighbors were very upset with having the curb cut on Lawrence Street, so it
was moved here, and we made it work, and we worked with streets, and that's where we're at right now.
Let me show you the unit count with the square footages.
Here you see the unit counts here.
We don't have any unusually small apartments, although some of the studios are a little bit small, but they all average over 500 square feet.
We added some three-bedroom units.
The neighbors wanted some nicer units.
nicer units. We agreed to that. Now, let me say this about the total, the 200 total.
We agreed to that.
Now, let me say this about the total, the 200 total.
The original project that this board heard back in 2019 was originally 227 units, and that was
reduced, and we lopped off a story on one of the additions in order to bring down that density.
So we did already reduce our density. This is the lowest density that we can afford in order
to pull off a feasible development in light of the extra cost that's needed to preserve the
structure and deal with the it's very monolithic there's very large beams large thick walls and
you know i'll get to the testimony now because um our architect can can really discuss that really
quick um let me show some of the renderings so you can see exactly what we're dealing with
Wing C is most of the addition.
There's an addition here, again, all approved by historical.
But wing C is mostly new.
The existing structure is wing B.
There's some building on top, but we're mostly keeping the existing elements on wing B, wing A.
This piece at the corner of Germantown and Oxford is brand new, as are these floors here.
but this is all existing here and again we see is all new all right so let me go to um and this is
the old zoning permit that has been expired as you can see we the zoning board information is here
this board heard the case voted unanimously there were no appeals um so obviously we feel that if
anything that the development has approved improved from your original decision back in 2019.
With that, let me ask the Anthony Ruffo Jr. to be promoted to testimony, and I'll try to move quickly through it so we can get to your question.
Just the owner or the architect?
We have both, Mr. Chairman.
Anthony Ruffo Jr. is the owner.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Ruffo.
Hello.
Good morning.
Mr. Ruffo, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, sir. Anthony Ruffo, R-U-F as in Frank, O as in Oliver, representing T.R. Gretz LP.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
All right, I'll try to move quickly as I can. Mr. Ruffo, did you hear my opening presentation and statements?
I did.
Are they true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And can you adopt then my presentation as your formal and official testimony in this matter?
So, Mr. Rufo, you are a managing member of TR Gretz, LP?
How long have you owned the property?
August of 2003.
And was it mostly vacant when you purchased it?
That's correct. It was vacant.
And what was the prior, to your understanding, was there any prior use to the property prior to your purchase?
Prior use was storage for a contractor, machinery storage for a contractor.
To your knowledge, when was the last time it was actively being used as an income-produced property, if you know?
To the best of my knowledge, about 45 to 50 years ago.
So how difficult has it been to maintain this property during your ownership?
It has been difficult.
It was acquired as a vacant property with violations and has been a security problem and criminal activity problem.
We have since gotten that pretty much buttoned up, and there's no criminal activity on the site anymore.
So if you had to estimate for the board, what would you say the cost has been for you to maintain the existing structure through its vacant status during your ownership?
Just over $1.6 million.
And then during that timeframe, was there any income derived from this property?
No, there was not.
Has this property been marketed during your ownership?
Yes, it has.
And have you had any interest in any type of industrial use for the building?
No, we haven't had – we've had zero interest for industrial use.
um as and what what what is the only interest that you have encountered for the for the for
this property um multi-family mixed use and you heard my
Multi-family, mixed-use.
And you heard my testimony about the 2019 case for this board.
You were also involved with that, correct?
Yes, that's correct.
So explain, just briefly, I covered it, but explain to the board why you were unable to make use of the building pursuant to the 2019 permit, which I actually have up on the screen.
What happened with that permit?
What happened was COVID hit. The instability of the financial markets and supply chain issues pretty much stalled the project.
And you were the individual that met with the neighbors during the current process, correct?
Yes, through both processes, yes.
Yes. And I've already informed the board, we did have a vote in support of the project from the neighborhood group, but why don't you go ahead and, if you can, summarize the changes that you made to the project as a result of those meetings with those neighbors in the current project.
the neighbors were resistant on um the driveway entrance for uh lawrence street so we
worked with the streets department and the rco uh all the neighbors to relocate the driveway
entrance and exits onto germantown avenue uh we removed the garage door on lawrence street
We added more street trees on Orange Street, reconfigured the commercial space as per their requests, and I think we had a total of six meetings, I believe, and worked well with the RCO to improve this project.
and as far as the number of units is there any flexibility on you're the developer right you've
been the person that's been presenting this project and and attempting to bring it to bear
is that right yes that's right and um the the 200 um the 200 unit count is what makes this
project economically feasible. Yeah. Go ahead. No, I'm sorry. I just cleared my throat. Excuse me.
Okay. And is the 200 units the minimum necessary for you to be able to feasibly reuse, adaptively
reuse the structure? Yes, it is. And last question. You heard my, you already heard some of my
testimony about the difficulties posed by the structure. Do you want to elaborate what is
difficult about the structure that makes it, you can't demolish it. So what is difficult about the
structure that renders this development challenging yeah well the historical designation
makes us retain the structure the structure has several multiple buildings with extremely high
ceiling heights it's it's really not adaptable for an industrial use right now and
And residential would be the only answer, mixed use.
Okay, that's all I have of Mr. Ruffo.
My only other witness would be the architect who can just provide a little bit more detail about the challenges made by the structure.
How long do you see, Mr. DeMarco, how long is the architect going to take?
I can get through him in probably five, ten minutes tops.
Okay, please proceed.
All right, I appreciate that.
Anthony Sarantanakis, if you could virtually raise your hand and be recognized, and then we'll ask you a few quick questions.
I've been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
Yes. Can you hear me?
I can hear you.
Okay. My name is Anthony Tsurantanakis. Last name is T-S-I-R-A-N-T-O-N-A-K-I-S.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
So I'm going to get right to the point, Mr. Tsurantanakis. The board has a long list today.
Why is the existing structure not compatible with an industrial use?
Well, it's composed of a number of buildings that don't have huge footprints.
The footprints are not really suited to even a small industrial process where you need
assembly lines and you need some length.
The other reason is that the infrastructure of the building is not there.
is not there. In other words, you don't have a freight elevator. You'd have to put in a freight
In other words, you don't have a freight elevator.
you'd have to put in a
elevator. There aren't enough stairs. So just getting product in and out of the building would
be very difficult. In addition, there's really no way to bring in like a semi-truck, a large truck
into the courtyard. So again, that would be very difficult. An industrial use would really block
up the streets around it in order just to service loading and unloading from a semi
or even a smaller truck.
And you're a registered architect, correct?
I am, yes.
Is it your opinion that architecturally speaking, the best proposal to adaptively reuse the
structure is the current use?
Yes, I do believe that the best use for this is the mixed use focusing, mixed use with commercial and residential, focusing on the residential. It uses the space that's there in the existing building in the best way possible.
and uh is it is it uh briefly explain to the board why architecturally speaking even the
residential component that and the current proposal why is that challenging in light of
the conditions of the existing structure well it's because of uh the the we've had we have to
go in and make there there's going to be very interesting and unique units here uh with you
have a lot of height uh there are certain spaces in there that were the the you know that were used
for the big beer vats and big storage rooms
that have enormous amount of height
where we've had to break down the floors
into adding additional floors and mezzanines,
which will create really interesting spaces.
But it's a lot more challenging than a normal building
because we've had to go in and figure all that stuff out
and install a lot of new infrastructure and new floors.
And then we had to work with the existing window patterns
as tall, beautiful windows, but we couldn't move them.
In fact, we've added more windows that are historically accurate
in order in some of the facades that have been messed around with
to kind of make the building feel more like its original state.
So as far as the occupied area variants,
we have 89%, 80% is the minimum. If you can explain to the board, why do we need the extra
occupied area in order to pull off this project? Well, the commercial, there's a couple of reasons.
That's really about the area that's on Lawrence Street and part of Oxford Street. It didn't make
sense for Lawrence Street to have a commercial use. And also, the window pattern on Lawrence
Street is really smaller, I mean, tall, but less wide punched windows. And that did not make it
really suitable for retail in the sense that you couldn't, nor would you want to put in a storefront
system in that. You'd have to take out a lot of historic windows. So Lawrence Street is also
a small-scale residential street with row houses and other brick buildings. It didn't really seem
like a commercial street, whereas Germantown Avenue, we did everything we could on Germantown
Avenue to create a commercial corridor on Germantown Avenue, and the buildings on Germantown
Avenue were more appropriate for that. And then we turned that and we added, we also have
commercial buildings on Oxford Street to kind of extend that commercial corridor to make it turn
the corner. And I think you already answered it, but is that why you needed the variance for the
use of limited area for the non-residential street frontage? Is that why the variance for
not having 50% non-parking and residential was necessary.
And then the third factor is, of course, is the garage, which it was very important to
have a garage here, but the physical dimensional constraints of the existing site, you know,
kind of forced us to use as much of that area as possible for the garage, which of course
doesn't factor into that calculation that we got the variant, that we got refusal for.
And just to tell the board about why you have the height variance and why that variance is necessary.
Well, the height variance is necessary because we needed to have, as Mr. Ruffo explained, we needed to have the 200 units to make the project feasible.
Well, the height variance is necessary because we needed...
And we needed seven stories, given the, again, dimensional constraints of the site.
We needed to have seven stories that, in order to accommodate the number of units, we needed to put in Wing C, the new structure.
and make them, you know, make them be the right size and nice units in order to make the whole project work.
Are the variances that you have requested for this project the minimum necessary in order to achieve a feasible development, Mr.
Is that your opinion based on a reasonable degree?
Yes, it is my opinion, yes.
Your opinion based on a reasonable degree of architectural certainty?
That's right. That's correct.
all right well mr chairman i probably could do more but i understand you have a long list worth
the end so uh i'm i'm fine as far as the testimony goes and um again we have support from the rco
there's uh we completed cdr and so obviously we'd ask you to vote the project at this point um
and that's all i have as far as formal testimony questions from the board
um yes i have a question can you show me how many of the buildings have roof decks
Mr. I need help from Mr. I don't believe there are any. Let me ask, make sure that that's the case. Mr. Sarantanakis, can you help me with that?
You're muted.
Okay. Can you repeat the question, please?
How many, if any, of the buildings have roof decks?
uh there's a roof deck on uh two of the buildings have roof decks there's roof decks on wing wing
c part of the part of wing c has a roof deck and part of wing a has a roof deck i'm gonna
miss graham i'm gonna try to uh oh i'm sorry i take that back i miss miss i what i was talking
about green roofs part of part of the only roof deck is on wing c green roofs are on wing c and
wing a i'm gonna try to find something that shows that there you go there you go yeah the only the
only roof deck is on wing c right here that's right and this is this it here mr sarantanakis
that's right okay okay thank you the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson um just briefly um mr demarco i know you
for the for the taxes for this property i know you submitted proof of a tax agreement um however
i was not able to verify that that agreement is in effect and current i did try to with revenue
and it's not showing up on the the um philadelphia tax center page so we just need proof that that
agreement is current and in compliance before we can vote on this case so um let me go ahead
and go to it that so there isn't so this agreement was not um it's not it's not showing up on
philadelphia tax center from what i can see and i did reach out to a contact in the revenue
department to verify that it was it was current um and i did not receive a response unfortunately
before this hearing so we just need to to hold the vote till we have that confirmed i don't know
if you're able to now pull up a pull a tax clearance certificate um because if you did
if you were able to do that then we could vote on it but we just didn't there was nothing that
to show that this was current and in effect so all right that was that it was yeah um yeah it
was up to date because it already had started and that you know payments were being made and it was
in compliance is what i mean i i understand i would only say uh that this was very recently
signed right there's a signature in october this is the signature of mr ruffo senior
anthony jr um any additional information on this in order to try to get a vote now we can of course
we could of course submit proof later uh but is this any of that makes did you hear the comments
from if i could have mr ruffo jr uh reactivated for sure just it's been a lot to speak
uh yes i did hear um the comments i don't have any additional information at this moment
we can certainly provide what's necessary i i mean i believe that this does comply with the
code but obviously we'll defer to hillary on this and and get you what you need uh asap
okay yeah we just if you if there's either a tax compliance certificate that shows the properties
okay yeah we just if you if there's either a tax compliance certificate
now in compliance or proof of payments made that are due so far in this agreement then
we can confirm that the property just so i'm clear you want proof that payments were made on
this agreement that they are that they are current on this agreement or okay or a certificate of tax
compliance which you should be able to get if the agreement is current ah i see yes yes so
So I tried to get, like I said, I tried to get that confirmation from Revenue prior to the hearing, but unfortunately I was not able to get it.
So, and it didn't, and it wasn't showing up on the city's Philadelphia Tax Center website that these taxes were under agreement either.
So I know sometimes that takes a little bit of time too.
So, yeah, good luck getting something from Revenue these days, but I hear you.
Let's, let's, let's, we're going to move on here.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david effecto
with the city planning commission chairman and board members this proposal completed its civic
design review in september 2024 the civic design review committee's advisory recommendations
are not an expression of the city planning commission's recommendation or opinion regarding
zoning variances, special exceptions, or other discretionary approvals associated with this
proposal. The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location to RM1
residential multifamily. However, during a 2016 zoning map change, the civics requested IRMX,
industrial and residential mixed use. We'll also note for the board that the appellant submitted
a waiver paying a $4,200 fee in lieu of planting replacement trees. The appellant requests
use and dimensional variances to enable the preservation of the remaining buildings on
this historic site. This proposal conforms with the comprehensive
plan's goals to promote adaptation of vacant buildings for
mixed-use development and to reuse industrial buildings to create
new neighborhood anchors. The City Planning Commission recommends the Board grant
their proposed use and dimensional variances. Thank you.
Mr. DeMarco, we're going to have to hold a vote on this.
We're back January 8th.
And we will bring this up at the 930 meeting.
Yeah, we'll get you to what you need right away.
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you for your patience with the testimony.
No, we're fine.
Thank you.
Mr. Toppin, could you please come back?
You have one more case here.
MI 2024, 001-331-3144 Euclid Street.
uh it's been so long since we've met just for the records please state your name
yes my name is Sherman Toppin spelled t-o-p-p-i-n last name you uh please uh identify your
client a relationship to the property yes my client is Bryant Watson he is the sole member of
bja real estate llc and he is here on the line as well so if you if you see watson then that's
who my client is at this time vice chair has a few questions yes
Chair, I'll be recusing myself
from this case.
Counsel, do you
stipulate to the reading of the refusal
and do you agree with this accuracy?
I do. I do.
Please start your presentation.
Well, members of the board, it's a pleasure
to be here with Mr. Watson.
I think this board has been acquainted with him previously on a different matter, but we're here today on 3144 Euclid Avenue.
The property is right before you today.
I have my exhibit packet that we'll go through, but we'll center on the conversations of the property's condition and the conversations at the RCO meeting, which brought support.
So here we have the refusal again.
we're simply seeking two family proposed use in the existing structure unlike other hearings that
have had today their construction has not proceeded this is all a proposal we have plans which we'll
go through pretty soon here the property was purchased just in 2023 last year and so the
client is interested in making sure that this property is done correctly to code he's started
the right process got his contractor and got our firm involved to help him through this
so the issue with the continue the property is excuse me mr topman i'm so sorry to interrupt
i just want to make sure board member johns is is back on for this case because
johns is is back on for this case because um we don't have board member shaheed or and board
we don't have board members shaheed or
member graham has recused herself so just to make sure board member johns is back oh okay
yes i'm sorry board member johns are you there
let me reach out to board member johns okay
excuse me chair yes um this is fatina i don't see mr johns in attendees or in as a panelist
but we still do have a quorum is he necessary to proceed is is is you on the phone
i'll check now we need it we need this bottle of wine
yeah we do not have we do not have a quorum because in this
that's correct no he's not he's not here
mr chair i do see uh mr johnson the uh panelists uh lineup but must be muted
at this time all right let's see if we can hold he's not answering the phone ish i mean uh hillary
i am trying to reach him mr chair
all right right see if you can get back on because we don't have enough people
right it's trying to get back on now
and i'll back up mr chair to uh yeah if that's the case
can you hear me who's that mike michael good okay please start as you'll be on too okay great so
again, we're here for 3144 Euclid Ave. This is the property that you see before U2. It's vacant,
unoccupied. It's really in shell condition at this time. We'll talk a bit about the property
in a bit. And now our typical exhibit list is here. We'll walk through these exhibits and
center on the conversations at the RCO meeting and the plans for what is proposed here.
As we mentioned, we waived the reading of the refusal. But in this area, as RCO 5, we're only
looking for two-family use from single families. So that is the one refusal that we are here to
discuss. Our client has only purchased a property since last year, April of last year, and with the
intention of making sure this property is renovated. Now, as far as variance, as far as
his hardship upon purchasing the property, the difficulty was what would be the proper economic
use for a property that has been unoccupied for so long in its downgraded condition.
And the only feasible way that this particular client can do it is by creating two units,
which enables him not only to create affordable housing for that neighborhood that needs it,
but to bring this property up to speed. And we'll see some pictures of what the block looks like
in a bit. So here, this is our product information sheet. We went before the RCO. They required this
form but we don't need to go over that form in particular this entire area is rco5 and our
our property is sort of mid-block almost just favoring one end of it and as you can see from
the top from the aerial views there's a lot of vacant lots in this neighborhood a lot of vacant
lots and a lot of properties that have not been uh restored in this area so you know this is what
the block has looked like for some time so it's it's this blight that's creating the the economic
hardship to create any kind of single family or new single-family use in the
property. So here's an example just of the side-by-side view of the
property to which it shares a party wall. You can see both properties have the
Both properties have the same appearance, very aged, very in need of renovation, both unoccupied, and vacant lot at the end of the corner.
same appearance, very aged, very in need.
And you're looking down the street, this is what you're looking at.
A lot of need for infill, no new single-family properties in this area as a result of the blight that's existing here.
If you look the other way down the street, you see more of this. It's a narrow street altogether, only one way parking on one side. But here, you have a vacant property here or property that's, you see a lot that's present here. As you move down, much of what you see on the front continues down this Euclid Ave.
Now let's look at what's really inside. So when you walk onto the porch, you can see the condition starts to speak for itself. You open the front door and this is what you've got. The property is completely uninhabitable at this time. It's a complete shell. It's sturdy in that it doesn't need to be demolished. The integrity of it is not compromised in that way, but it just needs complete renovation for it to be livable.
There's no place in the property that you can even discern areas so much so.
This is going upstairs and you see more of it.
Time has really battered the property and it just needs complete renovation.
And it's at that tender spot where, if not completely renovated, demolition would have
to occur here.
And so here's just more visuals of pictures of the inside as you go up to the second floor.
and to the top floors and more of that, more of the same.
So I'm just kind of going, this is the basement, lower level.
So again, nothing has been done here.
It is all pending this process that we're pursuing here.
So let's talk about what is exactly envisioned by this developer.
So I'm going to move this over to the right, come down a bit so that you can see what's envisioned.
So what is envisioned for the property as you walk up onto the porch, this is the middle, this is the, that there'll be an entrance to a first floor unit and there'll be a second entrance to the upstairs two units and no living space in the basement.
As you go into, so as you go into the second floor, you'll see that there's, I'm sorry, let me just move down to the next panel. It has actually descriptions of what these spaces are.
It's a little cleaner here. So again, from the porch, if you walk in from the porch,
there'll be an open space, open concept with a kitchen and a single bedroom studio on the first
floor. That is the entirety of the first floor unit with some space going downstairs with just
mechanicals only. No living space envisioned in the lower level. As you move up from the front
face of the property, a second door will take you upstairs. And in that space upstairs, you'll have
sort of open concept from the kitchen here with a bedroom in the back and on the upstairs there's
two further bedrooms as you can see one's in the front and one's in the back so it'll be a three
bedroom um a dwelling unit for the upper two floor unit and then a one bedroom for the first unit
is what is envisioned by these plans we had a we had of course we submitted uh properly to the rco
in the area let me make this bigger so the board can see let's go back to the middle
here and in that for that meeting we sent notices out to the 150 affected neighbors
of this very densely populated area and here's our addresses and proof of mailing there was
no there was no question of that people received these mails and of course notice of this particular
hearing was posted on the property and we have tax compliance showing zero but let's get back to
what happened at the rco meeting so at the rco meeting the strawberry mansion did provide us
with a letter of support for this to family use this was a well-attended meeting i think it was
a companion to another property we had last week very well intended and the vote of the meeting
was recorded. It was 13 in support and only 5 opposed and 5 abstained and the entire attendance
of the meeting was 30 people. So this was not many folks were there for this count for
the two affected RCOs involved and both of them came out in our support. So we feel that
the community wants to see this property renovated, wants to see and clearly by the show of support
They are in support of this particular development as two units and the way that we've described and presented it.
So what I'd like to do at this time is I'd like to bring Mr. Watson on as a panelist to...
So what I'd like to do at this time is I'd like to bring Mr. Watson on as a panelist to adopt my testimony and to ask any questions that the board may have.
Thank you.
Let me see his hand again.
Yes, Bryant Watson.
All right, they've been allowed to speak.
Am I on?
Mr. Watson, Mr. Watson, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Bryant Watson, B-R-Y-A-N-T, W-A-T-S-O-N.
Where are a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Watson, have you been listening to this, my presentation on your behalf for this zoning experience?
And is the testament that I've made true and accurate and complete with regard to your zoning application?
and would you accept my testimony as your own if you were testifying yes okay well we'll let now
entertain any questions the board may have questions from the board a question uh just
uh confirming that there's no uh basement living uh yes there well no there isn't i'm confirming
that there is no basement living yes for storage only for the first floor unit or how is it i'm
to go down to that picture just to show you what the plans are showing for the basement
mr johns so again all this is just let me just get further down so you can see that for yourself
again here so the basement is going to be mechanical and only there's going to be you
know the the hvc related they won't be finished at all it'll just be basically this appearance but
cleaned up and with mechanicals heading servicing the upstairs units okay and the plans the plans
show the same and i'll show you that quickly here other questions from the board what size
are the units um the first floor unit is almost like a studio if you will but what size is that
and then besides for the second and third floor which looks like it's a bi-level yes correct yeah
correct correct miss gaston and mr watson if you know those right off hand we can i know i think
you can provide that answer to miss gaston here yeah so first floor is a one bedroom
with kind of like a master bedroom, one-bedroom apartment for the full bath.
And the upstairs unit is three beds, two baths.
And what size?
Oh, so I think it's the first floor is 600 square feet.
And the second and third floor is probably like maybe 900 square feet.
Well, it's stacked.
It would seem like your math would lead it to be 12.
But the upstairs is not the full length.
The third floor is not the full length.
okay okay i see great thank you the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hilli emerson
not at this time mr chair questions comments from the virtual audience
i'm yes chair i have a hand up from tyrone williams i've allowed them to speak
Hi, Reverend, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. Good afternoon, board chair, board members, and those on the line.
My name is Reverend Tyrone Williams, Tyrone, T-Y-R-O-N-E, Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, sir.
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
We're not opposed to this project, provided that there's a proviso of no basement living
and that there's a trash plan that has been discussed.
Other than that, the Strawberry Mansion CDC is in support of the project.
Thank you for taking the time to close. We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Calvin Williams. I have allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is Calvin Williams, Calvin, C-A-L-V-I-N, Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Williams, are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Please proceed.
Yes, I just wanted to go on the record that I do not think this project is a hardship.
We have had in the 32nd Ward, the 23rd Division over the years, rehabs and developers like the Friends.
Over the years, rehabs and developers like the Friends Development Group did a project on 31st and Burke Streets.
And throughout the neighborhood that is now becoming gentrified, there's been no problem with total rehabs and the developer recouping their funds.
We've on my block here in the last five years has sold the property has been bought for over $200,000 on two separate occasions of rehabs. And I just want to be on record that there is no hardship with this project. And I'm going to like to see our neighborhood stay with single family units. Thank you.
Thank you for taking the time to call. Is there anyone else in a virtual audience?
um yes anyone else yes mr chair i have a clayton brothers with their hand up
i've allowed them to speak you please state your name and spell for the sonographer
playton brothers c-l-a-y-t-o-n-v-r-o-s-t-h-e-r-s you swear affirm to tell the truth
told truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor i am are you in favor of this project
or against i am in favor of it thank you for taking the time to call us we appreciate is
Is there anyone else in the first audience?
Ken Ellis.
How many more hands do you have, Jase?
Just that one.
Just that one.
Okay, thank you.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer, sir?
Hi, my name is Kenneth Ellis, K-E-N-N-E-T-H, last name Ellis, B-L-L-I-S, and I'm in favor of this project.
Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes. Thank you. And your testimony is?
I am in favor of this project. Yes.
And you're a neighbor, sir? Yes.
Thank you very much for taking the time to calls. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon. David Fechtow with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the Comprehensive Plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The city changed the zoning maps in Strawberry Mansion in 2014 in accord with recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan.
At that time, this property was zoned RM-1 residential multifamily.
We are aware of six other legally non-conforming duplexes on this block face.
the city planning commission recommends that the zoning board grant the proposed use variants for
two dwelling units you m i 2024 001 331 3144 euclid treat i vote yes with proviso no household
living in the basement michael johnson my vote is yes with proviso cheryl gaston my vote is yes
with proviso i am wondering my vote is yes with proviso
thank you thank you council thank you and happy holidays members of the board sure thanks thank
you number 18 mi 2024 003 732 1040 wall street joseph consul is the attorney
there's recommendation of non-opposition from the lower moin mensing civic association
We're coming back as a panelist.
Good morning.
Mr. Consul, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
It's Joseph Consul, J-O-S-E-P-H, last name C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to the property?
Mr. Dialsinger, he's the owner.
Can you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and agree with this accuracy?
Yes, just that we submitted a proviso with modified plans after a couple of meetings with the RCO.
So one of the refusal issues, the vacant commercial space is not relevant, and the two-unit has been upgraded to a three-unit residential.
I'm back, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
Hillary, how do we stand with this amended refusal?
Yeah, Mr. Consul, the refusal will need to be amended with those changes because the scope is kind of changing and, well, the scope is changing and the refusals are changing.
So we can hear this today because it appears from the materials that you submitted that your new proposal is what was presented to the community at the last meeting.
However, we will need to hold for an amended refusal that reflects what is now being requested.
that reflects what is now being requested.
All good.
All good.
Please proceed, counsel.
Okay, Joe Consul, I am here for Mr. Donnell Singer,
the owner of 1040 Wolf Street.
Mr. Singer bought this property in 2020
in an extreme state of disrepair.
These properties, there's four of them on the caddy corners.
In this part of South Philly, you have a lot of two-story properties, but the four corners, here's our property on the left and the property on the right, here's across the street, the two corners, these are all three stories.
The two properties that you're looking at are zoned commercial on the first floor with two residential units above.
The property directly across from my property that we're here to talk about, which is 2300 South 11th, is approved for six residential units.
That was approved in 2018.
My client originally sought approval to match the commercial spaces across the street.
So it would be a commercial on the first floor with two residential above versus going for more units like the property across from him.
He wanted to do the commercial with the two residential.
However, we met with the RCO three times in total.
The neighbors did not want another commercial space on that first floor.
They wanted only residential.
My client was not interested in trying to do six units, which his property is the same as the one that was approved for that.
But that seemed like a ridiculous amount. So and plus, he's planning on moving into the property himself.
But he's asking for three units, one on each floor.
We submitted a revised proviso plans form stating that we were removing the request for commercial unit on the first floor,
replacing it with a residential unit making the total residential unit count equal to three we
submitted these updated architecturals that show the layout there's no living space in the basement
strictly storage and utilities the three floors reflect a unit one two bed two bath 912 square
feet. Unit 2, one bed, one bath, 482 square feet. And Unit 3, two bed, two bath, 1616 square feet.
Like I said, after the third meeting of the RCO, we got their non-opposition after we submitted
these revised plans
and we had several
neighbors show up in support.
The ones
that didn't sent us
did I unshare?
Hold on. Sorry about that.
We got a letter
of a petition of support
from a client as well
which was in our packet.
you guys have that
hold on one second
for some reason
my sharing
disappeared here
let me get it back up
all right
let me try that again
so the goal is
to get approved for
three residential units
let's try
this should be my packet
it again. Did I pack it back up? It's back up. Okay. Sorry about that. So here's my proof of
mailing. The RCO meetings. We did three times. So it is the exterior.
A deed to my client and his wife.
Reality transfer tax, project information form, tax compliance certificate, currently
valid.
Actually, we had a couple of petitions in support.
There's one, and then there was a letter that was written directly to the RCO from the next
door neighbor.
um i understand we're waiting for an amended refusal uh but i'd like to call my client in
to adopt my testimony mr singer can you raise your hand i hear it mr shenger
I hear it.
Mr. Singer?
I've been allowed to speak.
Hello, Mike.
Could you please, could you, sure, could you spell your name for the stenographer, please?
Donyell, D-O-N-I-E-L-L-E, Singer, S-I-N-G-E-R.
I'm a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
one mr singer did you hear my testimony just now regarding your property at 1040 wolf street
i did does that accurately reflect um your understanding of of your project and do you
adopt it as your own it is accurate okay nothing further board questions from the board
so to confirm this is uh proposed for a three unit property is correct yes sir
okay thank you the questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes mr chair i have another hand up to miranda i have not them to speak
hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer alicia miranda
that's a-l-i-s-h-a last name m-i-r-a-n-d-a
where or a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes are you a neighbor yes please machine cool i just wanted to understand if there's been any
efforts to engage with the neighbors about uh the rental unit proposal uh i know that we were
against the commercial but has there been any close communication with neighbors about what
we would like to see in this neighborhood for that building uh yeah we had three rco meetings
where we sent all the the exhibits out and on top of that and my client can speak to it
he spoke to near neighbors regarding the use of the property and um because no one wanted commercial
and there we don't believe that the uh six unit that was approved on the same size building
makes any any sense he believed that a three unit was appropriate and the rco had submitted it's not
opposition for that we had neighbors present and forgive my ignorance but how did you disseminate
the rco information as i did not get any of that uh we the the city gives us a list of addresses
that we have to um serve of a certain radius of the property and each one required us to send out
215 pieces of mail, which we did three separate times for those different, different meetings.
Okay. And then my last question is, are there any efforts to research what the possibility of
affordable housing could be for these units, considering the income of this neighborhood?
I could have my client speak to that. It hadn't, it hadn't come up previously.
I don't know if he's prepared to address that.
We believe that we set up a handicap unit on the first floor would be very affordable as well as the second and on the third floor of my family would be living in that one.
Cool. And then are these mixed bedrooms?
Is there a mix of one bedrooms, two bedrooms, three bedrooms, or how do you envision the layout to be?
I have the layout on the screen right now.
Ms. Miranda, first floor is two bedrooms, the second is one bedroom, and the third unit is two bedroom.
Got it. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Planning Commissioner.
One second.
You're saying that the second floor is a one-bedroom unit, but you show a bedroom at the rear with the kitchenette.
Yeah. Mr. Singer, is the third unit a bi-level between the second and third floor? Am I remembering that correctly?
That's correct.
So, but on the second floor in the rear, when you come up the step there, there is a bedroom with a kitchenette.
That's included with the third floor apartment. So the third floor is a bi-level apartment.
It exists with the entire third floor and the last room on the second floor.
So, Donnell, Mr.
John is referring to something labeled as a kitchenette in this back bedroom here.
But there's also a kitchen on the third floor and another one on the second floor.
and another one on the second floor right there and one on the third floor so
Right. There's four. And one on the third floor.
it is just a uh a sink area it's not really a kitchen kitchen it's just a sink
any other questions planning commission thank you chairman and good afternoon david pecto with
the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change in zoning at this location from residential single family uh five the city planning that city
changed the zoning in this neighborhood in 1996. this proposal has a documented history as ground
floor commercial space with dwelling units above the appellant seeks to change the previous ground
floor commercial space into a dwelling unit this proposal will bring the property closer into
conformance with the residential zoning the city planning commission recommends
of the board grant the proposed use variance for three dwelling
Right. Mr. Consul, we're going to hold the vote on this. Otherwise, the case is closed. Am I correct, Hillary?
Yes, it's closed except for receipt of the amended refusal.
Thank you, Mr. Consul.
Hillary, just briefly, how do I achieve that between now and the held vote? Pardon my ignorance on that.
you can send me to send a letter um to to rcozba and board council requesting permission to amend
and explain why attach attach a copy of the existing refusal all right i'll do it right now
thank you also is there a roof deck on this
mr singer okay there is yeah we we have access to a roof got it okay all right thanks thank you
Thank you. Number three, Mr. Schirmer.
Mr. Schirmer?
Mr. Schirmer will be back in as a panelist.
yes good afternoon mr how's that computer uh computers doing well thank you can you get it
bring it up uh okay coming up no well you need to share your screen am i right this is the
third time we're trying to share the screen sharing now
please start your presentation okay this is 1500 winsome avenue uh back in 1941 this property was
built as a two unit duplex the requirement here is to get the property
since it is no longer under zoning as a two unit it has been used as a two unit for a long long
a long time as this is the application for appeal this is the supplemental
application project information form and all the deeds
now the property as
property as constructed
is a duplex it has been since 1941 we have two
electric supplies we have two heating units separate entrances two heating
to be set ups and this is the frontage on Linson we have the frontage off of Cornelius
All right, let's do it.
And we have 170 waivers who have only been notified multiple times.
All right, so the property has been licensed by L&I since 2003 for the prior owner, and
And then the prior builder, the entire area
was developed as a two unit at the end of the row of houses.
All information, and the property has been used as two units as built since 1941.
Every one of the corner properties has been developed as a two-unit property, and a property
across the street has been a three-unit field by the zoning board, as a triplex,
Well, you're trying to, yours is a duplex, am I right, Mr. Shermer?
Yes, this is a duplex.
This is a duplex, 1941.
I understand.
It has been licensed as a duplex from this owner, the prior owner, the prior, prior owner.
Okay, Mr. Shermer, why don't you bring your client on?
Bring your client on.
And if not, Ms. Samuel will raise her hand.
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello, my name is Lillian.
My name is Lillian Samuel, L-I-L-L-I-A-N Samuel, S-A-M-U-E-L.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Ms. Lillian, are the photos which I have submitted, which your daughter took, are representative of the house as it is?
They are.
Okay, so the property was or has been, excuse me for scrolling quickly, but let me go to the interior.
here so we have the okay so the property has a has two entrances one off of or the property
Property has a two-car garage.
Property has an entrance off of Side Street.
Property has two boxes, two hearings.
and are all these photos correct yes they are
okay when the property was purchased that you heard when your husband as far as you know
when your husband purchased the property was it set up as a duplex yes it was
did you make any changes to the property
no changes
okay for purposes of notice we sent out 100 and I sent out 170 notices to everybody on the list
we saw that Mr. Shermer yep yep just making sure and the one uh twist in this hearing is that
But the RCO, which was pretty much a one-person RCO, which was Isabella Fitzgerald, has passed away.
So we were unable to set up a hearing with the RCO because the RCO is a single person who passed away.
But I can't continue.
I'm working out.
As of Thursday last week, I found out that Isabella had passed away.
So I re-sent 170 notices and re-posted the property to invite all the neighbors to come through and deal with or invited all the neighbors for a neighborhood hearing.
We had no people on Monday, no people on Tuesday.
the property is one of pretty much every single property in the area was developed by orleans
homes and they were all developed as duplexes or triplexes the property across the street was
developed as a triplex you think you've said that a little while back mr chairman and the
design board actually approved that as a triplex but just to make sure that the Planning Commission
when they speak on this that the properties in the area pastorious this property specifically
was previously listed as and improved as a duplex and then previously approved as a duplex and the
property duplex okay mr mr mr shirmer we know i i think we understand that no and but all the
properties when these properties when this entire development was laid out all of the properties
were laid out of duplexes at the end of the world so it's not just pastorious i understand you told
us mr shirmer you told us that before mr shirmer you told us that before we understand it i know
i'm just going through that all of the other properties laid out by orleans but i know mr
shirmer you've said that three or four times now we understand that okay one of you one of your
summer i'm just putting i'm just putting it in the record pastorius pastorius pastorius hollis hollis
and the zoning board has previously
granted variances to legalize
the property. Mr. Shermer, we know that. Please.
No. I'm just saying
it was built into this property. Mr. Shermer, you've told us that
numerous times. I know.
This property was built as a duplex in 1941.
I know. I know that, Mr. Sharma.
Questions from the board.
Questions from the board.
Are there interior photos of the interior of the units or layout of the units?
Oh, yeah.
Give me a second.
Okay, so the outside of the property, unfortunately sideways, but the property is an end unit with a separate entrance.
So there's no interior. You showed us the outside. Is there anything in the interior to show how the units are laid out?
mostly focusing on this interior
Mostly focusing on...
okay yes the doors are going up okay separate doors separate stairways separate heating units
it's been this way since 1941
any other questions from the board
i just um uh chair i just want to be clear they're asking for a duplex not a triplex correct
absolutely absolutely but i think his testimony was michael's that when they built this
development on the other side of the street they put in a couple triplexes is what he said
okay and that's my question this is this is definitely a duplex okay okay because every
i got it questions or comments more attorney ilry emberson not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further answers or any commission thank you chairman and good afternoon
david vecta with the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive
plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location. The city
changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 1969. This property has a documented history as
two dwelling units. The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the
proposed use variance for two dwelling units. MI 2022-005-549-1500 Winsome Street. I vote yes.
michael johns my vote is yes cheryl gaston my vote is yes
tennetta graham my vote is yes i win my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel
thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience whose case has not been called
i do not see any further answers thanks everyone see everyone at 2 p.m thank you
good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this afternoon's meetings
with me is our vice chair ismail shaheed president mr chairman our board member
cheryl l gaston president mr chairman our board member tanetta graham president mr chairman
our board member Michael Johns
and our board member
Ty Wynn should be here any minute
also present is our
attorney Hillary Emerson
and our executive director Ian Haggerty
here's our virtual
format, seatings are being recorded
with your participation
you agree to be recorded
a video will be available by contacting
ZBA executive director
at phil.gov
for our courts and offer we ask attorneys
and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All questions should be directed to ZBAexecutiveDirector at phila.gov.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2024-003-927-5344 Ray Street.
That case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Chair, we have David Orphanides with their hand up. I'll allow him to speak.
Hi, Mr. Orphanides. Could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
Certainly. David Orphanides. Last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Is your case 950 Marlboro Street?
It is.
Okay. Could you give me an update of where you stand with that?
sure certainly um we um we met with the coordinating the zoning committee for the coordinating rco on
october 15th we met with the full community on november 12th we received a number of suggestions
and requests for things to consider regarding the project um we are going to be we're scheduled to
So we are going to be scheduled to go back before the zoning committee for FNA on January 14th, and then back before the full community on January 21st. So we're requesting a continuance of today's proceeding to allow that process to play out. And I would imagine we'd be ready to come back before the board sometime in February or thereafter.
go back before the zoning committee for
Thank you very much, Mr. Orfinetti. So MI 2024-005-731-950 Marlboro Street, that case is continued. Thank you.
And number eight, MI 2024-006-029-2218 Rittner Street, that case has been withdrawn.
we're going to go to our add-ons
one mi2024004144 2255 north 22nd street
i vote yes with provisos revised plans one page stamp by stamp by zba on december 18th
2024. Maximum
16 dwelling units, no household
living in the basement.
My vote is yes with proviso.
You're on mute.
My vote is yes with proviso.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes
with proviso. I'm sorry, I was on mute.
My vote is yes
with proviso.
And number three, MI 2024-001-174-1819, Natrona Street, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Carol Gaston, I abstain.
Bayouin, my vote is no.
Ishmael Fahey, my vote is no.
Thank you.
So, we're going to go to number two, which is a pro se. MI 2024-005-359, 6450 Haverford Avenue. Makamba Kulabali is the owner applicant. It's a pro se.
there's a recommendation of support from hmc squared the vote was four in support four abstained
macumba kalubali has been promoted to panelists
good afternoon could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer
Are they muted?
Hi, Makamba Kalabali?
chair i no longer see him in the virtual audience i'm not sure what happened maybe
he's having technical difficulties okay so i'll move on to the next case and then we'll get back
to him. Number five. MI 2024-005-963-5430-44 Paschal Avenue. Frederick Cooper is the owner
applicant. It's a pro se. Unanimous support from Southwest Philadelphia District Services.
Council Member Gauthier agrees with the coordinating RCO and supports the requested
variants to establish a space for individuals with autism.
Chair, I see no one by the name of Frederick Cooper in the virtual audience.
Is there anyone here for 5430 to 44 Paschal Avenue? There may sound like someone else
attended the meeting, but we don't have any proof of lease or anything else like that for another
applicant. Chair, I have a hand up by the name of Katina Carter Geiger. They have been allowed
to speak. Okay. Hi. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Katina Carter Geiger, K-A-T-I-N-A Carter, C-A-R-T-E-R, Geiger, G-E-I-G-E-R.
Where or a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Where or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you involved in this case?
Yes, I am.
Identify what you do there or what your position is?
Yes, it's my program, and I will be leasing a facility from Frederick Cooper.
All right.
Do you have a...
Hold on, excuse me, excuse me, Mr. Chair.
Ma'am, do you have currently a lease with the owner of the property?
um yes they asked me to submit the deed and he gave me the deed to submit but yes I do
okay so ma'am you can only present if you have some sort of legal interest in the property and
that is if you have a signed lease if you do not have a signed lease unfortunately you will not be
able to present only the owner would be able to present because we only have proof that he has an
interest in the property. Okay, I can call him now and ask him to get on. I thought he would
have been on here. I don't know why he's not, but I'm going to call him right now and ask him to get
on. I didn't know. They didn't ask me. They asked me to submit a deed, and I did. I would have
submitted the deed. We did not know. That's why. We said deed lease. It depends on what applies
to you, and for you, Elise, is what applies if you would like to present. But yes, Mr. Chair,
go ahead. I'm going to go
I'm going to go past you a minute
call him and I'll come back in about
15 minutes okay?
Number two
MI 2024
005359
6450 Haverford Avenue
Makamba Kalabali
is he there?
Yes chair
I'm going to promote
him to penalize
Macomba Kalubali, please accept the promotion to become a panelist.
I did.
hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
my name is macumba koulibaly you want me to spell it as well please m-a-k-a-m-b-a-c-o-u-l-i-b-a-l-y
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes this application is for a child care center on the first floor and a single family household
living on the second floor all in the same existing structure. The proposed use child
care center is prohibited in the RM1 zoning district. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon. Ma'am, have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed
and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have my husband here with me. He provides you with where she sent everything to.
Okay, you can proceed to share your screen, and you need to turn your camera on as well.
Hey, my name is Musa Cdibi.
So, I think your wife is the one that's going to testify, okay?
All right, sure.
All right, start your presentation.
um can can i do the presentation with her with her i can testify that uh that i will be truthful
and honest as well i know i know but what i'm saying it's it's her business right we we own
the business together but the you know she is in the application she's the one who found so so
you know so she's gonna have to do the testimony okay we'll get her through the testimony don't
worry okay no problem all right so we're gonna share no no no no you you you can't testify she's
going to testify sorry sorry sorry my fault no that's okay it's okay
pardon me chair this is the court reporter could i have the gentleman uh give his name please
um my name is musa sidibe m-o-u double s as in sam a as in alpha last name sidibe s-i-d as in
David, I, B as in
boy, E as in Edward.
Thank you.
All right.
And forgive us because we lost...
No, no, no. Do me a favor. She's going to testify, sir.
She's going to testify.
On your screen.
Let me start sharing.
It should be that green button on the bottom.
It should be that green button on the bottom, see it's share screen.
See, it's share screen.
Yeah, no, I am sharing my screen.
However, I have to find the file that I'm doing it with first.
All right.
You have to open your file first and then share screen.
Are you seeing the screen now?
Yeah. Okay. Let me try again.
I'm doing it from a phone.
Bill OIT.
All right. Once you hit the share button, does it ask you what you wish to share?
Yes, it's asking me what I want to share, but it's not really like...
Can I say something, sir? Is that okay, please?
Hold on a moment. Let's see if we get her through this, please.
bill it she's on the phone too right unfortunately so here it is here it is here it is
all right
so um i already have a daycare right next door which is on um which is at 64 48 harryford avenue
okay with the capacity of 32 children um we passed on in with that one um so
how many children are you looking to have in here um we haven't we haven't done that yet
so we don't know how many kids we are allowed yet okay sure um this is our floor plan
how many floors you're going to be on one
and the second floor is a residence yes can you blow that up a little bit so we can say it it's
kind of hard to say sure where do you want me to start thank you that where the daycare is right
here um i will no this is the top floor i believe and this is the second floor that's the daycare
there the first floor yes i'm sorry okay the second floor is the private residence yes okay
keep going so you went to the rco yes we passed
Do you have photos of the place?
Yes, we do.
So this is across the street from the daycare center.
This is also 65th and Habibford, the intersection of the daycare center.
This is also another across the street is the cleaners.
This is the cleaners across the street.
This is a seafood restaurant here.
This is a corner store across the street and a hair salon at the corner.
This is the Chinese store at the corner of 65th and Haverford.
This is also a hair salon right next door to the property that we're here for.
And this is the property right here, 6450.
And the daycare center that we're occupying right now,
So the building that I can find right now is 6448.
That's you posted your building.
That's the inside.
So it's all fit out and ready to go?
That's the bathroom in the corner there?
No, that's the door to the basement.
Back here is the door on the left-hand side is the door to the bathroom.
This is the door to the back.
The other door straight ahead is the door to the back.
This is the bathroom.
That's the door to the back.
The one on the right-hand side is the entrance to the upstairs.
The one on the right-hand side is the entrance to the upstairs, and the one on the left-hand side is the entrance into the place that we want to make the daycare center.
That's your application for appeal.
How long have you been in business next door?
Six years.
And it's just to the point it's too crowded in there? Is that what it is?
Just to expand.
Expand.
Okay. And that's where you're going to move into the one with the glass you just showed us?
All right.
All right.
Questions from the board.
You got a question.
In your current daycare, is it the same footprint or the same size as the one space that you're proposing to go into?
Sorry about that.
Smaller or larger?
Sorry about this.
That wasn't true.
You said, is it smaller or larger?
Current daycare.
The current daycare.
I believe it's larger.
How many children do you have there?
I have the capacity of 32 kids, so we're at full capacity at the moment.
All right.
So the intent is not to move sites, but just to have another site next door?
Okay, thank you.
how many uh people do you have working at the uh center that you have now and how many do you
anticipate you're going to have in the new facility um so at the moment i have seven
staff members working in the facility in the building that i'm in now so i anticipate having
about three to four um staff members um um again we're just expanding so i want to make it doesn't
need it just for the infants so yeah the infants are four to one so depending on how many kids
they allow me that'll be the um that'll let me know how many staff members i'll need to have here
and you said that was from like four months to one year is that the age of the children
um no we i'm starting six weeks six weeks okay
any other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney not at this time mr chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon.
David Fecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from RM1, residential multifamily, to RSA5, residential single family.
The zoning of this property dates to the original 1933 zoning code and maps.
This property has a documented history as ground floor commercial use with dwelling units above.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed use variance for a child care center.
MI 2024, 005359, 6450 Haberford Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tannetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowa, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Fahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2024, 005-639-2350 Reed Street.
Alok Sokoloff is the attorney.
Letter of support from Point Breeze Development Coalition.
The vote was five to one.
Applicant also provided 19 form letters, six from the block.
Mr. Sokoloff.
oleg sokolov has been promoted to penalties good afternoon to the board could you please
state your name and spell it for the court's sonographer yep oleg sokolov on behalf of the
applicant swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
The client, the representative for the client who's going to be on the line is Matt Mullen.
The entity itself is 2350 Reed Street, LLC.
Vice Chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Do you agree to either read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Good afternoon, Mr. Shahid.
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and
share your screen. Thank you. All right. Is everyone able to see that? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank
you. Once again, good afternoon, everyone. Oleg Sokolov on behalf of 2350 Reed Street, LLC. And
as I said, I have my client, Matt Mullen, as a member of the entity on the line who will come
on a little later to adopt my testimony. What we have here is a request to build a three-unit
building on a CMX-1 lot, which is adjacent to RSA-5, hence the issuance of the refusal.
The lot dimensions itself support the three units, and as I just said, the only reason
for the refusal is because this CMX-1 lot is adjacent to the RSA-5 district, therefore
held to the zoning requirements of of that residential district so and you'll see that
here from the refusal it isn't a cmx1 and once again the refusal is issued because of its
being adjacent to the rsa5 the owner listed on the refusal has since changed and that's why
i represented that we are 2350 reed street llc so here is the deed for that purchase in july of 2023
This is an empty corner lot on the southeast corner of Reed Street and 24th, as I'll show you in the map.
It's been vacant for some time as far back as we can see into the zoning history, and it is located right on a park.
So it's a great place for some additional residential units in the Point Breeze neighborhood of Philadelphia.
Here's our tax clearance, only showing a balance for the 2025 year, which, as the board probably
hears over and over again, are not due yet, so we are tax compliant.
This is a view south down 24th Street and a view down Reed Street.
This here, where this tree is, is the park right across the street.
And this is the lot we're talking about. So it is a corner property. The frontage would be on Reed, not on 24th.
Our zoning map, you can see that this area is pretty ripe with this type of CMX1 unit on the corner.
This is the park that we're directly across the street from, but we are catty corner from a large CMX2 property, along with some CMX1s here that you can see.
And basically the entire neighborhood has corner properties listed as CMX1 adjacent to RSA5s or RM1s.
Here are the proposed plans for the structure.
Three-unit structure with a roof deck and a pilot house.
The first floor will be a little bit above grade.
And we are looking to do a unit each on each floor.
I'll go through those floor plans in a moment.
I can zoom in a little bit once we have questions or are there any technical issues.
I can also have Mr.
This is the side elevation.
You'll see that having the corner unit is very nice.
We can provide a lot of light along 24th Street to each unit.
and we're not closed in on the other side, so.
And here are the floor plans.
So you'll see we're proposing a three bedroom,
two bath on the first and ground and basement floor,
a two bedroom, one bath on the second floor,
and a two bedroom, one bath on the third floor
with only the third floor unit having access to the roof deck.
and then as the chair stated we do have 19 letters of support I did not count how many
were from the immediate block by a quick count I think we have five from the immediate block
and then a number on 24th street or 23rd street which are adjacent
we actually met with the RCO twice we met with them first in October where we had some discussions
where we had some discussions about the property, not any design changes were requested, but
about the property.
We, they, not any, uh,
further discussion with the community, especially the immediate neighbors was asked for. So that's
when Mr. Mullen went out and did some further community outreach and sought these letters of
support from both the immediate block and just adjoining neighbors. And then we ultimately did
have the formal rco once again on the um 25th of november at which time we we were fortunate enough
to to get support um after some some discussion about the the property itself and the fact that
there are a number of uh multi-fam properties in the area that have also been granted by
variance by this board. Here's our ultimate letter of our notice letter to the neighbors
for the November 25th. That's the second meeting. And our letter of support from
Point Breeze Community Development Corporation. A quick map of a number of variances issued by
this board over the years for the similar type of dwelling units. So you can see they're almost
within a block of the property.
They're all right along this park that are here.
So of a quick search, we found five variances
that have been granted for similar type of requests.
And our posters for today's hearing
and our certificates of mailing to 165 nearby residents.
At this time, if I can bring on Mr. Mullen to adopt my testimony, please.
Mullen?
Good afternoon, Chair. He has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name, sir, and spell for this phenomenon?
Matthew Mullen. Can you hear me?
I can.
It's M-A-T-T-H-E-W.
mullen m-u-l-l-e-n where or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed counsel thank you good afternoon mr mullen um were you on the line
to hear my testimony before the board here today yes and would you adopt it as your own yes okay
um along with entering our exhibits into the record chair that's all we have thank you
so how many on that your particular block or multi-family on that block i don't have the
the exact multi-family um number completely but based on um yeah there there was a three family
dwelling variance granted for 2330 reed street uh matt do you do you know how many other properties
on that on the immediate block are multifamily can you hear me but um i have four um on the park
not on that immediate block but on the perimeter of the park um i have four in my notes
and those are the ones that we've listed so not on the immediate block of the 2300 block
of reed street other than 2330 that you know of um not on reed street no
how wide is that lot the council uh i believe it's 16.
yeah questions from the board yes um how high would the building be in relation to the other
homes with the rooftop there let me get that for you so are you looking to the the top of the
building itself or to the top of the pilot house um well both just tell me both if you can sure
42 uh six 42 and a half feet to the top of the pilot house and then the top of the the structure
level it's 32 eight okay and and this in relation uh to piggyback off of the church questions in
relation to the size of that lot um with the other sizes of the lots on that house is anything
unusual about the um the size of that particular parcel or is it's relational to all the rest of
the parcels on that in the block they it's it's fairly relational to the rest of the parcels on
They, it's, it's fairly relational to the rest of the parcels on the lot. They are all 16. I mean,
the lot they are all
we don't have measurements for them, but in looking at them, they're, they're pretty narrow
properties. Um, okay. And so is there a particular hardship to have three units, uh, in this, in this
build? It's a, certainly a financial hardship given the, the cost of building, um, the ability
to rent the single family unit so we found that and also just the availability of units in the area
what's in the basement all up so the basement would be
here we have basically a utility room and two bedrooms
one bedroom upstairs it's yes one bedroom upstairs and then a larger dining living area
for that for unit one which is the first floor and basement unit the questions for the board
oh the so the so the first floor unit is by level with it's a four bedroom unit
it's a three bedroom unit um there there is this additional recreational room that that you know
it's a unclear how that space will be used but we did not want to put a second bed in a third
bedroom into the basement unit that's that's good you thought of that what's the um what's the the
depth of the basement slab below grade uh i will turn to matt who will be better equipped to answer
that kind of technical question so your your question was um how deep is a total basement or
how how how low below grade how low below grade is the slab right yeah um so you'll be about six
feet um below grade but these are all um conditions that will need to be um dealt with when we are in
the field um it's primarily based on where the neighboring footer is but as the plan right now
On the plan, it shows five feet below grade, not six feet.
I stand corrected.
And it looks like from this elevation that your egress well windows are below grade.
Correct.
Which is always a concern for me.
The higher you can raise the basement out of the ground, for me, the better, just in terms of livability.
um if somebody's going to have a you know a bedroom or any kind of living space in the
basement that's always a concern and you have a 38 foot max height i'm assuming so you've got room
to to go up the other question that i have where where is this building in relationship to
the house next door um now the house next door has a has a porch and so are you is your is your
build coming to the face of the masonry wall of the of the building next door or are you coming
out to the edge of the porch so we'll be um in line with where their front door is not the porch
okay it's basically where the grass is looking at it's basically the we won't be moving into the
the current concrete that's there for the sidewalk
okay so you're you so you're set back so you okay because you don't on your site plan you don't show
that on your site plan it's difficult to show see that on your site on your site plan it looks like
you're at the face of wherever the property ends next door you know what i mean yeah i think it's
just because there was the neighboring property wasn't set in the site plan you see there on the
left it shows as if you're right at the edge of where their property is and it's hard to tell
but but you're saying that your your your building will start the front of the face
of your building will be at the face of the maestri wall of the building of the house next next door
correct right yeah yes i believe so i would honestly have to check double check with the
architect but um from how it's laid out and the other new projects on the because i'm looking
yeah yep so i'm looking at the the pavement just the blocks of the pavement if they're all five
feet that's like 15 like maybe 20 feet and it doesn't look like you have that on your site plan
so that's all
So that's a concern. I don't know. How is it working in context with the block?
The intention is to be set to not block the front porch.
The intention is to be set to not block the front porch.
I think there needs to be some clarity.
But you're not going to have a porch.
Right.
They're not going to have a porch.
So that was my question, because since you're not going to have a porch, if you're going
to the face of the porch next door, then you literally are blocking their view, right?
Because you're going to have this wall.
this three-story wall next to the porch.
So, and it's unclear from the plan, the site plan,
you know, if that, you know,
the hatched area is the edge of the porch
or is that in fact the edge of the maestry wall
of the house next door.
So I think we just need clarity on it.
And I have a concern with the depth
of the basement below grade.
And I have a problem with the basement living.
period so that's not a question that's just a statement
uh matt do you do you have certainty on whether this this hash area is to the masonry wall of
the neighboring property that i'm correct the intention is never to enclose that porch obviously
from the one side no i believe we are in line we are not up to the front of the porch we're
in line with the masonry wall of the neighbor's house not the porch the front of our building
and then to touch base on the basement um we prefer to to raise the basement up out of the
ground when we do the excavation we dig a test pit to see where the neighboring footer is and
in most cases we try to match that and in this area it's uh known to be higher the the basement
um so our goal and it's best for us to not underpin as well uh we plan on um matching
the neighboring footer and raise that and get that extra 30 well i mean we have to 38 feet
to go so we have room to play right because you're at 32 feet you said yes yes 32 and a half
32 and a half, and then the max is 38.
They've got a ways to go.
They just don't want it to be called four stories.
We also don't want to be too high above the neighboring property with the pilot house on.
Right, exactly.
All right.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes good afternoon again mr chair this is jason and i will be your co-host for the session
i have kimberly done i had a uh kimberly down with her hand raised but
they have put their hand down as of now what else so no no further hands wait
okay the hand is up again they've been allowed to speak
Could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
My name is Kimberly Daniel, K-I-M-B-E-R-L-Y, Daniel, D-A-N-I-E-L.
Swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
I'm directly next door to the house.
Actually, Mr. Mullen knocked on my door to ask me if I would sign his petition.
At that time, I was still renting that house, but I'm actually in the process of purchasing the house right now.
Our closing date is January 10th, 2020.
The house next door you're buying?
Yes, sir. I'm actually living in it currently right now.
Yeah, sure. So what kind of testimony do you have for us?
first of all the notice that was on the fence it was out there a day and then it was gone
i'm happy we took a picture of it so that we were able i'm able to be on this call
it's a very narrow uh parcel of land i can't really see how three families are going to live
in it uh and i believe i mean actually living next door to something like that i think if i
had known that, I might not have even purchased my house.
All right. Anything else you want to add?
No, I just wanted to make sure that I was heard.
Mr. Sokoloff, do you have any questions?
No questions.
Okay. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
no further any commission thank you chairman and good afternoon david effecto with the city
No further.
Commission.
planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the cmx1 commercial mixed use of zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition or
circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the
zoning code. This is a primarily single family block face. The city planning commission recommends
that the board deny the proposed use variants for three dwelling units. MI 2024-005-639-2350
Reed Street, I vote no. Michael Johns, my vote is no. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
my vote is no
my vote is no
my vote is no
thank you council
number five
thank you number five
MI 2024
005 963
5430 to 44
Pascal Avenue
Frederick Cooper please
Mr. Cooper's hand
I have a Katina
with the hand raised
I'll allow them to speak and see if they're
well for this case
Could you please state your name
And spell for the stenographer
Katina Carter-Geiger
K-A-T-I-N-A
You've already been sworn
Have you got a hold of Mr. Cooper
Yes, he's on here
He says he's on here
Okay, we're going to get Mr. Cooper
Please
James do we see Mr. Cooper
not yet
Mr. Cooper
if you are in the virtual audience
please raise your hand and wait to be
sworn in
Ms. Geiger did you
send him the link that you
received
for this hearing
Ms. Geiger
can you please unmute
Ms. Geiger are you still available
I'm here
I sent him the mute that I received
I sent him the link that I received
I see there's multiple of your name
on here so he may be under
your name but he does need to raise his hand
tell Fred he needs to raise his hand
and let them know that he's on here
He needs to raise his hand
They're calling for him to talk now
And let them know what he's on here
He doesn't know how to raise his hand
He doesn't know how to raise his hand
He doesn't know how to raise his hand
He's on audio
We're going to move on to the next case
Could you get a hold of him and then try to figure out how we can get him on?
We'll be back to you in about a half hour, okay?
Number six, MI 2024-005-968-8000 Lanola Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from Winchester Park Civic Association.
Nine in support, two in non-opposition.
could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name is Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Where or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client or relationships in the property?
Yes, my client is Tran Nam Du Pham.
He's the owner of the property.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to exact accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and you can share your screen.
Thank you.
Just make sure I have the right screen up.
I think I do.
I think I have...
Sure screen.
All right. So I represent the property owner at 8,000 Lanola Street. This is a single family home
and my client's not a developer. He's just a single family homeowner who recently had a young
kid with his wife and he was just looking to expand his the inside of his house by converting
the garage into additional living space and didn't know that he needed all these approvals and we'll
go through the presentation you'll see other homes are just like this where they take the garage
and make it into additional living space so it's a two-door car garage and he put like an additional
living entrance that kind of centered the the living area and you'll see that in the pictures
and then put a window where the other garage door was so you know during my presentation
we'll review the notice of refusal and then we have a letter of support from the winchester
park civic association so everyone at that meeting either voted in support of this project or non
on opposition. Not one person who attended this very well attended meeting voted in opposition.
And then we'll show you pictures of nearby converted garages. That's why my client thought,
oh, I could just do this. Didn't realize there's a whole zoning code and building code that he
needs to follow. And that's where he hired my firm after he got a violation against the property.
And we're trying to legalize that from a zoning perspective. And then obviously we'll do that
from a building code perspective as well then we'll review maps of the area so from a zoning
perspective as well as a google maps perspective again we're just keeping the single family zoning
use we're just legalizing the conversion of the garage into additional living area then photographs
of the property as well you know from inside and out including that area where he can convert where
the conversion was or is simple floor plans or meeting notice and proof of value of that notice
our application for appeal that we filed to the CBA, the deed to the property,
showing my client's the owner of the property, and the Certificate of Tax Clarence.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Tran virtually raise his hand and be sworn in,
and I'll have a few questions for him.
Notice refusal, pretty straightforward.
We're taking a two-car garage.
We're converting it into livable square footage.
you know we're getting a refusal surface parking spaces and detached garages and carports are
prohibited and required front side and rear yards so now or you know we are parking now is in front
of our building and that's why we're getting these refusals it's a pretty big driveway we
still have to be able to park multiple cars there not at issue and not out of character
to many surrounding properties.
Letter of support, again, you know,
support nine members of the zoning committee for the RCO,
11 members of the community,
and in non-opposition, two members of the zoning committee
or the executive board for the RCO,
and 11 members of the community.
Again, not one person voted in opposition.
And then I guess this is what they provided as well
as proof of, you know, how people voted.
And then nearby converted garages. So my office did an analysis of properties within a couple block radius. In addition to ours, there are 14 other instances nearby of this happening similarly.
So you have 2807 Winchester, 2904 Home, 2908 Home, 2910 Home, 2912 Home, 2918 Home, 1810, 8010 Nervon, 8012 Nervon, 8014 Nervon, 8016 Nervon.
And it goes on and on. I'm not going to keep going through it.
But again, this is a solid single family neighborhood.
We're not changing the use of the property in that way.
Photographs of the property, as you saw on the front page, we just converted this two-car garage to additional living space as my client's family is growing.
This is Linoa from the front of the property.
This is the zoning hearing posters from Linoa and Nirvan, which is the intersecting public street.
This is Nolan to the right of the property, to the left of the property, Nirvana to right
of the property, to the left of the property.
This is the rear of our home.
This is the additional pictures of the rear of our home, side yard, side yard.
Interior photos. This is the converted garage area. So, you know, what my client is looking to do. More interior photos, very well-maintained and kept property.
Interior photos.
This is the converted garage area, so that, you know.
And this is everything we showed the community as well. So I just, you know, made sure that it was, you know, the same as what I'm showing this EBA today. They asked us for a lot of photos inside.
And then, you know, just our plans and drawings. So we're just making that conversion to make that into livable square footage. And this was the previous, I'm sorry, this was the previous two-car garage with the garage doors.
It got converted into a double door for now a more pronounced front entryway for the single-family home. And then, you know, closed it up to make a smaller window.
RCO meeting notice, 57 addresses were mailed this notice, proof of mailing of that notice
or application for appeal.
My clients actually started this process by themselves.
They got kind of caught up, and that's when we kind of helped them out a little bit.
The deed to the property showing that they own the property.
Certificate of tax clearance.
Those taxes are not yet due until the end of March, but that's why it's showing up.
With that being said, I would ask that Tran virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Yeah, I'm looking for them right now.
Patricia Guarana has been allowed to speak.
Hi, yes, this is Patricia Guarana.
I'm a resident that lives up the street from the mentioned house.
We're trying to find the owner first, and we'll call you as soon as we get the owner, okay?
I'm looking for him right now.
I know he is.
He's not the most technologically savvy person.
Mr. Knackamson, you're an officer of the court.
We will accept your testimony.
Questions from the board?
Okay, so how close were these other conversions to this property?
And do you know if these were legal conversions or just?
So I can share my screen again.
I believe there are legal conversions.
My office tends to not like show stuff that has not gotten permits.
i cannot be 100 concerned but okay the conversion you show different addresses how close are they
or they are on the same i have a map of the area so here is our property right here we're number one
I'm sorry.
You see better?
Where are you?
Your cursor, I'm sorry.
Right here.
That's us, number one.
Ah, okay.
All right, SD.
And then all the conversions are within a block radius.
They're all here in Nervon.
So we're at the corner of Nervon and Linola.
So you have 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, and 15.
they're just down the street on Nervon and then you have some of these on homes which are down
the street right here. So they're all within the block radius and then there's one on Winchester
that's right here. Cheryl, Cheryl, you, you, oh yeah yeah there you go. Okay um and how many
bedrooms are in this house um i'm not 100 sure this was not to increase the amount of bedrooms
this is just to create a more pronounced living area because they have a like a child now so
they're spending a lot of times in the living room but i believe it's i can't how many people
are living in this house just a couple like husband and wife a couple who've now had baby
and they need all this much more living space.
all this much more living space yeah i just need more common area space not the bedrooms but more
Yeah, they just need more common area space.
so you know as a father myself i know that i didn't spend i spent a lot of time in a living
area just letting my kids crawl around and then eventually run around and so i think that's what
they were looking for was just a little bit more common living area space for their kid okay but
it's nothing that's been built above below ground this is you know you know front door essentially
and they just want additional living area space for themselves.
And they didn't, you know, they're not developers.
They didn't know what they were doing in terms of having to get the zoning
approval. And then obviously once we're done here,
we're going to have to get a CO for that additional space as well.
Okay. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Any other questions from the board?
I have a question about the surface parking.
Was the asphalt pad already two lanes wide?
And was any vegetated area or grass reduced in the expansion of the house?
My understanding, talking to them, is that the only change that they made was to convert the garage.
Everything else was the same when they purchased the property.
And then, you know, obviously, as part of this process, we had to submit a drawing with the streets department that they had to stamp off.
and that if there was any increase in the size of the parking pad,
that probably would have been noted as part of the refusal.
The questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes we had a hand up by patricia i'm gonna i'll know the speaker
hi um this is patricia i think i swore you in already am i correct you started to but then we
got a little okay sure so then i'll then i'll swear you in um could you spell your name for
the court stenographer sure it's patricia p-a-t-r-i-c-i-a last name is guarna g-u-a-r-n-a
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed are you a neighbor i am yes and i have never received any kind of notification
in the mail uh about them making any modifications to the house i just so happened to notice the
zoning notice one day. My fear is that no one lives in that house. So I'm not exactly sure
what the attorney was saying about a couple and a child. I walk by that house probably three times
every day. The house has been vacant for months. Our concern of what they want to do is they want
to run it out and make it a multifamily home. And this neighborhood is not zoned for that.
We moved into Winchester Park because it's a nice neighborhood and to avoid rentals or, you know, transients moving around and into and out of our neighborhood.
And that's our fear with this house.
So I'm not sure what he's referring to when he says that there's a family who lives there, but there is no one living in that house and has not been for months.
They are, I believe they have very intention to turn it into a rental.
Now, do you have any questions?
Yeah, I mean, so the only thing I could say in terms of whether she received a notice,
we're required to mail notices within a 250 square foot radius.
I believe when I gave my presentation, there were 54 addresses that were part of that notification requirement.
We have proof of mailing.
I know that this is in the Northeast where the properties tend to be a little bit larger in size.
So I don't know where Miss Gurna lives in relation to that.
So maybe she's outside the 250 square foot radius, but I'm not, I am not.
I am actually on Hargrave street.
My corner is Hargrave and Linola. So I am definitely within that rating.
Yeah. And I don't mean to pry, but like I have the addresses here.
I can tell you which, if you give me your address and I don't mean to like ask,
like on public forum,
But whatever those addresses are is where we mail those notices.
I saw your notifications.
The list that you provided, my address was not on there.
All right.
Well, that's fair.
So, I mean, again, we're just giving those addresses by the Philadelphia Planning Commission.
So we just blindly send them out because that's our requirement.
As far as, you know, converting it into a multifamily, there is no intention to do that.
and if we did i mean at least according to my clients but if we did you know we would have to
come back here because this is a i didn't even look it's just a rsa2 property and we would have
to get additional zoning approval for that there's no intention there's no division of the property
interior into two units. I know that my clients
interior into two units. I know that my clients have been overseas somewhat lately.
They're in Asian descent. So I think they're Vietnamese and they've been seeing family. So
I can't speak to how often they've been to the property lately, but I know they do live there
and they have a child. But my concern is just the rental. We don't want to live in a neighborhood
where we have people moving in and out.
We've, you know, pay a lot of taxes.
We've paid a lot for our homes
and we just don't want to be exposed
to that kind of environment.
Thank you.
No, I hear, we had a very well attended meeting.
I think a total of like,
I think 20 people at least voted
and they all voted either in support
or in non-opposition.
My understanding is that the district council members,
Zoney Aid, Stan was also at the meeting.
I don't know if he was, you know,
he's in attendance here,
But, you know, he would verify, too, that there was great support for this project and it's not out of character to have this type of additional space for the conversion of the garage.
If there's 20 people that showed up to the meeting and there's about 300 houses in our development, I think that's a pretty poor turnout.
I didn't even know about the meeting. This is the first I ever heard about the meeting.
So I'm pretty confident that a lot of our neighbors did not know about this meeting.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chairman and good afternoon david
vecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the rsa2 residential single family zoning at this location
the appellant seeks permission for parking spaces in their required front yard the proposal will
not injure the use of adjacent properties and matches the character of the block face the city
planning commission recommends that the board grant or post variants for parking in the required front
yard my 2024 005 968 8000 linole street i vote yes john my vote is yes charles gaston my vote is no
tennetta graham my vote is yes i own my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
knockamson could you please stay on please so number seven mi2024-006-023-2201 south third
street mr knockamson just for the record could you state your name alan knockamson could you
identify your clients and their relationship to the property? Yes, my client is Stephen Benna and
Stephanie Oliar, who are the equitable owners of the property by waiving the agreement of sale.
There's a letter of support from the Whitman Council, which has a proviso of interior trash
storage, and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla. Our Vice Chair has a
few questions for you, sir. Council, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate
towards accuracy we do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes we have thank you council
please proceed and share your screen thank you all right so this is 2201 south third street
this is an exciting date hopefully for my clients who are small business owners who are looking
to use this property as their first office space, dedicated office space.
Currently, they have a home office where they live in South Philly.
So they're under-contracted by 2201 South 3rd Street, which is 3rd and Jackson.
And it's previously been used by one of the unions as their offices and classroom.
So, you know, we filed a zoning permit application specifically, you know, as office use, business and professional office use within an existing structure for two floors.
And it has a long hit, even though this property is an RSA 5 property, it's never been used as single family use.
We have history as far as 1954, where it's been multifamily and with commercial on the ground floor, as a furniture store, as a private club, and most recently, like I said, as offices and classroom for one of the unions in the city.
So during my presentation, we'll review the notice of refusal.
Again, the letter of support from the Whitman Council Incorporated.
It was a very well attended meeting.
and actually the council member was there too and they were enthusiastically in support they
actually even voted in front of me i think unanimously we also have a letter of non-opposition
from the council member's office as well we have a petition of nearby neighbors in support of this
of nearby neighbors in support of this we can show you the property history here
we can show you the property history here
and then it's even though this is rsa5 property it's a corner property it's not out of character
to have non-residential uses on these corner properties for rsa5 properties so we'll show
you that a little bit about viva environmental health and safety the company uh who's going to
go in there for office use maps of the area photographs of the property in the surrounding
the area our simple plans and drawings we're not changing anything up really again it's office use
already i think maybe we'll change some i don't even we're changing walls inside but nothing
structural uh and our meeting notice again probably have like 30 40 people there our application for
appeal our agreement of sale which is conditioned our purchase condition on the board's approval
and as soon as we can you know get the board's approval we'll hopefully close on this property
and our certificate of tax clearance for the previous or the current owner.
And then at conclusion, my presentation, I'll ask that Steve,
one of the members or people on the agreement of sale as the buyer,
will virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Notice refusal, RSA 5 property.
And, you know, you can see here that, you know,
that this is for proposed business and professional office use.
I do think that they did try to get a, they did get also approval in 2023 for group medical practitioner, because I think someone else was going to buy the building to do that. And maybe the sale fell through, I don't know. But again, the most previous use of the property were offices in the classroom for the electrical union.
Letter of support. Again, we don't disagree with the proviso. We have no intention to store trash outside or any dumpster. It's office use. And then the letter of non-opposition, the petition that my client circulated nearby properties, as well as form letters to support.
property history again i guess this was the last known actual use of the property and it was
offices in the classroom for the electrical union and then again not out of character to have
rsa5 properties corner properties have commercial use and we have nine eight other instances other
in our own. Number one in green is us. And then we have two through nine, which are basically in
a two block radius. So almost like every corner is used for commercial use. And again, the history
of this property, long history of this property for 70 years has not been single family use.
So 2149 South Third Street, you can see is non-residential use. 2200 South Third Street
across the street from us, non-residential use. 2240 South 3rd Street, non-residential use. 2241
South 3rd Street, non-residential use. Actually, I think this is where we had our meeting too
for the community meeting. 2301 South 3rd Street, non-residential use. 2300 South 3rd Street,
non-residential use, and so on and so on. And then a little bit about my client. They do
environmental consulting, they actually do clean up. I think they do testing for the school
district. I think that's one of their major clients. Again, no environmental use, you know,
for, you know, within the premises. That was a discussion point that we said, no, we're just
using it for our offices. My client has a total of 17 employees. Most of them are off-site doing
the testing. They have like three or four employees that are going to be in the offices themselves.
And just a little bit about Steven, you know, certified, accomplished, been doing this for almost 20 years, has had his business for a few years, and now he's ready to, like, get a dedicated office here, and he's excited about this opportunity.
and then maps of the area again we are rsa5 but um i don't think the history would say that this
is a single family uh zoning zone property in essence again maps of the area again we're at
the corner third and jackson photographs of the property we're not changing the building footprint
in any way this is a two this has been a two most used most recently used as a two-story
commercial property. Proof of posting for today's hearing. South 3rd Street to the right of the
property, to the left of the property, Jackson Street to the right of the property, to the left
of the property. You can see even the commercial use here at this corner. Architectural plans and
drawings, pretty simple. You walk in, there's a little meeting conference room, there's a break
room, a bathroom, a little storage. They have their garage here. They have a basement area, I guess,
for more storage and then the offices are really on the second floor they have like one two three four
and then the offices are really on the second floor they have like one two three four office
five offices on the second floor with another bathroom on the second floor as well rco meeting
notice we had our meeting on november 20th at 6 30 p.m we emailed that notice a few weeks beforehand
to the rco relevant parties and while we emailed them we showed them that we mailed that notice to
186 addresses. These are the addresses. These are the proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal that we filed on my client's behalf. Our agreement of sale
showing that the equitable title my clients have as well as that it's still good. And again,
this deals contingent on my client getting his owning approval. And there's no taxes even though
even though they're not, they weren't technically due until March 31st of 2025, the payment.
With that being said, I would ask that Stephen virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Stephen, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Stephen Venna, S-T-E-V-E-N-V-E-N-A.
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes please proceed councillor yeah steven you heard everything i had to state about your zoning
matter yes is it true and correct uh one one correction the most recent use was a doctor's
office it was used as a doctor's office okay i was mistaken sorry about that uh and do you
adopted testimony is your own yes all right thank you questions from the board
yeah um can we how how do you get into this property is that a ramp yeah there's a ramp
that's what i'm understanding steven is that correct there's there are two entrances one up
a handicap accessible ramp, and then there's
another entrance on Jackson Street as well.
Is that where steps are? Yes, there are steps there.
Okay, and then the fence just goes around the property from where
the steps are around to where the ramp is.
Yeah, so this is, Stephen, is this the step, the entrance
on Jackson? Yes. And then
this is the ramp on third street that you kind of come up right yes yeah okay all right thank you
welcome questions or comments more yeah i'm sorry do we have um were there interior pictures of the
space yeah drawing yeah we just had drawings it's it's not in that it's not our space yet um
So I do apologize by not giving interior photos.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions or comments for our attorney, Hillary Ambers?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon.
David Fechter with the City Planning Commission,
Chairman and Board Members.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
This property has a documented history as a medical office.
The zoning code contemplates a business and professional office as having no greater impact than a medical office.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant a proposed use variance for a business and professional office.
MI 2024-006-023-2201 South 3rd Street. I vote yes with Proviso. Interior trash storage.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Teneda Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ayah Lynn, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Nockamson.
Number nine, MI 2024-006-037-2851 Salmon Street.
Michael Phillips is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of support from Southport Richmond Civic Association
and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Mr. Phillips.
Mr. Phillips, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the board, Michael Phillips, M-I-C-H-A-E-L-P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S, with Claire Harrison Harvey Bransberg.
P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S with Claire Harrison Harvey Bransberg on behalf of High Top Real Estate and Development and Salmon Investment.
Excuse me, 2026.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Before Mr. For Ishmael talks, Hillary, do you want to talk a little bit about the corrective refuel?
If you haven't talked to him yet.
Yeah, no, I haven't had a chance and I apologize. Mr. Phillips, on the refusal, it does not list, even though they are in other parts of your documents in your packet, the refusal itself does not list the addresses that are included within the unity of use. And that's something that does need to be corrected by L&I.
um i did note that you um did submit revised plans that would eliminate one of the refusals
so we can either and we can talk about this offline we can either just ask ellen i to issue
a corrected refusal or you can request an amended refusal and have those revised plans as part of
your refusal um instead so but either way we can't we can't vote it today we just we needed that
at a minimum need those addresses on there on the uh okay i thought they were
all there but i do see that they only put um 2851 didn't list the specific so in terms of
listing the parcels because they put you know they said there's eight but it doesn't say one
eight okay um yeah like i said i saw the addresses elsewhere in your packet but they have to be on
the refusal so but we can yeah we get that's not a problem okay um our vice chair our vice
chair has a few questions for you sir yeah i was gonna say we can proceed today that that's not a
problem but we'll just need to get that that corrected and like i said we could even amend
it with your revised plans um if you wanted to do it that way so we can decide that offline
okay that sounds great counselor do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate
to his accuracy uh i do with uh the caveat of of what board council just noted understood uh
have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance at his hearing yes i have thank you counsel um please proceed and share
screen. All right. So good afternoon again. Michael Phillips here on behalf of High Top
Real Estate and Development for a project at 2851 Salmon Street. And just to give all
of the addresses. It would be 2851, 2853, 2855, and 2857 Famine Street, as well as
their addresses along East Cambria that are 2724 to 28, 2730, 2732, and 2734 East Cambria.
And our application proposes to create a unity of use to treat these eight properties as one.
Ultimately, we will consolidate all the properties and to erect two buildings to be used as a total 12 townhomes.
So this would be a planned unit development.
Two buildings, each would have six townhomes in them for a total of 12, and each would have one car parking.
We have our meeting with South Fort Richmond Civic Association, where they voted to support, and Councilman Squilla's letter.
This, to orient you, these are the lots.
There's not a delineation here on this one on the bottom right, but that is split into two.
But you'll see there are eight total RSA 5 lots.
These four are all approximately 2,000 square feet.
They're 20 by 100.
And then these lots fronting Cambria all have 40 feet of depth in their more undersized lots.
Right now it is vacant.
And here's the aerial.
You'll see it's just vacant, unimproved land.
Historically, it's been used as a parking lot, but my client is not using it as a parking lot.
It's just people have parked here historically.
The rear abuts the I-95 overpass.
Here's Cambria, and here is Salmon Street.
And a lot of this property to the rear was condemned as part of the I-95 improvements, just some more aerial views.
So here's contextual just for what the lot looks like.
Here's contextual just for what the lot looks like.
Again, this is...
Again, this is the corner at the southeast corner of Salmon and East Cambria.
And this is the house right next door.
This is 2749 Salmon.
Not our property, but it was recently approved for use as a duplex.
And then to the rear of the property, as you'll see, this is the overpass.
There's all this new parking that SEPTA has.
We've actually been in discussions with them about how members of the community can utilize this parking because it's there.
It exists, but it's underutilized.
So here's the zoning plan.
And as you can see, there are two buildings.
And we propose that they both front Salmon Street so that we can utilize an existing curb cut that's there to provide one car parking for each of the homes.
So the homes would each be 2,250 square feet each.
And here is the visual so you can see the orientation.
We proposed to orient the streets this way in terms of a northwest orientation so that there would be increased light and air.
None of the homes would back up to the I-95 overpass.
and we can provide that drive aisle with one-to-one parking dimensionally the plans
comply there was a refusal issued for not having four bicycle parking spaces but we have
updated our plans to show those spaces here are just some more views from salmon in cambria
this is from cambria 95 again this area here to the to the left of your screen that's you know
where the overramp comes right up to the property.
We just did this so you could actually see, you know, how those units would be oriented.
And this looks down the drive aisle from Damond Street and just a few more views.
In terms of the layouts, we believe, you know, keeping these at 2,250 square feet is contextual with the neighborhood.
We don't want these units to be oversized, but again, we're not looking at this as a density clay.
We're looking at what makes sense here for this overall 12,000-square-foot lot.
12 units on 12,000 square feet equates to about 1,000 square feet per unit.
You'll see we have three bedrooms, two on the third floor with one on the first floor and the one-car parking there.
And then in terms of just showing you some more context of the neighborhood, so here
are the, in red, this is our lot.
You'll see the blue dots are where there are some multifamily.
Again, this is a duplex that is directly adjacent to us.
There are some other two and three unit properties.
The biggest change was this Charles Carroll Public School was adaptively reused recently
and has 69 units with 30 parking spaces.
In terms of also the property sizes,
we'll note the 1,000 square feet is all contextual
with these homes in between Cambria and Auburn,
as well as the homes opposite us on Cambria.
And you'll see, we put the lot sizes here.
They're all between 957 to 1,000.
So again, we think this is contextual
with what's in the environment.
If you look at the eight units, again, the ones fronting salmon are 2,000 square foot lots.
Looking at the project right next to us that received a variance for a duplex, one way of looking at this is if you put a duplex on each of those lots, that's eight plus the four front in Cambria would be 12.
But, you know, we believe that, you know, creating one lot or the unity of use to create one zoning lot will allow us to create this drive aisle and make the homes fit in a way that is much better for the community and especially having that one-to-one parking I know is, you know, very important.
And so, you know, we looked at this as, you know, trying to do something that works for the community.
We're trying to improve this vacant, unimproved lot, bring 12 townhomes.
They would all be for sale and they would all be market rent.
And I have Ryan Lobauer with HITOP Real Estate and Development, who's an in-house architect, who prepared the plans, who can answer any questions the board may have, as well as Jennifer Rosenberg, VP of Development for HITOP, who is online and would agree to accept my testimony as her own.
Why don't we have your testimony accepted, and then if there's questions about design, we'll bring the architect on, okay?
If there's questions about design, we'll bring the architect on, okay?
Why are Lou Barrows being allowed to speak?
Oh, I would ask if Jennifer Rosenberg could be allowed to speak?
I'm sorry.
Jennifer, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Can you hear me?
I can.
Jennifer Rosenberg, J, E, N as in Nancy, N as in Nancy, I, F, E, R, Rosenberg, R, O, S as in Sally, E, N as in Nancy, B as in boy, E, R, G.
We are affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Jennifer, you heard my testimony a moment ago regarding the project?
Do you agree that everything I stated is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
Yes, it is.
And do you agree to adopt my testimony as if it were your own?
I do, yes.
I have no further question.
Questions from the board.
Yes, I have a couple of questions.
What's the setback from the property, that triplex property?
Eight feet.
In this front.
where you yeah and i have uh here you can see right here this this setback is uh eight feet
i didn't hear what you say it again oh i've uh eight i believe we have an eight foot setback here
i will uh confirm but i believe it was eight
yeah that's correct mike and what's the what's the so this is all considered one
one parcel yes so the so you said you're going to be subdividing it consolidating it and
subdividing it into two lots right now it's eight lots so um ultimately the plan would be
consolidating it into one lot and this would be um a planned unit development like they would be
12 separate you know condominium or or townhome units for sale
what's the uh i see on your your um plan you show the um drive aisle and you show
um just sort of the the radius of a car coming out of that first
garage but how does the car get out of that end garage i don't see a turning radius or
a three-point turn to get out, but they have to back out.
Brian, can you speak to how this, I guess it's Unit F and Unit L cars would exit out of that?
Yeah, they should have enough room to back out fully and then make the turn back down the drive
aisle. The two turning radiuses shown at the front basically also show they have enough space
because it's just a single um parking space in the end units so they have room to actually
back towards the end of the drive aisle before they begin their turn towards the front so they
would be entering salmon street uh basically with the front of the car pointed towards salmon
the drive out all right is it 20 is it 20 feet 20 22 22 feet
Okay. Any sunshadow studies done?
We did not do any sunshadow studies for this. Again, we kept everything within the 38 feet compliance and are not seeking any height variances.
sorry rendering sorry just to comment on that the the renderings shown here are accurate with
regard to the relationship with the sun um 95 uh is basically to the south and that actually does
create a shading effect on the neighborhood but as you can see as the sun moves east west this
rendering that we're looking at right now on the screen that's uh towards the morning before the
son kind of passes um or i'm sorry hold on a second just get my bearings my concern is that
the units that front here that face that house that whole street is going to be whatever that
that alley or whatever is going to be in shadow and you've only got eight feet from the face of
your unit to the, to the side of that property, very sort of dark, narrow passageway for eight.
narrow passageway for eight oh is it six how many units are on that site six six units
so they will receive the sun from the drive aisle i understand your point about you know we're we're
we have this relationship with the triplex um they do get sun um during the day but uh overall
because we're able to get windows on both ends of these units uh they they should get ample uh
daylight um as that sun sort of crosses uh across the uh as it crosses the sky it'll be a varied
light throughout the day but it would be great to see us some kind of sun study on that's such a
narrow um walkway to get into a unit it's just uh it's just it's it's narrow it's cavernous
and it seems as if it's going to be very dark without kind of understanding how it's going to
you know look understood we'd be you know willing to uh you know put additional um lights in there
as well i mean we felt that orienting the homes this way instead of attaching them
um in an east-west fashion would actually improve the light and air because we wouldn't you know
we'd be able to both have it you know we have it pretty much from all four sides um whereas if we
oriented the homes differently um you know we'd really only be looking at um you know in front
of us and then behind uh you still have that 95 overpass so it's you know not ideal but we would
absolutely put additional lighting there and um you know could do that
the questions from the board yes um how far is this from this 95 overpass and will there be
noise issues um yeah so it i mean it directly if i could uh well yeah it directly abuts um
the the overpass um we felt that you know by orienting the homes this way we could
you know diminish some of the or uh you know diminish some of the the sound um you know we
will um you know make ryan if you could speak to you know any anything that would be done to the
units in terms of sound proofing uh but it's just you know the kind of the nature of the beast of
where we are um that you know 95 is there i do believe and i don't think it's reflected but i
kind of the new 95 work did put larger sound barriers up so you know you can't see the property
but you know Ryan did you know can you speak to just what we've done in terms of you know sound
proofing and and how that'll be treated yeah I think you're correct like it is it's a hardship
to be located this close to 95 like in the neighborhood that was one of our concerns with
trying to design the site orientation. So by having the houses really oriented so that if we
did this as a variety, they would all have some direct face orientation to 95. So there'll be
some mitigation from that. But additionally, what I've talked about with our owner is that the
windows would be upgraded. That's probably the biggest sound transfer would be just the noise
communicating through uh the windows um but yes you're you're right like that is a that is a
concern we believe that the way that we've designed the site is going to mitigate that in part and
then the homes themselves will have additional upgrades to their acoustic profile to help with
that okay and then my second question you said something about how uh you uh no longer had a
refusal for providing um bicycle parking spaces yes can you speak to that and is that is that
still well i don't see it as one of the refusals anymore so yeah we we put um you'll note it
submitted a proviso plans um it's hard to see but there's a bicycle parking here in unit f
another bicycle here at unit L and then we put two more bicycle parking spaces towards the
front of the building as well here and then here to get the four in. I think K and E also have the
bicycle parking spaces within the garage. Oh here it is yeah I'm sorry so yeah it's even hard for
me to see but at the very top of E and K so those are the four bicycle parking spaces we put in to
eliminate that refusal. All right. Thank you. The
questions from the board. Are you required to comply with
complete streets design? We are utilizing
design for this we are utilizing uh the existing curb cut that's there and i believe
um that a streets application has been um submitted uh ryan can you just speak to that
because i think you would have been the one that that is correct and we did list the complete
streets design criteria on the streets department application so we did get our approvals
the questions from the board questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson
not at this time mr chair why should our comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chairman and good afternoon
David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The city rezoned this part of Port Richmond in 1973.
At that time, the zoning of the property changed from R-10 residential multifamily to R-10A residential single-family.
The appellant requests a use variance for multifamily units, multiple printable buildings on a lot.
the proposal is equal to the number of dwelling units that would be allowed if the lots were
consolidated and re-subdivided however in addition to standards in the zoning code our planners must
review the proposal in relation to livability of the proposed units and the public realm
we see 12 dwelling units with no open area except the drive aisle the city planning
commission recommends the board deny the proposed variances
so if you want to respond before yeah um you know we again we have each of these homes has
roof decks um there is open area um you know this eight foot space was additional open area we are
not there is no refusal um for open area and and again we uh you know trying to uh you know
maintain as much space as possible again if we oriented these homes and created a rear yard
those rear yards would essentially be backing right up to 95 here by orienting the homes
inward similar to the way they're oriented along I'll show you know the aerial these homes between
Auburn and Cambria you know by orienting them that way we're allowed to we're able to have more
and maintain additional open air, and the homes will all front, you know, here they'll front
Cambria, and these homes will have some open area in front of them. So, again, we have the 80%,
we're a corner lot, and, you know, these are 22, you know, 2,250 square foot homes that we believe
are contextual. If you look at this, you know, here's the duplex, you know, right next to us,
There's literally no open area. And again, that open area would abut the parking, abut the N95.
So we think it's a plan that works for the community and is oriented in the way that best reduces the hardships generated by the location of the property.
Mr. Phillips, as relative to our conversation before, the refusal will be amended, and then you'll come back and then we'll vote.
Other than that, it's closed. Am I correct, Hillary?
Yes, Mr. Chair. We'll just hold it for the amended refusal.
We don't need to do a resumption in this case since Planning Attorney given their recommendation.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Phillips.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2024-006039, 1820 North 22nd Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Ishmael will recuse himself from this project.
I'll be coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. Nockamson?
Alan Nockamson.
Mr. Nockmson, could you identify your client or relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Rana Investment, LLC, and in the virtual audience is its member, Michael Ollidot.
Mr. Nockmson, do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with its accuracy?
And I see here there's a...
And I see here there's a letter of non-agreement deferral received from Strawberry Mansion.
Yes, I just got that today.
Share your screen and make your presentation, sir.
All right.
Thank you.
Let me just make sure I have the right screen up again.
all right so i'm here to present 1820 uh north 22nd street uh this is an aerial view of this
block as you can see there's a lot of vacancy nearby and we're looking to put a four family
dwelling unit here which is not out of character to the neighborhood so during my presentation
we'll first review the notice of refusal then we had we did receive correspondence this afternoon
or maybe late this morning from the strawberry mansion community concern we did have a nearby
neighbor actually attend that community meeting and he was in full support of this project which
is referenced in that letter and in that letter it also references that it's not out of character to
have like four unit dwellings like this. There were issues in terms of more like building code
issues, which again, we would comply with, but that's the extent of that letter. Then we gave
examples of nearby comparable RSA 5 density. And again, you know, 1829, 1839, 1843, 1845, 1834,
1800. All in that block are multifamily, even though there are RSA 5 properties. Then the
aerial view of that block, as you can see, as you saw, there's a lot of vacancy. So things that are
occupied with building structures are multifamily, but there's a lot of unoccupied vacant lots there.
Then maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings,
or RCO meeting notice, along with proof of mail in that notice or application for appeal that we
filed with the ZBA deed to the property, showing that RANA Investment LLC is the owner of the
property, as well as a certificate of tax clearance. And then again, at the conclusion
of my presentation, I would ask that Michael virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Notice refusal. There are no dimensional variances that we're requesting. We meet the height
limitations we're only 35 feet high we meet the open area requirements we have 481 square feet
of open area so rather large amount of open area for this property that's over 1500 square feet
the rear yard setback while only nine feet required we have 27 feet rear yard setback
Our only refusal is because we're RSA 5 and we're looking for multifamily use.
Again, we're over 1,500 square foot lot.
So correspondence from the coordinating RCO, again, the only person that attended actually said,
I live right behind the property and I welcome this development.
I would be the most directly impacted and I want this development given the amount of vacancies in the area.
Yeah. And here's a letter from Shulbury Mansion Community Concern.
There are really no zoning related issues with the property.
It has more to do with, you know, building code and configuration.
You know, there are issues with, you know, there will only be one entrance to the building in the front,
which is not out of character to other multifamily structures in this neighborhood.
And most of these walk-ups, there are, you know, four units or so.
So issues about like venting and, you know, noise issues with multifamily structures.
Again, we would, you know, obviously meet the zoning code by, you know, doing whatever venting and insulation we would need.
Questions about fire safety. This would be because it's newly constructed. It's over three units.
We would have a sprinkler system and a fire suppression system, which many of the properties on that block, our older construction, do not have.
So, and again, even here they said that, you know, there are similar four family dwellings here.
And they did not oppose, the community group did not oppose the project they just deferred, even though the only member of the community that did show up was enthusiastically in support of this project.
Nearby multifamily, again, we pulled it off the city records, 1829, 39, 43, 45, 34, and 1800 are all multifamily.
Aerial view of the property, there's a significant amount of vacant lots here we're hoping to develop.
There's a significant amount of vacant lots here.
We're hoping to develop one of these.
Again, we're RSA 5.
There's no dispute as to that,
but there's definitely a diversity of zoning classifications nearby.
Photographs of the property were vacant lots.
This property had an abandoned building in 2007,
which eventually came down.
Proof of posting for the property. For today's hearing, this is 22nd Street to the right of the property and to the left of the property. And then there are plans and drawings.
You know, just, you know, I know this is always a question that the ZBA asks, you know, how far are we out of the ground?
You know, so we're three feet out of the ground here from the first floor.
And, you know, according to my rough calculations, that would mean that our ceiling height in the basement level is nine feet high.
So there are four bi-levels here, right?
So you walk into the common front door, you have unit number one, which is almost 800 square feet.
That is a one bedroom, one and a half bath.
You walk a little further down, there's a trash room.
So we can agree to a proviso trash stored inside.
We would also agree to a proviso of commercial trash pickup.
But unit number two is in the rear.
that's also a bi-level that's 867 square feet approximately that's also a one-bedroom apartment
instead of going on the first floor you go into the second floor we also have two bi-levels here
unit number three is 885 square feet these this is a two-bedroom apartment and then unit number
four is a bi-level that's 928 square feet that's also two uh uh two-bedroom apartment there's no
there is no roof deck here. Also, not that this matters from a zoning perspective, but my client
is a certified PHA landlord, where that's his business model to provide affordable housing.
According to him, based on the one bedrooms, the occupant would pay $415 per month for those units,
given the subsidy, and they would pay $495 a month for the two bedrooms.
RCO meeting notice, we met with the community December 11th last week.
138 addresses were notified of that meeting.
Most of those addresses, honestly, there are a lot of vacant lots or tenant-occupied properties,
those multifamilies we're talking about.
Proof of mailing of that notice, our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of RON Investments,
a deed to the property, and then finally, tax clearance.
I would ask that Mr. Ali Dodd virtually raise his hand, and then I can always go back to the drawings
if there's any technical questions about architecture.
I also have Ola, the architect from SGA, you know, online too, if I can't answer the question.
So, Mr. Ali Dodd, can you virtually raise your hand?
I'd be sworn in.
Ali Dodd?
So, if you are in the audience, once again, please raise your virtual hand to be sworn
knockups in your office of the court will accept your testimony you see him
no chair
mr knockups in your office of the court will if i maybe i missed it but did you talk about
how many multiple units are in the area i know there's a lot of
they can ground there. But how about other multiple units in the area? Did you mention
that? There's six other instances just on that block. 1829 North 22nd Street, 1839 North 22nd
Street, 1843 North 22nd Street, 1845 North 22nd Street, 1834 North 22nd Street, and 1800 North
22nd Street. You don't have to go over all of them, but what's the average numbers of the
So we have four three-unit buildings, a six-unit building, and a four-unit building.
Thank you.
Thank you question. Good. I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
I'm sorry.
No, I was just going to say, and ours is rather large in nature. Ours is a little over 1500 square feet. Not that it matters, but like the 6 unit, 1636 square feet of lot size while the 4 unit 1800 north 22nd street is 1347 square feet.
No, I was just going to say, and our…
Ours is over 1500 square feet. I think, you know, again, screams more 4 units by deferred to the boards questions from the board.
yeah a couple things um uh first if you can go back to the plans that'd be great
um you said the rear yard was how many feet 40 feet uh it is according to my notes uh the rear
yard setback is 27 feet got 27 27 foot backyard which is a really decent backyard um but if i
look at your floor plan you've got to go through the bedroom to get to the backyard um let's see
well the one unit the only one unit has has access to it that's right through the bedroom
uh yes that was the the plan i mean again i think my client is willing to flip the the the you know
the layout um you know i think he's not he he's like basically go either way with it he thought
that it would be better to have the living in the in the lower level but yes either way you're
going to have to go through either the living room area or the bedroom to get into the backyard
practice it i don't think people want people going through their bedroom to go to a yard if
they're having a barbecue i would i would agree with that i don't you know i'm just telling you
You know, I've lived in enough houses in my life that have had interesting entrances and exits.
If you're starting from scratch, you ought to be able to plan something that works better, right?
All I can tell you is my client's not here, but given he's not here, I would agree with that.
Yeah, the other issue that I raise every time is the depth of the basement below grade.
And if you're six feet or below, below grade, that's always a concern for me because it's, you know, you know, it's just you're underground completely.
And that you are underground. I do. So let me finish.
And that's a poor from that's a poor living experience to have very little light air and ventilation in a space, whether it meets code or not.
Livability, I think, is something that we really do have to consider.
And if you're going to have a basement that has a living space and you've got a 30-foot, 20-foot rear yard, why don't you just – they should create access directly out of the living space to the backyard and not a light well.
So there's always a tradeoff here because the concern that we get from the community –
Those are my concerns. Depth of the basement below grade and the fact that the way that it is laid out is not a good living experience.
Yeah, I didn't mean to interrupt. I thought I didn't hear you finish. So I apologize for that.
But there's there's always a trade off when we appear in front of the community where they don't want the heights, even because we're only at 35 feet high and we're not near to 38 feet.
And there's always a trade-off because the community thinks even 38 feet is too high.
And that's why there's a lot of these overlays out there where they're trying to crunch down the height of the building.
So we try to do that trade-off where we're three –
Not to go back and forth with you, not to go back and forth with you, but the trade-off could be that the building is deeper and only three stories and not try to do anything in the basement.
You've got 24 feet, or even if you did a nine-foot backyard, which is required, you've still got another 12 feet to go.
So there's ways that they could have gotten around that if they wanted to reduce the height and not do such a deep basement where people are underground living.
I defer to you, and there's provisos out there that you can obviously hold us to, and there's opportunities out there.
I think he's also trying, because it's affordable housing, he's trying to limit the size of the building.
And I get that from what your position is or the board's position.
I'm just saying from a practical aspect, he's trying to make it work.
You know, we try to work with our clients in that way.
We hear what the board's telling us.
And, you know, it's, you know, what you're saying is not something we haven't heard and we know.
I don't want people to, and I hear this a lot, housing that's affordable or for low-income people has to be subject to poor design, right?
That you have to go through somebody's bedroom to get to a backyard because it's for low-income people.
that you have to go through somebody's bedroom to get to a backyard because it's for low-income
people. That's offensive. Well, I'm not saying that. And by the way, and again, I've never said
this in front of the board, I grew up in affordable housing during my childhood. And so I get that.
And that's something that I take very serious myself because I did grow up in affordable
housing. So I don't usually say that, but I do understand that. And I don't think my client's
trying to be insulting there's trying to be practical in the sense of it's really hard to
develop it's very expensive they're trying to balance that off and i don't think he's trying
to make bad housing because it's affordable so appreciate that you think your client will be
amenable to three units you know without basement living i know he's not here but no i i i've had
that conversation with him and i again i'll tell you i've got my clients i i don't think i don't
i don't think he can build that so that's but that's for the board to vote on but i don't think
he can build that so that's alan alan let me let's let's go back to where teneto was there
is he at four because of the size of the building or is he at four because for economics he he's
the hardship here is because of the expenses that he would have to incur the bill to build the
building he can't build it at three units um it that you know if the board you know gives a proviso
maximum three units you know we may come back here over a year later after the one year period has
elapsed and and say listen we really need that fourth unit and so but that's for the board to
decide and it's also for the board to decide you know have a proviso with you know what what's going
on in that basement so i don't know what happens there um uh other questions we've had those
conversations i i will say i try to have those conversations with my clients okay other questions
from the board is your client does he already have a hap contract with pha or is he just approved as
a section 8 landlord and he's planning to just rent these on go section 8.com i don't know the
answer i'm not that well versed in in pha rules like that so i do i don't want to say something
that's untrue he is certified to my understanding my limited understanding of pha he's certified to
rent these out as pha units that's what he does and that's why we gave those numbers because
that's what he does so i don't i don't know the difference the nuance that you asked me the
question so i do apologize so when he bought this property from pha it was his intention
to turn it into affordable housing.
Yes, that was his intention.
That's right.
But with the unit count that he has,
like that he's seeking.
And which is not out of character
to other properties on that block.
And again...
There are other four unit...
There's other quadplexes
in single-row house building.
I thought most of them were three.
Four of the six were three,
But for 1843 North 22nd Street, which is 1,636 square feet of lot size, that's a six unit, so 100 square feet higher in lot size.
And 1800 North 22nd Street, that's a quadplex at 1,347 square feet of lot size.
Are they an extra story or are they the same roof line?
there i believe again i have not i don't want to misstate anything but
i believe those are also three story structures
any other questions from the board questions or comments more attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
planning thank you chairman and good afternoon david effecto with the city planning commission
chairman and board members the comprehensive the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the rsa5 residential single family zoning at this location the city changed the zoning maps
in this neighborhood in 2014. At that time, this property was zoned RM1 residential multifamily.
This is a primarily multifamily block face. Most of the homes on the block face have two to three
dwelling units. We also note for the board that absent participation in a city, state, or federal
program, or a city zoning incentive, affordability mentioned in the appellant's testimony cannot be
enforced by any city agency. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the
requested use variants for multiple dwelling units, but with a maximum of three dwelling units.
MI 2024-006-039-1820, North 22nd Street. I vote yes. Proviso. Maximum three units, no basement living.
proviso maximum three units no basement living michael johnson my vote is yes with proviso
Michael Johnson.
charles gaston my vote is yes with proviso tenetta graham my vote is yes with proviso
i am in my vote is yes with proviso
thank you alan thank you and have a happy holiday season thank you so number 11 excuse me mr chair
Could we please call number 15 next?
The attorney has a time constraint.
MI 2204-006-147-2144-48 Lombard Street.
Meredith Ferliger is the attorney.
Letter non-opposition from Center City Residents Association with Proviso.
Also, there's a petition of support
with eight signatures.
Council.
Meredith.
There you go.
Counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
Where are you referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Most certainly.
my client is the j spot which is a tenant of this property represented here today by
jacqueline clarizio please share us a few questions oh counsel do you
counsel do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy
yes to both thank you i have emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing i did thank you counsel please proceed
you then you can share is great. Okay.
All right, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, again, the request before the board today concerns
2144 through 48 Lombard Street, specifically the ground floor commercial space. You have an exhibit
a packet in front of you that contains 15 exhibits, which we do request be moved into
evidence at the conclusion of the presentation today. To summarize the basis for today's
request, my client is looking to open a new med spa business with a small juice bar cafe
in just over 2,000 square feet of space. Most of this use is permitted by special exception,
with a very small variance needed because of the size of the existing space.
Let me first orient you to the location of this property.
The tax clearance and sections of the lease are included at Exhibits 2 and 3.
As you can see here, let me zoom out a little bit.
As you can see here on the aerials shown at Exhibit 9,
This property sits on Lombard Street at the corner of South 22nd Street within the South and Grays Ferry Commercial Corridor, as indicated on the city's open map system.
The South view provides a slightly better view of the context of this building, which sits in an area that is mixed with residential, commercial, and other mixed non-residential uses.
On the zoning map at Exhibit 5, you'll see that this property is zoned CMX-1, which is a step down from the more common CMX-2 designation that you often see on commercial corridors.
Consistent with the photographs, this area is a mix of multifamily, commercial, and single-family zoning classification.
So you can see this is one of the more colorful zoning maps than you are probably used to seeing for particular areas.
If I turn to the photographs at Exhibit 15, you'll see the first view here from South, 22nd Street,
where you'll find the entrance to the commercial space that has now been vacant since 7-Eleven vacated sometime around 2019.
The next photograph is from Lombard Street, where the residential entrances to this building are found.
The next photograph is from Lombard Street, where the residential entrance
This building has three residential units above the commercial space.
From the back, there are several parking spaces for the residential units.
Another view here is provided from the corner of Lombard Street and South 22nd Street,
where, again, you'll see the dominant commercial frontage with large windows and a canopy denoting the commercial entrance.
And again, just from another view there.
I have also included, if I scroll a little further, I have included a photograph of the interior of the commercial space, which is currently in shell condition.
And again, this space was previously 7-Eleven.
Prior to that, dating back to the 30s, this site apparently contained a gas station
until that was demolished in favor of a retail use sometime in the late 1970s.
I did also include photographs of the zoning posters, which were posted timely on each of
the frontages. My client Jacqueline is here and can answer any specific questions you have
about her use, but let me give you a basic overview. At Exhibit 6, I'll zoom in a little
so you can actually read this, you'll see the floor plans. Starting first with the actual
med spa use, this includes areas for a cold plunge and a sauna, as well as more traditional
medical aesthetics such as facials, injectable products, and other services that are required
to be administered by licensed medical professionals. As you can see, most of the
space is reserved for the med spa, and you can see that's really most of this commercial space.
In the front, along South 22nd Street, a small space is reserved for a small-scale cafe,
predominantly serving prepared juices and other similar small-scale cafe items,
such as coffees and teas. The juices are strictly prepared off-site. As you can also see on the
floor plans, there's a dedicated trash storage area that can be emptied directly from South 22nd
Street. The cafe itself falls under the prepared food shop use, meaning that there are no commercial
cooking appliances requiring any exhaust, and any food items sold are pre-packaged or prepared
off-site. We have also included some renderings of the space at Exhibit 7. This is just a rendering
from the exterior showing the intended activation of South 22nd Street that has long been dark
since 7-11 vacated. Next is the cafe area, including both the seating area as well as
the service bar. The next rendering here shows the med spa lobby and the reception area where
the aesthetic products would be sold, similar to what you'd find in your traditional hair salon
that always has products being sold very similar products you can find in a med spa specific for
beauty use we have also included some renderings of the spa areas as well by way of additional
information about the use we have included a presentation at exhibit eight the j spot will be
a woman-owned medical business services here will include wellness and anti-aging medicine
mental health services and nutritional services
medical waste will be stored in required biohazard containers and will be picked up directly by a
medical waste company specializing in medical waste disposal as i mentioned earlier trash will
be stored in the designated trash room. And you can see that here. The medical component of the
business will be open from Monday through Saturday, 9 a.m. to 7 p.m., and the cafe will be open seven
days a week, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. And again, my client Jacqueline is a licensed physician assistant,
so she has extensive background in this area and will be available to answer any additional
questions that you have on the use itself. Now, regarding the refusal and the referral at Exhibit
1, the proposal received two referrals and one refusal. Starting first with the refusal,
I can address really quite quickly. As you can see on this refusal, CMX 1 does not allow any office
As you can see on this refusal, CMX-1 does not allow any office, retail, or commercial service use
So, let's do this.
to occupy more than 2,000 square feet of gross floor area.
The challenge is that this existing commercial space is 2,354 square feet.
This is despite the fact that the previous 7-Eleven also occupied this same space
and therefore violated this exact same provision. That 7-Eleven was, of course, not considered
non-conforming for the amount of time that it occupied the space. To comply with the code,
this applicant would have to shrink her use by 354 square feet, which would clearly create
economic waste, leaving a 354 square feet space that is not capable of independent occupancy.
There are only a handful of by-right CMX1 uses that do not have this space limitation, and with this space having been vacant for about five years at this point, the hardship in complying with this section of the code is quite unambiguous and likely will be created by any tenant that would occupy this space.
Furthermore, this is de minimis that does not technically require the board to find hardship to warrant granting this particular variance request.
In terms of the referrals, this application received two referrals as prepared food shops and group medical, dental, and health practitioner, which requires a special exception in CMX1.
The med spa use here qualifies as a group health practitioner, which is administered by state
licensed medical professionals, often nurses or physicians assistants, who administer injectable
products such as Botox or other similar fillers and other similar injectable products. Given that
the use also has more traditional spa components, such as the cold plunge, the saunas, things of
that nature. We've also requested the use as personal services, but that does not require any
relief. As described throughout the presentation, we submit that all of the aforementioned uses
constitute uses permitted under the zoning code by special exception. We submit the proposal will
not increase congestion, harm neighbors' properties, or impair light and air. No physical changes to
the exterior envelope of the building are proposed. This use is entirely consistent with the impact
one might expect from a med spa, which, if the board members have ever visited a facility like
this, would know that it is extraordinarily low impact, predominantly filled with predominantly
women seeking various beauty services. By all means, there are some men, but it is predominantly
women. The cafe and prepared food shop are much smaller than many cafe spaces in the area and
will therefore have less impact than a typical cafe might. This is especially true where the
prior 7-Eleven attracted much more pedestrian traffic, and this use will not only eliminate
a five-year vacancy, but will improve the overall site conditions from the long-standing historical
use. This property has a nearly 100-year history of some form of commercial use and the proposal
will align with the expectations set by the CMX1 zoning of the site. The use is further consistent
with the comp plan that designated this area as a commercial corridor and will pose no danger
nor diminish the public safety and welfare. We submit the proposal complies in full with each
section of the zoning code concerning applicants entitlement to both variance relief and the grant
of special exceptions more detail as always is provided in the memo of law submitted to
the board at exhibit 11 and i'd be happy to touch on any point in more detail
at this point i would ask if the administrator could look for jacqueline clarizio
look can you hear me i can't sure jacqueline could you please state your name and spell for
the stenographer my name is jacqueline clarizio that's spelled j-a-c-q-u-e-l-i-n-e clarizio c-l-a-r-i-z-i-o
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Jacqueline, you are the member of the J-Spot, which is the tenant of this commercial space.
Is that correct?
And have you heard all the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today?
I did.
Would you agree that testimony was true and accurate, and would you adopt it as if it were your own?
would you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt it as if it were
your own i would and is there anything else that you would like to add not at this time thank you
we're happy to answer any questions questions from the board yes can you expand a little bit more
about what the medical services are here?
Yes, of course.
So this is all medical wellness.
It'll be everything from nutritional services
to anti-aging services,
such as facials, injectable fillers, Botox, et cetera.
There also will be IVs, administering hydration.
And then there will be other therapeutic services
like therapy meditation cold plunge and sauna okay all right thank you the questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emerson um just briefly um mr berliger the rco
they had several provisos one the one that appeared enforceable was interior trash storage
is that is that the intention here yes okay with that proviso we were we were entirely fine with
their list of provisos enforceable or non okay great and this is only on the first floor of this
building correct that is correct it's first floor commercial space only all right thank you
enter comments from the virtual audience
yes chair
Jeremy Blatestein
could you please
state your name
and spell for the stenographer
star six
to unmute yourself
chair we also have
Wade Albert
and we'd be
bring Mr. Albert
on if he's ready to go
good afternoon hi good afternoon mr albert just for the record could you state your name and spell
for the sonographer sure uh my name is wade w-a-d-e my last name is albert a-l-b-e-r-t
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
uh yes i do please proceed sir thank you so i i'm counsel for the center city residents
according rco for this project um and i you've discussed the the letter where we um we do not
opposed subject to a number of provisos so respectfully ask that if the board is inclined
to grant this request that the decision uh include uh any enforceable uh provisos that
you deem to be enforceable thank you very much council we appreciate it uh who else in the
virtual audience do we have chair we want to try um jeremy blatestein again star six mute yourself
um no further hands chair no it's still not a meeting planning commission
thank you chairman and good afternoon david vecto with the city planning commission
chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the cmx1 commercial
mixed use zoning at this location the city changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 2019
in accord with the recommendations in the comprehensive plan.
The appellant has shown that the proposed prepared food shop
and the proposed group practitioner will have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what might be expected,
and the appellant has shown the proposed occupancy of more than 2,000 ground floor square feet
will not injure the use of adjacent property.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the proposed special exceptions and the variance.
MI-2204-006-147-2144-48 Lumbar Street, I vote yes with provisos. Interior trash storage,
use is limited to first floor. Michael Johns, my vote is yes with provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisos.
panetta graham my vote is yes with provisals ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with provisals
chair i need to step away for about 10 minutes sure thank you thank you very much thank you
my timing constraint thank you so number 11 mi 2024 006078 7274 hanford street richard demarco
is the attorney. Letter of non-opposition from Take Back Your Neighborhood Coordinating RCO.
And a letter of unanimous support from the community on the rise. Mr. DeMarco.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. You called. I have two cases today and I was joining. You called.
You called, I have two cases today and I was joining.
You called Hanford Street first?
Yeah, Hanford Street, sir.
And Mr. DeMarco, you've already been sworn just for the record, state your name.
Good afternoon, Richard DeMarco, last name spelled D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Michelle Huang.
She is the managing member of the LLC, the LP, excuse me, that is the owner of the property.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and do you agree with its accuracy?
That's a referral.
I'm sorry.
Start your presentation, sir.
Share your screen.
And just for the record, the K and Z property LLC is the owner.
Thank you.
All right.
so mr chairman this is a referral to the zoning board i'll share my screen we'll get that up on
the board in a moment oh oh i just froze i don't see where you're freezing oh unless you're screen
sorry about that mr chairman i think you accidentally hit a pause button or something
i'm losing control of the you can hear me okay i can't control there it goes sorry about that i
had a little blip on my computer my book sure so it's okay all right so there we go there's
the referral uh this is an existing uh commercial space mr chairman along hanford street it's
actually right along cotman avenue the cross street is cotman avenue we had meetings with
two RCOs. There was support by both. I'll be brief. My client is available to accept my
testimony. If you see here on the referral, the prior use was a smoke shop and vape sales. It was
not a very nice, we would argue, neighborhood quote-unquote use. But there's a long history
of commercial use at the property. There's a single unit above. But obviously, we feel we
meet the legal standard for special exception. I'll show you. This will be a rolled ice cream
store. It's the new thing for desserts. There's no hot food, no grilling, no anything like that.
Let me show you a photo so you can see what we're talking about. Here's some photos of the existing.
This is the structure here. There is existing parking off street that was legalized by this
board with the smoke shop variances that were granted. And that's the parking. That's the
entrance to the store right there. There's actually two additional parking spaces in the rear.
And this is the posting and the main entrance to the property. The premises were not in great
shape. They're going to really rehab this, make it look nice. Again, the previous use was not
a very nice use i'll show you our floor plan real quick this is the floor plan there's going to be
some seating indoor there's going to be plenty of trash receptacles we're gonna have commercial
trash pickup um i'll show you i do have actually the client did show a photo that's what we're
talking about here hopefully you can see that that's what rolled ice cream is it's a very
popular uh new dessert i think that would be the main points let me go ahead and have michelle
Huang. Oh, this is our letter of non-opposition from the one group. And then we got non-opposition.
We got unanimous support from the other. So let me go ahead and have Michelle raise her hand
virtually. Well, I've set my testimony. Michelle. Yeah. Hopefully she's still with us at this late
Good afternoon. This is Michelle Huang.
Could you please spell your name for the court stenographer?
M-I-C-H-E-L-L-E, last name H-U-A-N-G.
Do you swear or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Counselor.
Michelle, did you hear my testimony in my factual presentation? Is it true and accurate?
And do you adopt it as your official testimony in this matter?
And the only question I had that I didn't ask earlier is you'll have three employees, no more than that?
Put it be four.
Oh, four, sorry.
Put it be three to four.
And your hours of operation are from 12 to 10 p.m., correct?
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Obviously, we feel this is an even better use than the prior.
Obviously, we feel this is an even better use than the prior.
It's a referral.
We don't need to prove hardship.
And the use-
Did she adopt your testimony?
I'm sorry.
Did she adopt your testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Here's a color rendering of the floor plan.
Sorry.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
There are no hands here.
Planning Commission?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission, A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
Are you a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from CMX 1 commercial mixed use to CMX 2.5 commercial mixed use.
The city rezoned the neighborhood in 2012.
The appellant had shown that the proposed eating and drinking establishment will not have detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might be reasonably expected.
The proposed advances the goal of the comprehensive plan to explore opportunity sites for development that supports a mix of uses in the Central and Northeast Planning District.
The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed special exemption for eating and drinking establishment.
MI 2024-006-078-7274-Hanford Street, I vote yes.
John's, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Sonata Graham, my vote is yes.
Ioann, my vote is yes.
Mr. DeMarco, are you still there?
I'm here.
Why don't we just do your case?
I appreciate it.
please. So, Mr. Chairman, on this one, my client had to leave. I'll ask you at the conclusion of
the presentation to accept my testimony as it is. So, MI 2024-006-151-423 South 50th Street,
letter of support from Garden Court Community Association, vote with eight in support,
six in opposition. Yeah, it's actually a little bit better than that, but that's fine.
And Mr. DeMarco, just for the record, state your name. Richard DeMarco, D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
Sure. And could you identify your client, their relationship to the property?
It's Evan Bacchetto, who is the managing and sole member of EJB Properties LLC.
Do you stipulate to the reading and the refusal? Do you agree with its accuracy?
I do. Please proceed, sir.
So, Mr. Chairman, I do want to speak about the refusal itself because there's an interesting little quirk. The examiner very astutely recognized that this particular property was a preexisting nonconforming use. And what we are proposing is merely to convert the existing very small storefront unit into a single residential unit.
So because that storefront is such a small, unusually small property, the zoning examiner acknowledged that it was a 10% or less expansion of the existing nonconforming use, that being the multifamily dwelling.
There are three other rented and legal multifamily apartment units.
So because the square footage of the new unit was 10% or less, the unit was permitted.
What we are refused for is not providing for accessory parking spaces, because once we
changed the to whatever degree the existing non-conformity the new parking requirements were
required under the rsa3 zoning district so we were actually required to all a new
provide for accessory parking spaces so that leads me to show you the photos so you see what
we're dealing with. And actually, it's physically impossible to provide the parking. This is the
property. It's a corner property. It's a nice property. This is the existing storefront.
It was a variety store. I'll show you the prior zoning permit in a moment. This is the
rest of the building. There's a rear yard back here that is fenced, but it is available to all
tenants for trash storage that is in an enclosure that is not viewed by the public. As you can see,
there's really no space whatsoever to provide parking. You'd have to destroy the rear portion
of the building here and have to have an abnormally large curb cut of
and have to have an abnormally large curb cut of at least two parking spaces.
Thank you.
And being this close to the corner, I would submit that the streets department would not approve such a curb cut.
Therefore, it's physically impossible to comply with that requirement.
So the proposed studio apartment is small, but it's dictated by the former site of the storefront.
My client bought the property from the daughter of the prior owner who passed away.
She inherited it.
The store became inactive, and it was empty for quite a while.
But it's an existing space.
My client's going to renovate it, make it a nice unit. It is a little bit small, but again, it's dictated by the building and the presence of this other unit that is occupied with a tenant.
um so we did have a neighborhood meeting um the total votes were um so so the reason why i said
i think we have a few a little bit more support than what you mentioned is because there's two
that were not opposed and i don't think you count them as opposition so it was 10 to 6
are not opposed or supporting if that makes sense okay but overall the committee did like
the project. They did not want us to destroy the property to create parking. There were some
concerns about the unit being abnormally small, but there's really nothing my client can do about
it. It's an existing unit that is being converted, and he does not want to evict the long-time
tenants that he has in the other unit. I did want to show you the existing permit. You see it's
retail sales of newspapers, medicines, greeting cards, cigarettes. So we would submit that the
residential use is a much less impactful use than a general store, you know, retail store that
probably is a little bit more busy and might attract, you know, vaping sales or, you know,
cigarettes or tobacco. So my client would testify as I just mentioned. This commercial space goes
way back into the, it looks like this was the 1950s or 1960, excuse me. It's an existing
non-conforming use. The hardship would obviously be that we cannot create parking there and through
this quirk in the code, it's required, even though the use itself is permitted,
we'd have to destroy the structure and evict tenants or terminate leases, and that would
cause a lot of pain. And so we would submit that the variances are clearly necessary and required
in light of the non-conforming nature of this property and its long-time existence as a
multifamily use. So my client would submit that that was his testimony. He had to leave. Sorry
about that. And that's all I have for now. Questions from the board?
I'll put the floor plan back up on the screen if there's questions.
uh where's the trash store for the units all units you said that everybody has a rear yard
right here that's available to all tenants right here no basement um there's no basement
questions
questions or comments from our attorney
Hillary Emerson
not at this time Mr. Chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
no hands
no hands Mr. Chair
thank you Jason
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission
the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the RSA theory
residential single-family zoning at this location. The city changed the zoning maps in this
neighborhood in 2019. At the time, the city, sorry, at the time, the property was zoned CMX2
commercial mixed use. The property has a documented history as three dwelling units above a ground
floor retail. The appellant's proposal would convert the ground floor commercial space into
a residential unit, bringing the property closer into conformance with the residential zoning.
The addition of the 4th Unit triggers the parking requirements in the RSA 3 Zoning District.
The addition of the fourth unit triggers the parking requirements in the RSA 3 zoning district.
There is no space on the lot which the appellant could logically fit a parking space.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed variance for the parking requirement in RSA 3.
I-2024-006151-423 South 50th Street, I vote yes.
My vote is yes.
General Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Thank you, everybody.
Have a great holiday.
Thank you.
Have a good one.
All right.
Number 12, MI 2024-006-095-2903 Diamond Street.
Tamika McCoy is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Strawberry Mansion Community Development Corporation.
Vote was 14 to 2.
and what a proviso sure i'll recuse
they'll be rejoining us as a panel sir
good counsel could you please good good afternoon could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer sure good afternoon simi mccoy mc capital k o y
could you um do you do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth yes could you identify your client or relationship to this property my client is
karen washington she is the owner of the property and our one of our uh board members tenetta graham
is going to recuse herself from this uh property of this project do you stipulate to the reading
of the refusal, do you agree with this accuracy? Yes. Please share your screen and start your
presentation. Sure. Thank you. So the property located at 2903 West Diamond Street in 2019
was approved for a variance for a three-unit apartment building. I'm going to just move to
a photograph of the property that we are referring to, and it would be this property here with the
white door and that has the wooden slabs that are in front of the windows as of right now.
The current application is to essentially still provide for a multifamily property with two units
rather than the three that they were previously approved for moving forward. We did submit
a copy of the application. We sent notices to approximately 158 affected neighbors for this
particular property. And the RCO meeting was conducted on November 21st of this year.
The results of that was that there was overwhelming support for the project, and so the Strawberry
Mansion Community Development Corporation also agreed and submitted this letter of
support to the board.
The total in attendance were 27 people.
Everyone essentially, all 27 supported.
there were two RCO board members that were in opposition, that should be noted, but there was
overwhelming community support for the project. A part of that overwhelming support comes by virtue
of this area having five additional comparable locations that are approved for multifamily uses.
I'm going to go to the floor plans that we provided.
And I did include the documentation of the multifamily properties that had been approved
in this actual area that shows that it would be consistent with what's happening for this
particular location in our city.
The floor plan I'm showing is the side elevation.
The basement is going to remain a basement property, and the first floor unit occupies
the first floor and a bedroom on the second floor.
The second unit occupies the second floor and third floor, so each are bi-level units.
When we look at the plan, the first floor depicts living areas with lots of proper natural lighting, a bedroom to the rear of the building, and also steps that go upward to a second bedroom.
So there are two bedrooms that will be available for this first floor unit, one on the same first floor and then a second bedroom on the second floor.
one on the same first floor, and then a second bedroom on the second floor.
The second floor unit is accessible by stairwells that basically is a common area. And there's
a kitchen living room area. And then up the steps are two additional bedrooms that would share a
bathroom. And that would comprise two bedrooms for the second floor unit as well. The basement
is just going to essentially be there for utilities and mechanicals. It's not going to have
finished living area. The tenants would be able to use the basement as storage as well.
There is a trash plan where residents would be able to essentially utilize garbage disposal bins
that will be stored in the rear of the property until every Wednesday when it will be put out
after 5 p.m. We did provide interior photographs right now. It's essentially a work in progress
that would be consistent with the plans that have been depicted here today. And I would like to
also show this is one of the other multifamily unit buildings that's on the block is directly
across the street. Ms. Karen Washington, who is the owner of this property, grew up in the area.
She currently lives in one of the affected properties. Her grandmother also lives around
the corner, and she's essentially been a lifelong resident of this community, which is part of the
reason for the overwhelming support. I would ask to introduce Ms. Washington so that she could
adopt the testimony. Meanwhile, we do that. I'm looking at the, um, if you're standing in front
of the property, you look to the right, you're seeing down the block. And then this is the
opposite direction that shows the corner of 29th and diamond street.
This Washington.
do we see miss washington's hand thank you miss washington could you please state your name and
spell it for the court stenographer my name is karen washington k-a-r-e-n-w-a-s-h-i-n-g-t-o-n
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Ms. Washington, did you hear the testimony and presentation that was done before the board today?
And would you adopt it as accurate?
I would.
I would submit on that and be prepared to address any questions.
Questions from the board?
Yes, I have a similar issue that I had with the other project that we looked at with having to go through the bedroom to get to the backyard,
which is just not a good thing to do. But you also mentioned that both units will have access
to the backyard for storage of trash. How does that second floor unit get to the backyard?
It's my understanding that the second floor would be able to access through
the side yard. But I'll ask Ms. Washington to actually provide the information relative to that.
Yes. The second floor can just go. Our building is fairly rarely to the corner, so they can just come out. Both tenants will have access to the yard. It will be a combination code on there. It's the only day you can get in there. I already have a commercial contract with the City of Philadelphia, which is, and I will just add that building.
Gotcha. How does the tenant that lives on the second floor have access to that rear yard?
based on your plan they have to go through the other tenants apartment to get to the backyard
and through their bedroom no what she is essentially saying is that they would have to
use the um front door entrance and then go access the yard through the back um the back alley through
an alley yes so so the tenant has to come out of their unit go around the corner through an alley
well we're we're we're one house from the alley it's not like they're going right through the
alley once they turn off of 29th street that's our building secondarily um there is separate
second from the corner.
Second from the corner, yes.
So they have to come out of the house, go around the corner,
Pass that other house into the alley, pass that other house into the yard.
pass that other house into the alley,
pass that other house into the yard.
No, it's only one house. There's one house on the corner.
No, it's only...
And then it's my house. The yard is right there by her yard.
Right. So you have to go through an alley, pass the house, not somebody else's yard to get to that yard.
Yes. Yes, that's that's.
Mr. Johnson, another potential solution is that the common area that has the stairwell where the entrances are also has the basement access as well.
There is storage as well in the basement.
Not based on your plan. Based on your plan, the only access to the basement is through that first floor unit.
No, no, no. You don't have to go through the basement, through the unit. The basement is right by the stairs.
Okay. There's no interest. Everybody, okay, to get into the basement, everybody has their own
interest. Like you, when the person comes from the second store, they can turn and go right down
in the basement. Okay. Person come out the first floor, if they need, they can go come right through
that little walkway, and that's the basement. The second floor don't have to go through nobody's
apartment to go through the basement. Listen to what I'm saying. I hear what you are saying,
but your plan does not show that okay the plan that you present here does not show that
this shows an entrance to the basement only from this first floor unit this this foyer serves the
second floor and into the entrance to the first floor unit that's not a that's not a shared way
to get into the basement so that's um this is what your plan shows
because the basement is on the side of the steps
well um that's all that's that's those only comments i have so okay what you're saying
and what you're showing the plan are two different things okay that's all the other
questions from the board.
Is it possible to turn the plan for that?
Is that better?
And can you zoom in a little bit too, please?
Sorry.
Let me come out so you can see a full page.
Any more follow-up, Taya?
No, I was just trying to figure out.
So they're both two-bedroom units.
That's correct.
But they're bi-level.
That's correct.
Correct.
All right.
Gotcha.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just one point of clarification.
The RCO did request a proviso of no basement living.
is your client amenable to that proviso if the board were to grant this request?
Yes. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I do not see any further hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
The board of the Planning Commission, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the RSA 5 residential single-family zoning
at this location. The city changes zoning maps in Strawberry Mansion
in 2014 in a community-supported map change. At the time, the property was owned RM1
residential multifamily. This property has a documented history as a three-family dwelling
unit. The City Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the proposed variance for use
as two-family dwelling units. MI 2024-006095-2903 Diamond Street, I vote yes. With proviso,
No household living in the basement.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Iowen, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a good day, everyone.
Thank you, counsel.
Number 13, MI 2024-006-104-2731 Federal Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
A letter of support from residents organized for advocacy.
A letter of support from Residents Organized for Advocacy and Direction, RCO, with unenforceable provisos.
They will be rejoining as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Mr. Clinton, I don't think I've seen you today, so could you just state your name and spell it for the court sonographer?
Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Where are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and to agree with its accuracy?
Share your screen and start your presentation, please, sir.
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
It is.
Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
I'm here on behalf of Cal Grace Furry, LLC, the principal of which is Colin Lahren, C-O-L-I-N, Lahren, L-A-R-E-N, and he is on the call.
Table of contents, A1 through A10.
I'll walk through each document.
Refusal.
So this property is in an I-2 zoning district.
And as a note indicates here, in 2020, I was before the board, and you granted a variance for the construction of a standalone six-unit apartment building with vacant commercial space on the ground floor and in the basement.
And that's why I'm back before the board again today to address the vacant commercial space at the ground floor as well as in the basement.
And we're asking for an assembly and entertainment space.
It's a nuance in the code where our use, we're not a child care, you know, we're not active
recreation, passive recreation.
So if you look at the definition of assembly and entertainment, it basically says that
it's for gathering space for recreation, entertainment, or other assembly.
I think we fit under other assembly, therefore, the refusal in this I-2 zoning district.
Chairman, you mentioned at the outset that we do have a letter of support from the residents organized for advocacy and direction.
Photographs. So this is Grace Ferry Avenue. Grace Ferry Avenue leads to Washington Avenue, and you would travel east to get to Broad Street.
Again, Grace Ferry Avenue. Here's a standalone building, which was granted a variance back in 2020.
Just another photograph, another perspective.
This is a ground-level view of the property.
The space that we're asking for is not a daycare.
It's really an indoor play area and an event space for children ages 1 to 5,
which must be accompanied by a parent.
So it's not a daycare.
It's not a drop-off situation.
The child must be accompanied by a parent.
And this would be one of the entrances to the facility on the first floor.
First floor is about 1,200 square feet, excuse me, 1,700 square feet, and the basement is about 1,300 square feet.
So we have about 3,000 square feet of use.
This is the rear of the building.
There's another entrance to get into the first floor, as well as to get down into the basement.
These are just other perspective shots, as well as showing you our zoning notice posted.
uh i'll walk through the plans uh the dotted line here is the space somewhat of a triangular
piece that curves around grace ferry avenue as you can see the whole area is i2 across the street
as well as down the block these are the floor plans for the basement commercial it's all open
right now 1700 square feet first floor 1300 square feet the idea is to have two rooms in the basement
for event area. It could be for a birthday party, an event, a meeting. It could be for
breastfeeding, a library, a multi-use area in the basement. And then on the first floor,
it would be a gathering area for sensory play, for socialization, for just hanging out with
parents and their children. The application for appeal, tax clearance, and zoning map. So
the occupancy, you could have up to 40 children or so in these two spaces. We would have two to
three staff members. As I said, it's not a situation where it's a daycare or we would
have fit in under that category. It's kind of a unique situation where parents can bring their
children, maybe after daycare or before, or if they don't have daycare. Not every family has
daycare. And sometimes as the operator of this facility has mentioned several times at the RCO.
As the operator of this facility has mentioned several times at the RCO, sometimes you get cabin fever if you're in the house all day with young people, and it's good to get out of the house and interact with other adults and other children.
The hours of operation are going to be Monday through Sunday, 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. and in the evenings from 3 to 7 o'clock.
Trash will be stored inside or there is an outdoor area fenced in down at this end of the building where you could also keep trash on the outside.
But I think there's going to be minimal trash with this operation and that will be kept inside.
I think that's basically it.
The operator of the facility is Miss Ebony Ferguson, and she is really excited to bring
this to Grace Ferry.
There's really, I think there's one other operation like this in the city of Philadelphia
where it's not a child care center, but it is an area where parents who don't have day
care and who want to mingle with other parents and have children mingle with other children
can use a space like this.
Henry, you pay like by the hour?
Yeah, it's going to be membership-based.
Okay, okay, thank you.
I don't need another finance, but yeah, thank you.
The prospective owner of the operation has a master's degree in special education
with an expertise in sensory uses for children as well as special ed.
I mentioned the staff, the trash, the uses.
so i guess i would just like to summarize that we are not um using the building in any detrimental
fashion we're not impeding anyone's development of adjacent properties uh we are in harmony with
the code we're in harmony with what the the community likes and wants the only thing the
community asked us is would we be instrumental in trying to get a speed bump here where my cursor is
on Federal Street. I realize that's not enforceable by the board, but we certainly have signed on to
that and we're going to approach Council President Kenyatta Johnson's office to try to get some type
of a speed bump here because there's no stop sign or traffic signal. So with that, I would conclude
my presentation and ask my client, Mr. Lauren, to unmute himself and adopt my testimony.
Mr. Lauren, can you raise your hand?
Thanks, but I'm glad to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Colin Lahren, C-O-L-I-N-L-A-R-E-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. Lahren, were you on the call when I disarrived the potential use of this vacant commercial space at 2731 Federal Street?
yes and if you had the opportunity to testify would you adopt my testimony as your own and
as true and correct yes thank you Mr. Lahren questions from the board can I see the drawings
again I just wanted to see where the two or their bathrooms on both floors in the basement and the
first floor here's the first floor they're going to have to install bathrooms okay
Okay. Good point, though, Ms. Graham. And they didn't want to do that until we went beyond this. Thank you.
Thank you.
Good questions from the board.
Yes. Will there be food served?
No. Now, if you have a birthday party, the parents can bring in food, but there's no food service at this facility.
okay and then i guess i'm still trying to figure out
what this is it doesn't appear to be fish is this like a almost like a well
okay is this to serve just any children and their parents who might want to be members or
Or are we looking at some special needs?
No, it's funny.
I share your question because when I first came to me, I was trying to figure out where this fits.
It's not really a daycare.
It's not for special needs.
It's just an operation where Ms. Ferguson believes there's a need for parents to bring their children to a location with other parents who have children.
and they can socialize and basically hang out
rather than being cooped up in the house all day
because not every parent has daycare.
So it's kind of a novel thing.
That's why we're fitting under this event
and assembly section of the code
event and assembly section of the code, because there's really not a lot of leeway in getting
because there's...
into any other aspect where I could, or I could propose this as a right.
Okay. All right. I thought I heard you say that maybe there was one other similar facility.
Ms. Ferguson says there's another one. She happens to operate a daycare in Francisville.
So this would be her first. But she says it's it's gathering steam in other parts of the country.
I didn't really do any independent research, but she's willing to sign a long term lease at market value.
So I think she believes in her concept. So it's almost like arranging like play dates, if you will, the most with children and parents.
Right. And we generally the thought is at least the business plan is it would be mainly walk up.
So, you know, people in the neighborhood would be able to walk there with their child or children ages one to five and have a play space, have a library.
There's going to be books there. And if they also want to use it for an event space for, you know, an evening meeting or a birthday party or christening, something like that.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr.
Any other questions?
I have a few questions about operations. So one is the intent that all of the furniture is going
to be freestanding in the space. Yes. And then is the intention that the cellar floor
is going to be used for operations? Yes. Because typically like one, like people with smaller
kids have lots of stuff. This is all stairwells and I've, and it means that it's not fully ADA
it accessible i know like typically when i've been to a few of these locations and there's usually
ramps or there's an elevator there's usually back of house spaces where the staff can store things
or furniture can be stacked um and so i'm just i'm usually there's more like storefront windows
or it's like just set up differently so i'm just still a little curious about how this plans to be
laid out since there's no furniture plan. Right. So in terms of wheelchair accessibility,
you can see the back entrance as well as, well, you can't really see it because this car is
blocking it, but both entrances are floor level. So you're going to be able to get into the first
floor. I grant you there's no ramp to the basement or elevator because it's only six units. But
But let me just go back to the floor plan.
So, yes, there are stairwells to get up and down.
And as I said in the beginning, the basement, there's going to be a room where my cursor is here and a room over here for private area, for library or for, you know, breastfeeding or whatever.
And then the open area will be in the middle and it will be freestanding furniture.
But I don't, I can't sit here and say that there's a ramp leading down to the basement.
But there is accessibility to the first floor.
Is this age restricted in terms of the children?
Pardon me, Mr. Johns?
Will it be age restricted?
The age is from one to five.
One to five.
Gotcha.
With the parent, with the child.
So, again, if there's a stair issue, the parent would have to check.
carry the child down the steps.
Any other questions?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No other answers, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the I-2 medium industrial zoning at this location.
The formerly industrial section of the neighborhood has transitioned primarily into residential.
In 2013, the city created a new use type event assembly facility to allow event spaces that are compatible with residential neighborhoods.
The city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variance for event assembly facility.
MI 2024-006-104-2731 Federal Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowa and my vote is no.
Number 14, MI 2024, 006107, 2630 Westerrod Avenue. Leonard Alteri is the attorney.
Leonard Altieri is the attorney attorney.
There's a letter of support from Fairmount Civic Association.
And two additional letters.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
How are you?
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Leonard Altieri, L-E-O-N-A-R-D. Last name is Altieri, A-L-T-I-E-R-I, with the law firm of Claire Harrison Harvey Brandsburg, and we represent the applicant, Alliance Girard Owner, LLC.
Where are a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
So our client is Alliance Girard Owner LLC, and they are the owner of the property located at 2630 West Girard.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and agree with its accuracy?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Share your screen and start your presentation, please.
Thank you very much, sir.
Can you see the screen, Mr. Chairman?
Perfect.
So this is a pretty straightforward application.
Again, we're here for the property located at 2630 West Gerrard Avenue.
I'm going to put it up.
So here's the property right here.
The property is known as the GEO, which is a new apartment community, which has been
constructed essentially at the corner of West Gerrard Avenue and North 27th Street.
Gerrard Avenue is right here where my cursor is.
27th Street is running where that set of buses.
The property itself is located in the CMX3 Community Commercial Mixed Use Zoning District.
It's also subject to three overlay districts, none of which are applicable for the application that we're speaking about this afternoon.
What we are seeking to do is to install an exterior reverse lit sign to identify the building.
It'll be mounted to the wall essentially right here, right there, and you can see it better.
in the signage plan. So this is a computer generated signage plan to show you what the
sign will look like. Again, it'll be fixed to the side of the building. It'll be internally
illuminated. The sign itself is essentially 64 square feet, the surface area. The reason why we
are before the zoning board this afternoon is that in the CMX3 zoning district, you can't have a sign
extend above the second floor windowsill. If you look right here, I can zoom in. This is the signage
plan, essentially showing you the dimensions. And basically what we're seeking is essentially a
seven-foot variance from the second floor windowsill, where we're extending is about seven feet.
The reason why we are placing the sign in this location is that the main entrance to the building
is located right here which will access not only the residential units but also the bike room it's
where the common deliveries will be and it'll also be uh where the uh as i said the mail room
the sign is necessary for the branding of the residential aspect of the property
and again is being located uh where the main entrance to the building will be
we need to place it above the second floor windowsill because this area down here is
commercial, and we don't want to put it any lower because it has the potential to conflict with any
future tenants that we're going to have on that ground floor of this building. We did meet with
the Fairmount Civic Association on December 5th. 22 residents attended, 17 of those attendees and
three board members voted to support, four RCO board members voted non-opposition, and the RCO
did give us a letter of non-opposition, which is found right here. We also have letters of support
from the Fairmount Community Development Corporation, as well as a neighbor who lives
at 912 North Taney Street, Mr. Brendan Murphy, which was also included in the overall exhibit
packet. This is a condensed version for the presentation. With that being said, Mr. Chairman,
as I said, it's a pretty straightforward application. I do have my client, Mr. Eric
Carlson from Alliance, who should be on the call. If there's no questions for me, I can have him
call and come on and adopt my testimony do that and then we'll open it up to the board when we're
done so eric if you can just raise your hand the board will let you in
they've been allowed to speak hello hi eric could you please state your name is spelled
for the stenographer eric carlson eric carlson where a firm to tell the truth
C-A-R-L-S-O-N.
Do I affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
the whole truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Eric, were you on the call when I went through the presentation?
And is everything that you heard me say true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you adopt that testimony as your own?
Thank you very much.
I have no questions further from Mr. Carlson, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the board.
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
no further hands mr chair planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the CMX III commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The appellant has not shown that an economic detriment would occur
if they were required to comply with the signed location requirements in the zoning code.
The pending commission recommends that the board deny their proposed signed variance.
MI 2024-006-107-2630 West Road Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Have a good holiday.
Back and see if we can find Mr. Cooper here.
Stop in.
you remember mr cooper's number which what was what was that
i'm giving you one second it was up toward the beginning of the list
number five yes thank you thank you who said that by the way board member gaston
All right, 2024-005-963-5430-44 Paschal Avenue.
Frederick Cooper, please.
Mr. Cooper.
Ms. Carter.
Mr. Cooper is there. He's sitting right
across from me. He's trying to figure out his computer.
He's here.
Maybe I should...
I think I have him now.
Let me come over there.
You got it?
You've got to keep
devices separate, so whatever
Mr. Cooper's on, let him stay
on that, please. Mr. Cooper,
could you state your name and spell for the
stenographer? Frederick
Cooper.
F-R-E-D.
D-E-R-I-C-K, C-O-O-P-E-R.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
And you're the owner of this property, am I correct?
Yes, sir.
And this application is for adult care in an existing semi-detached structure.
The proposed use of adult care is prohibited in the I-2 zoning district.
There is a letter of support from the Southwest Consortium RCOs with a proviso, and unanimous support from the South Philadelphia District Services.
So, Mr. Cooper, first thing, could you turn on your video so we can see you?
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, I have had to
promote him. You're going to promote him? Yes,
I just promoted him. He'll be returning. Thank you.
Can you see me now? No, not yet, sir.
you should turn on your video
let you turn on your video now sir
let me go to her
no you got to do it from there
okay you're on Mr. Cooper
all right Mr. Cooper now what we want you to do is
you have your documents right in the computer
tell him I'm present
he's saying that you have your documents
but tell them i was presenting tina's going to be preventing presenting all the documents no you
you you you have to present because you own the property okay we'll come to this computer okay
okay we'll come to this computer okay we have to go back on my computer because
everything's in my computer Jason what do we have to do to get her on okay I've
just promoted this quarter I got a panel issue we were sworn in shortly all right
Mr. Cooper, please come on that computer.
Okay, Mr. Cooper, you see the computer in front of you.
What we want you to do now is to put the documents for this project up on the computer.
There should be a button that says share screen.
Do you see where the documents are?
Mm-hmm.
Here we come.
Sharing.
Sharing.
Here we come.
Share.
Okay, I think, is it being shared now?
No, it's not. We don't see anything.
There we go.
So, share.
You should have to, do you see, you open your documents, and then you push share screen.
Oh, okay.
I'm doing it, but it's not sharing.
I don't know why I share something.
Bill, IT, what kind of computer do you have?
A Mac.
You still should be able to hit the share button,
then it should ask you what you want to share,
and then you should be able to share
the name of the document
that you're trying to share.
What about now?
You got to see it first.
How does it say? It's right here.
Can you see that?
Now hit share now, he said.
Excellent.
I don't see share on you.
Share is on the bottom of the Zoom window.
I say to share on this.
Right.
And once you hit that, it then asks you what you want to share.
Try sharing the entire screen then.
Share, application window, system, preface, universal documents.
listen i have we have one more case left before we have to go i'm going to do the case i'll come
back to you and see if you can't figure it out okay i have one more case here and i'll be back
in five to ten minutes okay okay so go out and then come back in all right we'll we'll call you
wanted to come back in. Okay. Thank you. MI 2024-006-305-2557 West Sterner Street. Joseph
Consul is the attorney. There's a letter of support from Swamp Poodle Neighbors
Parcels Association, an affected RCO with some provisos. Mr. Consul, Mr. Consul, you have
already been sworn uh just for the record uh say your name joseph consul could you identify your
client in relationship to the property my client is amia amaya williams she's the owner of the
lovely lane daycare which is the the tenant you stipulate to the reading of the refusal do you
agree with its accuracy i do please start your presentation okay hi everyone joe consul i'm here
for uh amaya williams owner of a lovely lane daycare seeking approval to use the space at
2557 west sterner street as a child care center which is prohibited in the rsa 5 zoning district
there's the refusal uh in 2016 this property was approved for a 12 child daycare and there's
And there's the child care facility license that was pulled in 2017. It was active for, I guess, only until May of 2018. Since that time, I'll show you what it looks like.
the child care facility license that was pulled
in 2017. It was
the property has
become
what looks like
a salon
that's the exterior of it
so despite being zoned
it doesn't appear to have ever
supported a single family use
what it looks like on the outside now
here's the interior
got nothing in there
stairs leading up to the second floor
obviously the salon's been gutted
my client has a lease for the property
under a lovely lane daycare
seeks to use it as a daycare
childcare facility
put together some notes
that were used for the RCO meeting
it's going to be Monday through Friday
7am to 5pm
this is her
second location
as mentioned
in the
letter from
Strawberry Managing Community Concern
her other locations at
3300 St. Vincent Street.
There are
concerns that parents wouldn't block
traffic or park on residence sidewalks
and trash will be collected daily by a
private hauler and store
indoors, both of which my client
agrees to.
is there one proviso
both revolving trash
parent pickup and parent
parking and noise
management we don't
anticipate based on my client's
history and the location that there'll
be much concern
regarding the noise
some other photos of the posters
the old
approval
for tax
clearance.
I believe we uploaded
to the system two days ago
a more recent tax clearance.
Pull that up if
the city attorney needed it.
I don't have it at the ready right this second, but I did find it
and upload it two days ago.
There was a appeal application, which was done
without me, but I jumped in now.
All right. That's it. We included the floor plan, which, again, my client intends to use the entire property.
The exterior has handicap accessibility, and there's a bathroom that's handicap accessible as well on the first floor.
So she's compliant. The number of children will be based on her CO and what the state allows her to have based on the space that she has available.
so she's not exactly sure what that number will be somewhere either on the low end uh 12 high end
probably be 20. all three basement first floor and second floor uh there will not be any children
in the basement no um so you can i can call her to explain her her layout more why don't you bring
Okay, Ms. Williams.
Hi, good evening.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stodog?
Amiya Williams, A-M-I-A, last name W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Counselor.
Good evening, Ms. Williams. Did you hear my testimony just now regarding a lovely lane daycare, too?
Do you agree with what I said, and do you adopt it as your own?
Would you briefly just explain the layout, the proposed layout of this, the number of employees you'll have, and just that sort of thing that will kind of build on the sort of light floor plan that you provided?
Yes. So it will always be three people. It will always be two staff and a director. The basement is basically for storage. The first floor will be for like library, small group, circle time. The second floor will be for napping and there's two rooms upstairs and there's a kitchen. And that will be like for the staff for them to like have a break or eat lunch and stuff inside.
Nothing further.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, Mr. Consul, we didn't receive a copy of a lease that was also signed by
Mr. Consul, we didn't receive a copy of a lease that was also signed by the landlord. Do you have that with you?
Ms. Williams, did you send me a landlord copy signed lease or?
I believe so.
Let me check to see this. The lease that we that you had included was not landlord signed.
Do you have that at the right? Actually, wait a minute. No, no, it's not.
Do you have that at the ready that you could you could send over?
I have a copy and I can send it over right now as we speak. Yes.
Okay. That would be great. Cause we do need that. We do need that to,
to vote. My, my other question was there was some,
we received letter, a letter from strawberry mansion, which you referenced.
We also received a letter to support from Swampoodle neighborhood parcels
association. They both asked for interior trash storage.
and then Strawberry Mansion
asked for commercial trash pickup.
Swampoodle wanted the hours of operation
specified.
Seven seconds.
Is that five days a week?
Yes, five days a week.
So I just was checking if you were
okay with all of those provisos.
Are you emailing that over, Ms. Williams?
Yes, I'm doing that right now.
Sorry for the delay. I didn't notice that
when I was putting all this together. That's okay. Thank you.
That's for sure.
We could go to, while we're waiting, go to planning
and the public, if you'd like.
Questions or comments from the public,
the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands raised, Mr. Chair.
Planning, planning.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the RSA-5, Presidential Single Family Zoning
at this location.
The property has received use permits in 2016
for family daycare and group childcare up to 12 children.
However, the appellant has not shown that increasing
to a childcare center for 13 or more children
is necessary to continuing to drive economic use
on the property.
Planning commission recommends that the board denied
the proposed use variance for childcare.
i haven't gotten a copy of the lease yet i want to exit out from you guys
yeah i mean if you email to me i guess i could i could flip it over okay
Thank you.
I'm sorry, board.
Yes, I'm sorry.
Can we send it?
You're fine.
i haven't got it got it yet i can send it to hillary as soon as we you know as soon as i get
it why don't i do this one i let joe let me come back in about five minutes let me go see
how Mr. Cooper's make it out. Okay.
Joe, go out and come back in, okay? I'll call you back in in hopefully 10 minutes.
Mr. Cooper. Cole, please get Mr. Cooper on.
I'm back in.
okay thank you mr cooper yes sir how are you could you are you have your video on please turn
Okay, thank you.
your video on the video all right have you found how to work the computer yet yes she found that
all right could you all right do me a favor please put your documents up sure
Can you see?
Can you see the screen?
No, we cannot, ma'am.
Chair.
Chair.
Mr. Cooper, you know, what we're going to have to do is we're going to have to continue this case.
And your next presentation, if you want to have someone call the office,
and maybe they can help you with some instructions.
But before the next hearing,
well, make sure that you know how to do
what you're doing here and to get your documents on.
All we'd have to do is get your documents on
and we can hear your case.
We're going to have to continue this, okay?
And Mr. Trey, I just want to add,
and Ms. Geiger,
you would be able to present this case yourself
if you have a signed lease for this property.
But if you do not, then-
She has one.
A signed lease?
okay well you need to submit that and then you can present the case okay
all right thank you we're going to continue this case send all the paperwork in and we'll
we'll see if we can't get you back in as quick as we can okay okay thank you mr cooper thank you
anything is the computer bring back on uh joe please
show console hey uh we're here she can't she can't find it at the race she said she uploaded
it to eclipse when she originally applied so i don't know if she's gonna get it we gotta send
it over or what what we'll do is we're gonna have to hold the vote hi joe okay all right
as soon as you as soon as you get it we'll get it as soon as we come back we'll make sure you
get on it right okay thanks thank you very much mr chair i think we can schedule the vote for this
one for January 8th
at 2 p.m.
I think in the next three weeks
Mr. Consul will absolutely have that over.
Thanks, Joe.
So we'll vote in our next date.
Is there anyone
in the Brooks and Walters
whose case has not been heard?
I do not see any hands.
Let's take a five-minute break.
Mr. Michael Handley.
Mr. Michael Handley has his hand raised.
sir could you please state your name sure could you please state your name and spell it
mr chair these may be questions about the 330 list yeah these are three for 330 i'm sorry yes
we have not yeah we're going to take a five okay wait great okay we're going to take a five minute
break and we'll come back and we'll get to the 330 list all we need is five minutes thank you
Bill Bergman. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be
chairing the 330 section. With me is our board member Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman. Our board member Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chair. Board member Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman. Board member Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Also, here is our attorney, Hilary Emerson, and our executive director, Ian Haggerty.
Here's our virtual format. The proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by notifying ZBA executive director at phil.gov.
For our court stenographer, we asked attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All inquiries should be sent to ZBA Executive Director at phil.gov.
Let's look at our schedule.
Number six, MI 2024-002-822-8007-Roosevelt Boulevard.
That case has been continued.
Any other requests for continuances?
Good evening, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hand.
I have a hand up from Amaya Williams.
Do I want them to speak again?
Do you want to let them speak again?
Hey, that's my client.
Hey, that's Michael.
We sent the lease over, and she's really hoping that we could try to get a vote.
I sent it over to Hillary, if that's at all possible.
Can we vote?
Unfortunately, we already continued the case and announced the vote for a later date.
And we started a new list.
We'll get you back the first day we're back, Joe.
January 8th, we'll be back, okay?
Thanks.
All right.
Any other requests for continuances?
I'm sure I do not see any further hands right now.
So number one, MI 2023-007-273-2126 West Erie Avenue.
No exhibits.
This is the third listing.
Lavi Properties LLC in Pennsylvania Star Properties.
Listed owners.
David Lackner is the listed applicant.
This is Mark Must Be Heard.
I do not see any hands raised for that matter.
So MI 2023-007-273-3126 West Erie.
This is the third listing.
We still have no exhibits.
I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss
Sonetta Graham, my vote is to dismiss
Ty Owen, my vote is to dismiss
And number 7, MI 2024
004-865
3911-19 North 5th Street
Judas San Diego is the listed applicant
S&S Realty are the owners
No exhibits, first listing
Judas San Diego
once again Mr. Chair I do not see any hands raised thank you so MI 2024 004 865 3911 and 19
North Fish Street cases continued mark must be heard we're going to go to number two
I-2024
001 452
7130 Boyer Street
Michael Hanley is the attorney
for the owner. There's a letter
of non-opposition from the Mount
Erie Neighbors RCO
Mr. Hanley
Yeah, we were joining as a panel, sir
Sure, thank you
yes good evening good evening can you hear me mr handley wait i can't sorry we're so late
could you please state your name and spell for this denographer
sure it's uh mike handley m-i-k-e-h-a-n-d-l-e-y where or a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do but you identify your client the relationship to this property
Yes, my client is MRSA Group, Inc., and its owner, Khalid MRSA, and they are the owner of the property at 7130 Boyer Street.
You stipulate to the reading of the refusal. Do you agree with its accuracy?
Share your screen and start your presentation, sir.
Can you see everything okay?
You're up now, sir. Yep.
All right. So, as you see here, we have the refusal along with the application for appeal. I'll go through these real quick. Project information form. Here is the, as the chairman mentioned, the RCO support, two board members and two meeting attendees all in support of the project.
Here is the State Department document showing Mr. Merza is the sole owner of Merza Group Inc.
I have the deed here showing Merza Group Inc. as the owner of the property at 7130.
Here is the tax clearance valid through December 26, 2024.
I have all of the proofs of mailing, the notices to the neighbors, as well as photographs of the posting of the posters at the property.
uh next here i have a 1947 approval to have this property say that again
i have the 1947 approval to use the property as a three-unit property uh first second and third
floor all being separate apartments this is how the property was originally built prior to the
zoning code. And you can see here in 1947, it was being used as three separate individual units for
three separate families. I also have the 1963
I also have the 1963 denial. That was an attempt to use the property as four units. I believe a fourth unit was to be put in the basement, and that was denied.
As you can see right here, they wanted to put a fourth unit in, and you can see right here it says apartment and basement. That fourth unit was denied, and it remained as a three-unit property.
and they're just going through the denial here we have the uh floor plans originally my client
was going to was going to attempt to do this as a four unit uh with a fourth unit in the basement
however after i spoke with him and we went through the history of the the property he agreed to drop
this so there will be no fourth unit in the basement that's just going to be a regular
standard basement with the hot water heaters boilers all of that um but these are the plans
for the first, second, and third floor. I have some photographs here. This is the first floor.
Nothing has been done to it. That's the front door right there. This is the second floor.
This is the back of the unit. There's a closet there. We see here, this is the kitchen on the
second floor. Here on the third floor, again, there's a kitchen there. And all of this,
It's important to mention that when he bought the property, it was already laid out like this.
All these kitchens were here.
He did upgrade the appliances, the cabinets, and everything, but he didn't run any new pipes, no water pipes, no electric, no gas.
He didn't move any walls, put in any walls.
This was all laid out as a three-unit when he purchased it.
He just obviously upgraded it.
Here I have a map of the blocks surrounding the property.
This is our property right here in green.
The property is circled in red.
There's 16 of them.
They are all either currently or were approved for multi-unit apartments.
I believe eight of them are currently still approved and eight of them have had their approvals expire.
They haven't renewed their approvals. So there is some history in this neighborhood of having multi-unit buildings or multi-unit properties.
And again, here are the showing the rental license to the properties here on the map.
So you can see this one's inactive. This one is still active here.
here we show 7128 boyer street which is on one side of our property at 71 30 here we show 7132
which is on the other side and you can see they're both multi-unit they have their own separate
electric meters um i have here i'll blow it up a little bit this is just um the uh the required
parking parking spots and you can see as we are in an rsa3 as i'm sure you are aware you
need one parking spot for every uh unit next here i have a map an overhead of the neighborhood 7130
here is where uh it was where the applicant's property is i have some other properties laid
out here, you know, 7132, 7128. The purpose of this is to show that, and here you can see this
is Boyer Street, my client's property is right here, 32, 28, 26. The purpose of this is to show
that in this neighborhood, since this neighborhood was laid out prior to the zoning code, there are
no, it wasn't designed to have any off-street parking. None of these properties have off-street
parking. These are across the street, 7121. I shouldn't say none. There is a handful. You can
see this property right here that's blue. They just redid the property recently. They gutted
the whole thing and made it a one-bedroom, and they put a spot going down into where the basement
used to be. There is one or two properties in this area that do have driveways, but the vast
majority, this is across the street from my client's property, Sydney Street. The vast, I'd
say 90, 95% of these properties, this is the street next to my client's street. None of them
have any kind of off-street parking. Again, this is across Boyer Street on Durham, the same street
here just on the other side of Boyer. None of these properties were set up or designed for
off-street parking. So even if my client were to, you know, completely gut this property and make it
a single-family home, he would still need a variant from the off-street parking as there's
just no way, there's no place to put off-street parking for his property. There's a little alley
here, but only half of that is his, and it's not very wide, so you couldn't put anything there,
which is why neither one of these properties ever have. There's no area here. You can see
Here you can see where my cursor is behind these properties. There's no area for parking there.
where my cursor is behind these properties. There's no area for parking there.
So, I mean, it would be virtually impossible for my client to come up with even one off-street parking spot, even if we were to do a single-family home.
My client, you know, the plans to do this are in line with the neighborhood.
A lot of these properties, I showed one on either side here, 28 and 32, they are both multifamily properties right now.
They both have, I think one of them has a two unit. One of them has three unit. The home was built as a three unit. It was used as a three unit. It was approved as a three unit. And basically my client just wants to be able to complete his upgrades and get three people in there.
Like I said, the community organization supported our application, and one of the community members that was at the hearing actually said that she herself has a three unit that she rents out in the neighborhood here.
So basically, my client is just looking to, you know, kind of use the property in line with how it's been used before and use the property in line with the current usage in the neighborhood for a lot of the properties.
And with that, I'd be happy. I have my client here, Mr. Merza. He's actually in my office with me here.
Bring him on and adopt your testimony.
Sure. Mr. Merza, did you hear everything I said today?
Wait one minute. Get him to identify himself, right? Spell his name for the reporter.
Okay. Hello, everybody. Good evening. First name is Khalid, K-H-A-L-I-D, and the last name is Mirza, M-I-R-Z-A.
Where are firms that tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Counsel, proceed.
Thank you. Mr. Mirza, did you hear everything that I stated this evening?
Yes. And do you agree that everything I said today is true and accurate?
Yes. And would you adopt everything I said this evening as your own testimony?
Yes. I have no further questions with that, Mr. Chairman, if you'd like to open up.
Counsel, when did he happen to buy the property?
I thought it was 2018.
Okay. Thank you. Questions from the board?
Are there images of the inside?
pictures of the first and second floors done and the third first floor looks like it's almost
demolished am i right correct the first floor so these so these first pictures here of the first
floor and then this is the second floor second floor second floor third floor third floor third
floor third floor and the plan your floor plans yes the plans are right here yeah make them bigger
yeah probably blow them up a little bit is that any better or do you want them no that's better
and so so but so now i just want to be clear so you're asking for three units correct we are not
doing anything in the basement correct okay so so you'll so these plans are so everything is the
same except the basement is gone correct yes right everything the first second and third floor will
be exactly in line with these plans basement staying exactly as it is just as a regular
row home basement okay so i have a question about the porch then um so is the porch still enclosed
the porch is no longer enclosed no okay so the picture you just showed us was the older picture
of the home the porch that was open right so the the picture that shows the front of the property
yes let me uh scroll down to that so yes this is an old this is google image and this is this is
before uh this part was torn down you can see if you look at the photographs of the posting
so he's put a new front you can kind of see here um so he's torn it down they put up a
new railing here uh but it's no longer enclosed in that with that yellow kind of ugly siding i think
the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Is there comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have Charles Richardson with the hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak.
Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Richardson.
Good evening, Mr. Chair.
Good evening, Mr. Chair.
Good evening.
Good evening.
You've already been sworn, sir.
Certainly.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 508 City Hall.
Councilwoman is not going to stand in opposition to granting the variance.
Very much, sir.
We appreciate it.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning, Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
Sorry, one second.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends no change to the RSA 3 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The property has a documented history as used as a multifamily dwelling with no off-street parking.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed variance for three dwelling units and no off-street parking.
M.I. 2024-001-452-7130, Boyer Street. I vote yes with Proviso. No basement living, maximum three units.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Carol Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
I win, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a good evening.
You too. Number three, MI 2024-001-459-5357-Lancaster Avenue.
John D'Antonio is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Overbook West Neighbors Incorporated.
They'll be coming back in as a panel shortly, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. D'Antonio.
You're muted, sir.
Can you hear me now?
I hear you now.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
John D'Antonio on behalf of my clients, Changing Lanes, Transport, LLC,
attorney ID number 83473, I do have present as well on the Zoom meeting
is the CEO and one partner, Christine Tarzan, and the operations manager.
Okay, hold on one minute.
Do me a favor.
Could you spell your last name for the court's stenographer?
It's spelled D-apostrate, capital I-N-T-I-N-O, John D'Antino, Jr.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client is Changing Lanes Transport LLC.
The owners are Aaron Davis and Christine Tarzan.
I also have present the operation manager, Michael James.
I do want to put on the record and disclose that Aaron Davis, one of the owners, is deceased.
He died recently.
But Christine Tarzan, who is the operating manager and CEO, is on as well.
And she does have standing in ownership.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the referral, and do you agree with his accuracy?
Share your screen and start your presentation, sir.
Are we okay with the taxes and things like that?
Yes, we didn't receive an updated proof of tax compliance, but I did check.
we didn't receive but I did check on the Philadelphia tax center and the
taxes are in compliance all right are you able to hold on are you able to see
my screen right now I see your postal service okay great yeah all right so
yeah just verify the postal service I believe we sent it out to more than 65
residents, nearby residents. There's the deed, changing lane deeds. You'll see my, again,
changing lane transport LLC. They acquired the property December 15th of 2022. By way
of history, this property was previously, well, it was always industrial, but it was
operated as an ambulance facility. And the residents obviously had an issue with that
prior ownership. I do
want to mention that at the RCL
meeting, we got a unanimous
approval by all
the participants, including
a number of neighbors that were there during this meeting.
There was a provisional
that the issue they had with the prior
owner was apparently some of the garbage
was being...
Mr. D'Antonio, what I think you should
do is, why don't you go through your
talk, but go through, show us some photos
of the property and things like that, okay?
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
and so
One second here.
I just had the pictures.
Hold on.
One second, sir.
I just need to open this one, okay.
All right.
All right.
Give me one second.
They were downloaded, but apparently they didn't.
So you sent some things to Hillary.
Could it all be there?
Yeah, I did send them previously to Hillary.
Let me just – here we go.
So let's see.
Here we go.
This should be it.
Here we go.
All right.
So you can see this is the existing structure of the
property. And there is no intention to make any modifications or improvements or renovations at
all. The existing property has been running as an auto body shop. Obviously, it's not in
compliance with the ICMX current rezoning. We're asking for a special use. My clients acquired the
property as is. They made some minor reservations regarding painting and so forth. But you'll see
within this property, they do have the equipment for auto body shops, the lifts, the forklifts,
power tools things of that nature this is the entrance obviously the signs and so forth uh
garage entrance this and this is a garage area as part of the building it holds 46 parking spaces
that's more than enough to maintain and and hold the cars that are being repaired yard entrance
rear of the building rear door front of the building and then we get some interior
interior photos there's an office bathroom office area for the operating managers
and so forth so again this is an obviously this garage entrance in and out this has always been
a service area um my clients when they purchase the property we're under the impression that
and i wasn't involved doing that transaction that the zoning was proper and they could still run
their business as they purchased it obviously they got in trouble and here we are um again
this conforms with the area uh all the neighbors that attended the meeting there was quite many
there uh were unanimous and supportive of this um i do have my client um michael james who's
the operation manager uh he's agreed to make some renovations as well as part of the provisios
he would make some africade renovations to the exterior of the building which the neighbor's
light very much. He also obviously
is volunteering with the community.
The owner and the
operation manager are from that area
and long-time residents,
and they are, again, working with other
management companies.
So at this time, I would like to
wave in Michael
James and have him
sworn in.
Are you going to adopt your testimony?
Yes, please.
Thank you.
Michael James.
they have been allowed to speak hi sir could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
yes chairman uh it's michael james m-i-c-h-a-e-l james j-a-n-e-s
michael you heard that you heard the presentation
you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you michael did you hear the uh presentation and
see the documents that I provided
to the panel? Yes.
And would you affirm that
everything that I mentioned is truthful and accurate?
Yes, I do.
And do you adopt everything that
I mentioned, including my testimony, as your testimony
of your own?
Yes, I do.
And do you have anything else you would like to elaborate
regarding your intent
on using the property and some of the
provisions that we discussed that you would
implement to
make the residents more happy about the situation oh yes absolutely i appreciate the time uh this
this uh this evening um and just to add further the testimony from our attorney uh
Per the testimony from our attorney, the establishment was completely, you know, as far as the presentation of the property has been renovated with new sidewalks, new fencing, cleaned up the area tremendously with the neighbors.
We have some collaboration with the other businesses that were next to us once they saw that we came in and did.
And the community was very excited to see the new us being the new owners there.
You know, unfortunately, we were at this place today that, you know, it was previously used as, you know, a collision and repair shop.
And that's where our ask is today. But working with the community, we're employing the community as well.
To give you an example, our current employee staff obviously has been on hold, but we have the ability to give second chances, so we do have some great impact in the community.
When we had our board meeting with the community previously, they were pleased to hear the impact that we're having directly.
We're looking to have community engagement regarding, you know, training opportunities for youth as well to bring on this trade to adapt, you know, the way of the way of bringing some peace into the community, providing jobs.
We're very secure. You know, we have a great business model and security with the premises to protect the vehicles.
We ensure the community that there wouldn't be any other outside our defense, any vehicles that are sitting and polluting the street.
Any vehicle that enters into the establishment has to be approved by the insurance company as well.
And, you know, that backdrop as far as overall goals are.
And hopefully with everything moving forward, we look forward to continue to build with any community and establish jobs and employment,
but also bring in a resource on that corridor of length that they're having.
All right. Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Anderson?
Just briefly, two things.
One, Mr. D'Antino, I'm D'Antino, I'm sorry.
um so i noticed in the documents that were submitted for the for the violation notice
that there was reference to um spray painting but there was no reference to spray painting on
the referral is your client seeking to have a spray painting booth yes so we obviously we would
need yeah a spray painting booth and for repairs yes okay so if that's not on and i have to pull
I don't know if that's what that's probably that probably requires a variance if that is not on
here because that's a separate use category so personal vehicle repair and maintenance would
not include a spray painting booth vehicle paint finishing shop is the use that you would need on
there so if that's what your client is seeking then I recommend that we resume the hearing once
you get an amended refusal that has that use.
Otherwise, your client's going to probably have to go through this process again
because I believe that use would probably require some sort of zoning relief as well.
Yeah, am I still on mute? I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
Am I still on mute?
Okay. Thank you for that question.
That's a great question.
I just want to bring clarity to our attorney as well, and sorry for the confusion.
So our initial phase is to do collision and not the repair.
The paint was a discussion that we had as far as maybe a separate phase.
But in our current business, we always outsource that as well.
We never, you know, that wasn't part of our establishment.
We outsource today, and we intend to do that as well.
down the line once we get back open and if that's a discussion with our
executive team that we want to go that route, we'll follow the proper stance.
But currently, we just want to operate as business as usual as we were
with the deliverer there. Okay. Alright, because
then what you have is fine if that is the case, but just know that you would
need additional approval, most likely really from the zoning board, if you were to add
that service in the future. Thank you, Hilary. No problem.
Yeah, no problem. The other question I had is the RCO did ask about a temporary three-year variance in their letter.
Was there any objection to that request if the board does grant?
I have no objection.
Okay. Thank you.
um questions or comments from the virtual audience
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes mr chair i have a gregory allen with their hand raised i have allowed them to speak
hello chair hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
yes sir gregory g-r-e-g-o-r-y last name a-l-l-e-n
um you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do mr allen please proceed thank you chair and board um first we would like to extend our
condolences to the davis family and everyone in changing lanes a few members of our community
were familiar with Mr. Davis. And it was him and Mr. James's testimony that made people feel
comfortable with allowing this property to be used in the way that it had been used in ways
we weren't comfortable with. So since our RCO meeting, I can testify that the company has
met all the things we've asked for um they do employ quite a few people from our neighborhood
at least two of them sat in on the rco meeting they we've accused them but they felt comfortable
because they're members of our overbrook-winfield community and then finally um we have uh made
connections with Overbrook High School
the business
offered to partner with them
so Overbrook High School is an
auto body repair
intends to reactivate
that program and we will
be reaching out to Mr. James
for that purpose
and also
the business, the RCO
the Overbrook West Neighbors
in addition to being the RCO
is the corridor manager
And so we look forward to helping Changing Lanes be successful with whatever funding or commerce department that we can help with.
So there was support for their application.
Thank you, Mr. Allen. Thank you again for calling us. And we appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
ICMX industrial and commercial mixed-use zoning at this location. The plan has shown that the
proposed personal vehicle repair and maintenance will have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what might be expected. The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the
proposal for a special exemption. Thank you. MI 2024-001-459-5357, Lancaster Avenue.
I vote yes. Temporary variance expires 12-18-27. Michael Johns, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
I win. My vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, everyone. Have a great night. Happy holidays.
Thank you. MI 2024-001-594-922 New Market Street.
Christopher Dean is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Northern Liberty's Neighbors Association,
a letter of support of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Christopher Dean.
Debbie, we're joining as a panelist, sir.
Good evening, Mr. Dean.
Good evening, Mr. Chair. Can you hear me?
Yeah, could you turn on your video?
Yes, I'm trying to start video.
There we go.
All right, Mr. Dean, how are you?
Could you state your name and spell it for this stenographer?
Christopher Dean, that's D-E-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client is Andre Pack, and he is the owner of 922 New Market Street.
Do you stipulate to the reading and the refusal
And do you agree with its accuracy
um start your screen and start your presentation uh is is my we're saying yeah you're fine okay
Start your screen and start your presentation
great um good evening everyone um it's my pleasure to present this application for a duplex in an
rsa5 at 922 new market street upon my client's purchase of this property in 2014 the first floor
had a pass through to the back but two separate entrances to the property uh one on the rear one
of the front door. The property is also over 2,400 square feet, so it's a larger side of a
single-family row home. My client is an immigrant, and this was his first proud purchase in America.
My client over time, while living at the property, being admittedly ignorant to the requirements in
Philadelphia, he did add, he ended up adding a bedroom and putting up drywall, making this
seemingly halfway there, duplex, a full duplex with no basement bedrooms. My client did get
married and then in 2022, after the first child, my client and his wife who lived at the property
vacated. So it's when my client sought to obtain a rental license for this additional unit,
he realized the problem. He had to legalize this use from years past.
I'm going to run through the exhibits and then I'll have the architect just briefly go over the plans and have my client adopt my testimony.
So the the aforementioned deed back in 2020, after my client got married, he did this is the vesting deed to the property.
this is a tax clearance good through january 4th 2025 here's a notice of the refusal
here is our application for appeal uh followed by the project information form i'm going to run
through the pictures and when the alex dollar the architect goes to the plans we can slip we can
zone in on any of the pictures but this is now what is a two unit um a two unit home
what are you what are you showing us now so these are these are this is but is this the first floor
second floor this is so this is so there's no basement living and i and i will touch more about
it in the plans um but this is the each of this is a separate each has a separate kitchen this is
the front units front units kitchen that bathroom another of the bedrooms on the
front unit this is the front of the house and you see right here this is the
actual egress to get into the rear of the property which existed when my
client purchased it and these are now this is going to be unit this is going
to be the the second unit bathroom bedroom the is where the trash is stored for both of the units
the egress to the back and then here's actual internal stairwell to access both units which
also existed at the time my client purchased the property so i will have mr dollar go through the
floor plans and the zoning map again there's more pictures on the zone on the actual context photos
to the zoning map that Alex will explain in a little more detail.
The neighborhood really supports this kind of use.
912 New Market Street, they're actually, I showed this as a historical use.
It's 2015, this became inactive for three units, but that's actually now three condos
that were built.
And then you have nine, we have, this is from 2013, three family dwelling approved at the
property at 930 New Market Street. And just last year at 932 New Market Street, a single family
was converted to a duplex before this board. 934 New Market Street, there was somewhat historical
1996 zoning for a four-family dwelling unit. 938 to 940 New Market Street, this is all part of that
that exhibit that is actually a 16 unit apartment complex um several stores down
from my client's property and the last 941 new market street also there's a rental active
rental license for two units um so the new northern liberties obviously has a it's a it's a
mixed very mixed use there's multiple duplex triplexes and apartment complex in the area but
But in particular, the new MarketStreet block, the two block radius that my client is on, there are multiple, multiple, multiple uses.
Why don't you put the architect on and show us how this place is set up, please?
uh alex dollar if he could alexander dollar if he could be unmuted
Alex Dollar, if he could, Alexander Dollar, if he could be unmuted.
they better not to speak i could you state your name and spell for the stenographer
hello can you hear me i can my name is alexander dollar um a-l-e-x-a-n-d-e-r-d-u-l-l-e-r
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed with your presentation.
And, Alec, if you want me to switch to any of the photos, just let me know.
Yeah, Chris, can you just, I guess, zoom in a little bit on that?
So, essentially, we color-coded everything so that it was pretty easy to kind of understand.
Um, the front unit is essentially a tri-level with the cellar, um, three, three living levels above grade. Um, and then the rear unit is a bi-level unit. Um, as Chris pointed out, the, both staircases were existing.
This was a rather large home, you know, with the servant stair kind of in the back, historically.
Essentially, all Andre did was close off kind of the pass through underneath the rear stair and closed off a doorway in the second floor.
So, Alex, let me ask you this.
You're telling us what he did, not that you did it?
no this is how the building exists now and has essentially existed the point i'm saying is
did you design this for him we did not we've we've documented what is there okay thank you
um it is two units so there is a rear unit rear one bedroom unit with the large bathroom
um kitchen living room and then the front unit is existing your first floor we have kitchen and
living second floor we have a large bedroom third floor we have two bedrooms and a bathroom
and the basement has kind of a small like uh small space like that can be mixed use
There is another bathroom in the basement and laundry and everything.
Essentially, we have explained all the requirements for permitting and legalizing
and everything that would need to be gone through on the building end,
assuming that the board would pass and grant this variance.
and the and the owner andre is willing to undertake all everything to legalize this property
um so chris this was done by the owner right and now he's trying to legalize what he did
yes and um when we met with the rco and i will pull up the rco um rco letter they did they did
give us approval they did just say they'd like to see the building permits um after you know
Assuming the board would grant us the variance, we've maintained close contact with Larry Friedman at NLNA, and we plan on providing copies of every building permits to legalize the essential adding of the other bedroom and closing up, separating the two units formally.
And my client does, he has very happy tenants in the property.
They've renewed.
They showed up both times.
We met twice with the RCO.
They showed up both times to support him, and we're hoping we don't have to displace them if this variance is not granted.
But we are happy to add any proviso about the building permits, as the RCO suggested.
And I will just zoom out just to get through to the end to show the RCO letter.
My client does pay.
This exhibit is the commercial.
He's been paying commercial trash fees at the property, too.
um he pays business taxes at this property um any rental income has been has been reported to the
irs this was the letter of support and as mentioned that they did have a they the two-unit proposal
assuming it complies with the philadelphia building code and my client is what is prepared
to undertake what's necessary knowing that it's going to be up to lni on approvals with the
building code. And the last was my client's adjacent neighbor. They've been there for over
20 years. They support the project. They wrote this letter and they showed up at the last RCO
meeting as well. And these are just the letters, the notices that went out of both the RCO and the ZBA.
And these are just the letters, the notices that went out of both the RCO and the ZBA.
Here's the posting.
And then these remaining 21 pages are all the certificates of mailing.
So just let me let me.
So that small alleyway, whatever you want to call it, that's you go down there to get into the back.
I mean, I can pull that up again.
there it is so but i'm saying you you come from the front and then go back there correct
all right questions from the board
um i'll go ahead you go ahead type i have a question around how much work the architect
has proposed needs to be completed to bring this up to code?
So we would need to install a sprinkler system basically legalize the fire separation between
the two units really that that's already done we just need to kind of drill some holes in the wall
and confirm you know the thickness of uh the gypsum board and then it's mainly uh separating
the utilities the electric between the two units um the best electric are all utilities
well water water is uh yeah water is basically common in most buildings between units and
And I believe he has all electric appliances, but if he has gas, the gas would also need to be separated.
And is there more so for the owner? Is there a plan in place for the two existing tenants while this work happens?
Well, I was going to actually add that. And this is something we discussed at the RCO that we will pay for.
and i'll have um i'll have andre you know confirm this but pay for temporary we hope it's just
temporary but we pay for their displacement during during any construction any anything that was
invasive and just to confirm hillary that's not enforceable though correct no that that would not
be any other questions for the board yes what is in this basement
And what is in the basement?
And this is, you said it's a level.
Currently, it's part of the front unit.
When you come down the stairs, there's kind of an open room area that essentially Andre and the current tenants kind of use as like a den.
and then in front of that is a laundry
and storage area
so the upper right hand pictures
show those areas
and you said
that the tenants
and the property owner
used this space
does he live there
Well, the property owner lived there up until 2022,
and the current tenants are using that space.
The photographs are of how the current tenants are using the space.
So they basically use it as like a theater room.
You can see the projector and the large screen on the wall.
Okay, so when was this conversion done?
Approximately 2016, 2017.
We could have the owner confirm that.
Okay. Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
oh i'm sorry why don't we adopt get your testimony adopted christopher yes and i would just uh close
with that you know we we believe that this variance doesn't alter the use of adjacent
properties and in fact we have support of adjacent properties um the area supports it it doesn't
alter the essential characters to the neighborhood and it is the minimum minimum variance in an area
full of at least two often three up to 16 in this area um and if on on
at least two, often three, up to 16 in this area.
And if Andre Pack could be unmuted.
And...
They have been allowed to speak.
Hello, distinguished board.
Hello, everybody else in attendance.
Andre, could you state your name
and then spell it for the court stenographer?
Absolutely.
My name is Andre Pack.
It's spelled A-N-D-R-E-I.
My last name is Pak, P-A-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed counsel.
Andre, did you listen to my testimony concerning your variance appeal?
And do you adopt it as a true and accurate representation of your own testimony?
Is there anything else you'd want to add to the board regarding the time period of the renovations and your current tenants?
The current tenants know we've had very amicable relationships, and they have expressed the interest in renewing it past the hearing date as well.
So hopefully the board will assist us in making this happen.
And in terms of testimony, no other additions.
And did you, you may have heard the question concerning the work. Alex testified that it may have been 2016. Is that correct?
Yes, it was 2014 when I moved in to 2016. Yeah.
And this was your first house purchase in America?
And you immigrated to America?
Okay. I have nothing further.
Mr. Dean, could you show me the front of the property?
Sure. Yes.
Here is, I mean, here's a, let me zoom in on.
Here's a multi-use that I had mentioned, and this is, hopefully you can get a good amount of use.
So that little doorway there, that little, is that the way you get to the back of the property?
And that's the only way you get in there?
So, like, in other words, like that small thing, you have to, like, carry your groceries and everything else back there?
I mean, how do you get furniture in there?
For the furniture, we have been utilizing the front entrance.
So there is a side exit to the back that you can carry larger, bulkier items.
so we would just get the agreement of the front unit tenants.
All right. Thank you. Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Board with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change the RSA 5 residential single-family zoning
at this location. The appellant has not shown that there are unique physical conditions or
circumstances that would prevent their property from being used in conformance with the zoning
code. The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variance for two-family
household living. Mr. Dean, I want to take this to the executive session on January 8th. We'll
meet in the morning, and we'll vote on this at 2 p.m. on January 8th. I just want to talk to the
other members of the board to really figure out where we stand with this, okay? Thank you, Mr.
Chair. All right, thank you. Okay. Number five, MI 2024-001-595-52 East Washington Lane,
Candace and Charlie
Whatley, it's pro se.
No RCO letter, but notice was sent
to the neighbors with proof of mailing.
Now we're joining shortly as a
panelist, Mr. Chair.
Hello?
How are you?
Could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer.
Candice Watley, C-A-N-D-I-C-E, W-A-T-T-L-E-Y.
Where are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
So this application is for use as a multifamily household living,
three dwelling units in an existing structure.
Multifamily household living is prohibited in the RSA 3 zoning district.
in the rsa3 zoning district so why don't you um share your screen okay and start making
So why don't you...
your presentation all right let me just figure out how to do that it should be that shared button at
the bottom? I'm sorry. I'm just looking for it. What kind of computer do you have?
It's Intel Evo. I'm not really sure. Oh, wait. Here we go. Here we go. I have it now.
okay i guess i should put what i want up first and then we don't see anything i think what you
have to do is you have to open your documents and then push the share screen okay
i'm sorry okay and then
okay you're coming are we good now we are okay so why don't why don't you uh you know bring up
your documents i see that you have the refusal letter the appeal application the project
information, the RCO letter. You have a letter from the RCO? We did not get the letter from the
RCO. We were waiting for it. We didn't get it. When you went to the RCO meeting, how did it go?
Oh, it went well. And I sent over some things that they wanted as far as like
the backyard being shared by everyone and having the tenants contact me if there were 15 or more
um if they were having a gathering of 15 or more and so i was just
tell us your sign that you put up yeah okay mr chair i just want to say we did receive um
the the letter um excuse me from councilman bass's office um earlier today it's a letter
in support from the chew and bell fields uh neighbors club yep and councilman bass has
also taken a position of non-opposition with provisos for no household living in the basement
and interior mailboxes.
Great.
Could you show us your,
when you posted the signs
for the zoning notice?
Here you go.
Can you see that?
It didn't come up yet.
Let me try this again.
Nothing yet?
So you might need to stop sharing and then once you open that document, share your screen.
Thank you.
Because we're just still looking at your files.
So let me open it and then share it.
yeah how do i share it
it will be that green button at the bottom and once you click on it
then it will actually what documents um you would like to share you can do your entire
screen just your thank you so much no problem share all right see it now yeah we do okay do
and you have photos of your property could you show us the inside yes all right is it let me
ask you this is this already a triplex yes right it's already exists as a triplex yes
and and how long has it been a triplex
since i purchased it when did you purchase it in 2016
you bought this in 2016 was it advertised as a triplex um yes
You bought what you thought was a triplex.
You bought what you thought was a triplex.
Now you're having it zoned.
Close the other side of the building.
Let me try to.
Could you open it the same way you just opened up the one before?
Could you open it the same way you just opened up the one before?
Can you see that?
No, you would still have to click on that green share button at the bottom first.
You can see that now, right?
What floor is that on?
The first floor.
It shows the photos of the first floor,
then second, then third, okay?
okay all right okay
so when you click that x button you're clicking to cancel your share screen
so you will have to go back to that green button and then share your screen again
but i have to open up the document first right yes just have it open first but you would still
just need to hit the green share button at the bottom and then open you know click on the document
it so here and here and then i have to go to the window and then let's see
that's better okay so all right that's the first floor as well
what's the first floor oh this here going into the bathroom
um it's just you can't see it oh could you open it let me make it a little bigger
okay here it is so that goes to the path what floor is that name it's still the first floor
okay how many bedrooms how many bedrooms on the first floor two on the first floor
how many on the third floor two how many on the third two the each one has two bedrooms
bath and the and the basement has no living no living
right try to get through the rest of their photos they have all right
Why don't you do the thing you just did?
Do you live in the property?
No, I don't live there.
All three are rented now?
No, all three are not rented.
Are they all the photos you have?
No, they're not.
I'm just trying to pull them up.
Bill, do you have any idea how she could open these up a little bit?
When you click on share, can you try sharing the screen instead of sharing the folder?
do you want me to pull up the plans like it's the triangle on entire screen share an entire
screen okay share screen i have to go to my window
entire screen right yes okay oh okay gotcha
share right okay now go
now you should go to your folders
right and pull up your documents and the ones that you want okay
there you go can you see it now yeah what floor is that that's the third floor
I want to just go through all the morning. I can't you move out. It wasn't a thing on the side. You're going to hit. OK, let me just go through. OK.
That's OK. OK.
that's all on the third floor this is this is the second floor
That's all on the third floor.
this is the second floor third floor third floor first floor
the other pictures and then i have that's the hallway this is the alleyway this is
outside where the trash will go on the side of the building this is the back
of the building and this is the front actually in the rear of the building I'm
sorry there's an action in the rear of the building too right no there's no
exit to the rear you can't get into the yard no oh no you can't from the side
I'll show you.
Let me show you.
From here, see this opening right here that goes into the yard?
Yeah, but I'm saying the house.
In the back of the building, can you step out of the house?
No, you would go out through the front and go out to the yard.
There's only one entrance?
The front of the house is the only entrance you have?
That and the sides are going to the basement.
Hilary, is there any way we could do a resumptive hearing for this?
We can, Mr. Chair.
I do want to note that with three dwelling units, in order to get a certificate of occupancy, which would be required because this is a change of occupancy from a single family classification,
she would need to have sprinklers and provide plans to make sure she met all fire safety requirements.
You hear that?
Yes, I'll pull up the plans right here.
Here they go.
So you have, you come into the first floor here, and then this is the first floor apartment.
office, living, kitchen, and you have the two bedrooms and the bathroom.
So, say you're on the first floor.
Is the only way to get out is through the front door?
So, we could do a proposed rear door.
But I'm saying there's no rear door now?
We're waiting for approval.
and do people live on the first floor now no okay all right show us the second floor
sure so here's the second floor you come up the stairs and you come in here then you have the
kitchen the living area the first bedroom the bathroom and the um the second bedroom
and then you have the one hour rated start stair detail going all up the stairs
and then you have the one hour rated partition going up to the third floor which is you have
the front you come in and you have the kitchen the living area the bath the bedroom bathroom
and then the front bedroom
um and you have the one hour fire rated floor ceiling assembly
and all the utilities are outside and in the basement and the basement will not be occupied
Hillary I I still think we're going to need a resumptive here and get a better look at the
the property. Mr. Chair, what would you like the applicant to have prepared for
the resumption hearing? I think complete photos of the back, complete photos of all the property,
really just a better understanding of what, I really had a hard time following what was going
on with this. Okay. So particularly focusing on the means of egress for the different units.
Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Understood.
So we're going to have a resumptive hearing for this. We'll be in touch.
Sorry, Mr. Chair. I just want to note, Charles Richardson does have his hand raised, so he may have some additional information.
Mr. Richardson.
Good evening again, Mr. Chair.
How are you?
Tired.
The councilwoman is going to hold her support at this point in time until the resumptive hearing to see exactly what it is that they come up with.
until the resumptive hearing to see exactly what it is that they come up with, because it doesn't
sound like the, I know that there were only four people at the RCO meeting, and I don't know what
was shared at that point in time, but we need to have further details as far as what's actually
going on before we make a determination. Thank you very much, Mr. Richardson.
So we're going to have a resumptive hearing, and we just need a better, you know,
practice with the computer whatever you have to do we just need a better way of
seeing everything understanding it okay and then you know especially like how would you get out of
the building you know if you're saying you you don't have that now then you're going to have to
let us know what you're going to do okay okay all right hillary okay that's fine mr chair and i just
also wanted to note that at that time we'll take testimony from the public as well as the
recommendation. Right. Okay, everybody. Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not
been called? I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair. I want to thank everybody. I hope
everybody gets a little rest over the break. I want to thank the staff, Michael, the whole group
you i want to thank everybody um i want to thank planning i i so we we have to we kept here you
later than i think you've ever been here so uh and the whole staff i really do and i and and
thank you and then we can't wait for the new year to get into that new building down there
some of us can't
Good night, everybody.
All right, good night.
Happy holidays.
Good night.
Good night, everyone.
Good night, everyone.
Good night.