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.