Good morning, everyone. Sorry for the delay. We've had a long executive session. We appreciate
your patience. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'm sorry, Frank. I hate to keep buttoning, but can we wait three minutes? There's not
many people in the room yet. Oh, I'm sorry. When you said go ahead, I thought that already
happened. Okay, I'll wait. No, we go live first, then we allow the door to open for
people to walk in. You got it. Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
okay chair we're ready to start thank you again good morning everyone my name is frank
tichico i'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment i'll be participating in today's
hearing along with our Vice Chair Ms. Carol Tenere, Board Secretary Confessor Plaza and
Board Members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkett and
Board Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet
participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can
expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
Before Vice Chair Tenere calls our first case,
I'd like to announce the following cases that are being continued.
1524 North 4th Street, that's case number 001853.
Case number 001685, 1530 North 25th Street.
Case number 001277, 362 East Worcester Street, and case number 001278, 5247 Frankfurt Avenue.
If the applicant and or an attorney do not agree with the continuance of these cases, please raise your hand at this time.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, this is Jason Hand, Clerk 3.
I do not see any hands at this time, sir.
Thank you.
With that, I will ask now if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal of an appeal for
this morning's list, please raise your hand at this time.
okay sir first off i have a miss hillary emerson i will allow her to speak right now
thank you good morning miss emerson please identify yourself with a record and i'll swear
you in good morning mr chair members of the board hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman
sherelle parker emerson e-m-e-r-s-o-n we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do um thank you um i'm not sure where this case is on the list um the
address is 1868th avenue um mi-2020-001255 number three yeah number three on our list okay i
Number three.
Yeah, number three on our list.
Thank you.
Yes, we're requesting a continuance.
I spoke with the RCO yesterday, and they have not had any contact with the applicant, and neither has our office.
I don't know if anybody here representing the applicant is present this morning, but no RCO meeting has been held to date.
And this is Sharon Sillette.
Excuse me.
We also have no exhibits for this case.
okay thank you case number zero zero one two five five one eight zero zero 68th avenue is continued
any other requests for continuances or withdrawals please raise your hand
all right so the next person's hand up is Mr. Oleg Sokolov
I will allow him to speak right now.
Good morning, sir.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your first and last name,
and provide us with your address.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
My name is Oleg Sokolov, O-L-E-G, last name S-O-K-O-L-O-V.
On behalf of calendar number MI2020-001253, that's 5432 Vine Street.
Excuse me one minute.
I just want to swear you in.
Swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. And you're talking about case number 12 on our list, 5, 4, 3, 2 Vine Street?
Yes, sir. Requesting a continuance? Yes, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, we've been unable to
obtain a tax clearance certificate due to some confusion with the IN number, so we're just
working that out. We have had our RCO meeting, and the RCO is supportive of our project.
so uh is there anything we can do on our end sharon yes there is we actually if you will just
go to the revenue department website and you can check the balance the real estate tax balance on
the property and print that out we will accept that okay um if you're able if you're successful
sir in doing that would you still want you still want to continue with um we have no exhibits so
there are no exhibits. I don't know where that was possible. And I do, if I could interject
a thought, Mr. Sokoloff, are you working with revenue? I have communication, but, and so is
the applicant himself, but we just, because this was an EIN number that is associated with that
person. So that's something that's more involved for them to resolve. Say that again, Ms. Saletta?
I'm sorry, Ms. Sunkit. Oh, I was just saying, I'm sorry. If it's an EIN number,
just mentioning to the board, that's something that's more involved. That has to be done
by revenue. So it could be a problem with the EIN numbers, not with the appropriate
applicant. Yeah. All right. We're unsure what it is. So I thought a continuance was best for it.
Okay. But again, if you don't need even the number, you just need the address if you go
the revenue department website if there is a zero tax balance on the property you should be able to
print that out okay great i will um i will definitely have it all in line for the next
hearing thank you all right calendar number zero zero one two five three five four three two vine
Street is continued. Any other requests? Thank you very much. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I do not see any further hands up at this time, sir. Can we proceed? Thank you. And
hold on one second. Got my paperwork here. All right, and again I would just like to advise
everyone uh do not attempt to uh testify in the chat any comments should be directed to our board
administrator miss tanya sunk it i believe with that we can begin uh just let me uh
what am i looking for here uh i have a couple announcements before we begin
the board was scheduled to vote on 7519 ridge avenue this morning that vote will be delayed
one week and we will and will be announced at the beginning of the december 9th session
also if anyone is here for the follow-up hearing on 3929 ridge avenue that hearing will be held at
the start of today's two o'clock session. And with that, did I leave anything out, Tanya and or
Sharon? No, you can go on to the regular list now. Okay, Ms. Tennery, please call the list.
no you can go on to the regular list yeah okay please call the list okay if anyone here presenting
a case today hasn't met with the rco or has an email their exhibit packet five days prior to
this hearing please raise your hand come forward now and explain to the board thank you
looks like we're good carol okay calendar number 1264 the address is 1401 north 7th street
henry clinton is the attorney
i've made mr clinton a panelist good morning mr clinton
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Please identify yourself with a record, and I'll swear you in.
Henry Clinton, 1313 South 33rd Street, Queen Memorial Building, Philadelphia PA, 19146.
Turn to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
and have you emailed your exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the
refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes i have thank you you may proceed
thank you mr nary uh miss sunkett can i share my screen
you sure can mr clinton thank you very much
mr chairman is that visible and is that large enough yes it's great
good morning mr chairman members of the board i'm here on behalf of
the applicant 1401 3 North 7th Street and with me is a principal of that LLC
Neti Levy, L-E-V-I, who is on the call with us. So this is my exhibit package including my table
of contents with exhibits A-A through A-10. My appearance statement, this is the refusal
which I will address as we work through the presentation but basically this is a corner
property at 7th and Master Street. Historically, it was used commercial on the first and residential
above. That is both addresses. It's 1401 and 1403. And I'll show you the aerial photographs of the
corner. We are going back to what the use used to be. We were asking for commercial on the first
floor, which kind of cuts against the grain of what's going on in the city right now.
and then two residential units above.
We did meet with APM and we have a letter of support,
which is in the packet.
You can see it was a unanimous decision
in favor of the project.
They reiterate what the proposal is,
two dwelling units above in commercial space
on the first floor with some parking in the rear.
APM also went into a detail
analysis of our presentation if the board wishes to read that it's certainly there for their for
their viewing these are photographs of the site again seventh and master it's a double lot on
the corner 1401 and 1403 this is a view looking toward the west i've not been able to determine
how long the lots have been vacant i'm told they've been vacant for at least 10 years and
probably closer to 20. Another view, this is looking east. You can see across the street
is a commercial establishment, and there's two units above. These are the plans for the project.
Again, the first floor would be, this is looking at the front of the building on 7th Street. The
first floor would be commercial, so we have large commercial windows there. The height does not
exceed 38 feet. In fact, our height is 36 feet, so we have no issues with height.
This is the view of the side of the building. Again, the commercial large windows would wrap
around onto Master Street and there'll be one living unit on the second floor front and then
the second living unit on the third floor and part of the second. The parking will be in the
rear of the building. It's tucked a little bit under the building and then also some open space
it's tucked a little bit under the building and then also some open space in the back
in the back where we'll have.
where we'll have three-car parking for the commercial space.
I'll blow this up a little bit.
This is the site plan just to give the board a more
specific feel for the property. Again, it's a double-wide property, a lot of frontage on
master street we have a large area in the back for trash storage it'll be commercial trash pickup
we won't rely on the city of philadelphia for that
these are the floor plans commercial open on the first floor parking in the rear outsides
two spaces tucked under the building one spot in the open air space this is the second floor that's
to be a one-bedroom apartment the one bedroom here with the bath and then for the second apartment
you would walk up the stairs have one bedroom here and then the entire third floor will be
the second part of the of unit number two so unit number one is one bedroom and unit number two is
two bedrooms one two and there will be a rooftop deck set back from the rear of the building as
well as the front of the building. My additional exhibits include, you know, the deed, the typical
exhibit you have in a presentation, the deed, our tax certification, application for appeal,
and what I wanted, and also this is the zoning map. I just wanted to point out to the board
that when my client bought this property, it was actually zoned CMX2. The zoning has changed over
time but you can see the other two corners are cmx1 and our commercial establishments on those
corners this is our notice letter mailing the other thing i thought i would like to point out
through the board is these are the zoning records for 1401 north 7th street so back in the 60s
this was a retail meat grocery store with two family dwelling above
again going further back into the 50s was still was retail meat market and two families above
and this is for 1403 uh was a store and a dwelling above
1403 again a little bit more recent in 1972 it was a family two family dwelling and a barbershop
And then later on, it became a two-family dwelling and a church.
And again, just referencing 1403, at one time, it was also a barbershop and two families above.
So that's just giving you some background as to what this corner was used for.
Historically, it was commercial.
And as I say, despite the situation that we're in, the economy, my client wants to put commercial on the first floor.
he believes will be occupied and right now the plans are for that space to be an architect's
office which we shared with the community group and they were encouraged by that. Mr. Chairman
if there's any questions from the board I'll entertain them now and I would also like to
have my client adopt my testimony who is on the call. Why don't we have your client adopt your
testimony and then we'll move on. Okay. Mr. Levy, Ms. Sunkit, can you unmute Mr. Levy?
Sure. Jason, you have?
Yes, I have now. Mr. Levy, you are now allowed to speak. Please wait to be sworn in, sir.
Good morning, sir. Please identify yourself with the records by your last name and I'll swear you in.
can you hear the chairman mr levi you have to unmute your mic to speak
good morning now yes good my name is netany levy and can you give your address could you spell
your name first, please. Sorry. N-E-T-A-N-E-L. Last name L-E-V-I. You swear and affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Mr. Clinton? Mr. Levy, where do you live
right now? 1319 North 6th Street. So that's in this neighborhood? Correct. And if you heard my
testimony today? I did. If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your
Roan and as true and correct. I would. Thank you very much, Mr. Levy. Thank you. Any questions
from the board? No. Anyone else like to testify in this case? If so, please.
Anyone else like to testify in this case, if so, please raise your hand.
There are no hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Jason, Planning Commission.
Good morning, Brian Wenrick, City Planning.
We're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Brian, please spell your last name, I'm sorry.
W-E-N-R-I-C-H.
This property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan
and has a history of corner commercial.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variances.
Thank you.
0 0 1 2 6 4 1 4 0 3 north 7th street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you mr chairman have a great day you go likewise thank you calendar number zero seven
742-2116 North 20th Street.
2116 North 20th Street.
Is anyone here?
has this case tanya been continued already wait a minute uh mr chair
green whose um hand is raised i won't want him to speak right now okay thank you um before he
begins this is sharon seleta and i do not have exhibits for this case good morning sir
Good morning.
Please identify yourself.
My name is Michael Green.
Your address?
2116 North 20th Street.
So you're the applicant.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
According to our solicitor, we did not receive any exhibits.
My exhibits should have been mailed in.
Me and my architect was working on it.
We got all the paperwork in, I believe, three days ago.
When you say mailed in, are you talking about snail mail or email?
Email.
And to what email boxes?
To the one that was acquainted. Give me a second.
ZBA staff, if you could check for that email in our box.
And, Chair, if you wish to move on while we check this information.
Yes, thank you.
We'll go to the next case, Carol, number five.
Calendar number 1259, 2129 South 8th Street.
This is Sharon Saleta.
Sorry to interrupt, but I just checked my email,
and I got something yesterday afternoon on that.
I haven't checked yet on the previous case, 20th Street.
I'm not sure if it was complete.
well we'll go with this case and then we'll come back to that
21 29 south 8th street
see mr ben estepani's hand is raised i will allow him to speak right now sir
good morning sir please identify yourself with the record spell your last name
This is Ben Estepani, B-E-N, last name Estepani, E-S-T-E-P-A-N-I.
Address?
The address of the property is 212933 South 8th Street.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you the applicant?
Yes, and the owners of the property are also on the call.
Are you an attorney?
I'm the architect.
Well, we need the owners to testify.
You can stand by and answer any questions that we may have,
but the owner needs to testify.
So is that Mr. Amoroso?
Mr. Amoroso, if you're on, please raise your hand.
It should be Frank and Josephine Amoroso on the call.
Josephine Amoroso on the call.
Thank you.
They've been promoted to our panelists.
Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Amoroso or Mrs. Amoroso.
Would you please identify yourself with the record and spell your last name?
You have to unmute yourself, Mr. Amoroso.
you see okay there you go there you go uh frank amoroso f-r-a-n-k-a-m-o-r-o-s-o
you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir okay mr amoroso you understand that your architect he can answer questions that we may have
but you need to describe what it is you're asking this board to approve
yes sir yeah we're uh we have an existing building that we're trying to we're trying
to put three uh three apartment buildings on top it's that is that a double building
29 21 29 and 29 21 29 dash 33 it was yeah it's an existing uh auto repair garage
Between Snyder and Jackson on 8th?
Yes, sir.
All right.
Do you have any, maybe your architect can get in now and show us any exhibits?
Yeah, if I can share my screen, I can show the exhibits.
And yes, it was an existing three parcels that was recently consolidated into one single lot in 2019.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I'm looking at the exhibits, and I don't see a deed or lease.
Did you submit one?
I did not.
I thought it only said if it was for recent share of sales that that needed to be submitted.
No, we always need a deed, lease, or agreement of sale.
Gary, let me ask this.
Could we go forward with the hearing and hold for those documents?
For the deed?
I would take that.
I mean, this has been in their possession for over 40 years, but I don't have that offhand
right now.
We have the deed, I mean, we need it here.
We need a copy of it.
Right, right.
Could you provide it to us by the end of the day?
Sure, yeah.
Perhaps we could vote it at the 3.30 session, assuming that we receive it by then.
we get it before 3 30 then we'll vote on it at the 3 30 session
okay so in the meantime the architect can show us some of the exhibits
okay what the plan is am I able to share my screen
it's good thank you so you can give us a brief description that would be helpful
This is the court reporter.
My screen is frozen.
Hold one second, please.
Okay, I'm good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Estepani? Are you there? Ben? Can you hear me now? Now I can, yes.
My apologies. Okay, so this is an existing auto services shop located at 2129-33 South 8th Street.
The existing auto service shop was going to remain, and we're proposing three two-bedroom apartments above.
We're only adding a second story above, and as mentioned previously,
the parcel or the building is located in RSA 5 zoning district which doesn't allow for
multifamily use but previously this was three individual parcels so we think that
Previously, this was three individual parcels, so we think the scale of the addition fits what this was previously zoned as, as opposed to having three single-family homes in this area.
We're proposing three apartments above the existing one-story building.
And if we can scroll to the elevations here, we're not only adding the addition above but
also improving just the appearance of the front of the building. So as you can see on the top
elevations, the existing CMU building with the auto body garage or auto services garage doors
remaining. We're removing the existing signage and then placing a new brick veneer at the front,
new extruded metal signage at the top with the apartments above so hopefully you know with this
variance being granted we can you know provide or continue to provide services to the to the
community while also providing apartments above and also improving just the front facade along
8th street here. The only other refusal that we're seeking is for rear art encroachment
and that's only because the building is the rear of the building is non-conforming by seven inches
and for ease of construction we'd like to build on top of that CMU wall just for again
ease of construction structural purposes but that's that's what we're looking to have approved
chair today okay thank you uh any questions from the board no anyone else would like to testify
in this case please raise your hand no hands at this time mr chair planning commission
this property is indicated for residential use can you hear me yes we can this property is
indicated for residential use the density seems appropriate to the neighborhood and single family
scale according we have no objection to the granting of the variances thank you very much
Mr. and Mrs. Amoroso
Mr. Estepani
I guess we said earlier if you provide
that deed before the end of the day we'll vote
the case later today okay
okay sounds good thank you
thank you have a nice day
you do likewise thank you this is
Sharon Saleta if I could interrupt for one moment
could we
take a two minute break and
could I speak with the chair
thank you
Excuse me, would you like me to pause the recording?
No, you're fine. We're fine.
We don't need Mr. and Mrs. Amarosa.
any longer do we okay we're not
Thank you.
okay we're back uh carol when we get done this before when we get to the last case
or finish the last case on the 9 30 list we have some the add-ons that were originally scheduled
for two i should be heard at the 9 30 case list we'll go through that at the end all right okay
we'll explain it further right all right so we got the next case carol number six um are we going
all right so we got the next case carol number six um are we going back to four
oh i'm sorry are we are we ready to go back to four
21 16 north 20th street yeah i think we were waiting for michael green
we're waiting to find out if the materials the exhibits were sent in i believe
um this here are we speaking to michael green i'm sorry yes um we didn't receive the exhibits timely
so this would have to be a request a continuance okay case number zero zero zero seven four two
two one one six north 20th street is continued now we can go to number six carol if i could
state mr green if you could reach out to the rco box or to me directly to understand how you can
proceed calendar number 1260 2152 north 21st street
All right, Mr. Chair, Ms. Alicia Clark has her hand raised. I will allow her to speak
right now.
Thank you. Good morning, ma'am. Please identify yourself for the record, spell your first
and last name, and provide us with your address.
good morning my name is alicia clark first name spelled e-l-i-c-i-a last name is clark
c-l-a-r-k and the address is 2152 north 21st street we're in a firm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do miss miss clark have you emailed your exhibit packet
with the proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral
photos and plans of your property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with
the RCO and do you have a letter? I have met with the RCO. I do have the letter. I do have
all my documents in the email. I'm not sure if you received them, but I can pull them up.
um miss clark you did email them to the rco box um yes okay my staff will look for it but you can
proceed as you wish and jason can you promote her if she's not already sure thing ma'am
Ms. Clark has not promoted the panelist.
Ms. Clark you still there? Ms. Clark, you can unmute yourself?
Yes, I'm still here. I apologize.
This is Sharon Sletta. Ms. Sunkit, were you able to find the exhibits because I wasn't
able to?
Okay. My staff can look for, ZBA staff, if you can look for those exhibits. Ms. Clark,
can you confirm whether you emailed the exhibits? I was trying to pull up the email now. I was
looking at my sent items. Okay. So can you give me one second? I'm actually scrolling through.
So we're going to pause you, Chair, and you can move on to the next as you wish.
Ms. Clark, I'm going to mute you and wait until the other case is taken care of.
Go to case number eight. Calendar number 1265, 3256 North Carlisle Street.
Okay, Lujan Liu has their hand raised, I will allow them to speak at this time.
Good morning, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your first and last name, provide us with
your address and I'll swear you in.
hi good morning uh can you hear me oh i'm sorry i thought it was a miss i apologize
yeah my wife is here with me so it's both of us you're the owner yes we are the owner
okay so please spell your first and last name please hi uh my name is lijon lu l-i-j-i-o-n
Hi, my name is Lijon Liu, L-I-J-I-O-N, L-I-U.
Thank you.
And you're swearing to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
Please proceed.
Sir, have you mailed your exhibit packet in with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans of the property five days in advance
of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
yes uh we emailed it on uh the 24th all the documents that we have met with the rco
on uh on november i believe with uh with the 12th 12th and uh we do have a letter from the rco
i'm sorry if i could just ask a question chair um are you being represented by someone or you
are doing it yourself. Oh yeah, I'm doing it myself. I'm representing myself and my architect
is here with me today just in case we need to go over the architectural plans. Great, thank you
kindly. Jason, you can now promote them to panelists as well as the architectural in case
she's needed. Thank you. Understood.
Okay, Mr. Liu and Ms. Poulos have been promoted to panelists at this time.
Okay, Mr. Liu and Ms. Poulos, as you wish, you can unmute yourselves.
and whomever who's going to present can share their screen to present the exhibits to the board
okay um I can start I'm Cheryl Poulos the architect okay but Cheryl the um owner has to
present sure the case however you could present the exhibits and the chair would need to swear
you in as well sounds good um cheer or madam vice cheer can we swear in miss cheryl sure do you agree
to oh no they're not agreeing to wave anything um a second you swear affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thanks please proceed
i apologize chair again i'm going to ask if we could get uh cheryl's name on the record and
spelling please i apologize cheryl please identify yourself spell your first and last name
cheryl pulos i'm the architect c-h-e-r-y-l last name is pulos p-o-u-l-o-s
we're in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Thank you.
Please proceed.
John, do you want to present, since you're sharing your screen?
Who has to present?
You can be there to answer any questions the board may have.
Sorry, yeah, I was having trouble with the technical trouble.
trouble. Yes, no worries. Can you see the screen of the refusal letter? Yes. Yes, we were, so
it was a refusal for a multifamily three units that's prohibited in the RSA 5 residential
zoning district. And also there was a refusal on a setback of at least five feet. We're not asking
for that that that was a error on our part we're only asking for our variance for the multi-family
three units uh and uh we did uh we met with the rco um let me see okay let me see if i can share this
okay let's just keep up
I'm sorry about that.
We need to share again.
I have to share again?
Stop sharing.
Okay, we met with the RCO on the 12th of November.
on the 12th of November. Here are some results.
Here are some results.
There were a total of 13 attendees. Six, I believe six was on the board community and
it was a unanimous decision. They was all in favor of the variance for the Moti family.
now is this sharing yeah so this is they can see this
are you are you able to see uh the permit uh uh zoning yes yes okay great okay uh i pulled up on
So this is 3246 North Carlisle Street, and I'm 3256 North Carlisle, and they were granted a variance, a zoning use permit in September 2019 for a multi-family, four-unit dwelling.
And also, next door to me, 3258 North Carlisle, they were granted a use permit for a three-family household, I guess a three-unit family dwelling.
yeah i want to pull up a zoning map
um can you see the zoning map
no okay okay
maybe if you can go to your property and give us the show us the exhibit of what it is you're
proposing to build. Okay.
Will my architect be able to explain this? Yes. Yes.
Cheryl? Sure. Okay. Let me share my screen.
Okay. Can everyone see my screen? Yes.
Okay, so same thing as John was just showing you the refusal, our application, our deed, our tax clearances, just go through.
Okay, so currently it's a vacant lot. It's actually a double wide vacant lot. So we would only be, we only own half of this vacant lot, you see.
And as John mentioned, we're proposing a three-unit, a three, is it four-story building.
The first unit would occupy the basement and the first floor.
The second unit would occupy the second floor only.
and the third unit would have the third floor and fourth floor which would be set back and as
John mentioned our roof deck is not going to come all the way out to the front it's going to be set
back the five feet so we don't need a variance for that just to give the third floor unit a little
outdoor space. So this is the elevation. You could see on this side, this is the existing
residence. That's three stories. So from the street, you're not really going to see much
of that fourth story because it's setback a ways. This is just a little parapet wall.
But again, the roof deck access area is only going to be probably five feet wide.
And again, you're not going to see it from the street.
And there's still going to be the vacant property on this side of the lot.
And we met with the neighborhood.
And as John mentioned, we had unanimous support.
And we also had some discussions about, you know, trying to help this neighbor as best we can with, you know, fixing his roof if we can and the porch just to kind of, you know, be a good neighbor and not allow any part of his property to get any extra water damage or anything like that.
get any extra water damage or anything like that.
And here is the letter from the neighbor with the summary of the meeting and their vote.
This is our letter to the neighbors. That's their refusal again.
Any questions? Go back to the floor plan that shows the first floor and basement please. Sure.
this is the basement so the first floor we don't see anything yet but your name
oh i'm sorry i have to share my screen again
okay could you make that a little bit larger please yes i can
so this is the basement floor and the first floors this is what the first floor for first
unit would um occupy so it's only two bedroom the means of ingress and egress from the basement
the basement has an egress window for this bedroom
um we're here very okay any questions from the board yes uh how do no yes i knew tom tom wants
how do you handle the trash each department has access to the yard there is we're one
unit away from the corner and there is an alley or i think we're close to the corner and there's
an alley in the back connecting all the properties there's no rear yard
it's only accessed by the first unit
third floor would have a roof roof deck right yes and we had a discussion with the neighborhood
about that as well hi may i uh for uh the first unit would have access to the to the yard for
trash now the second and third unit they would um need it's a little inconvenient for them but I
think they'll be okay they will need to uh walk uh out and um through the back of the alleyway and
for the backyard there will be a door which they will have a key to to uh put to uh put the trash
back there and let me ask you this how does the second floor and third floor you say could use
the alley do that would they not be able to use the yard they they would have there would be a
door uh from the backyard to the alley so they do will get access to the yard as well
i'm saying so they can store their trash in the yard is that correct yes all right all right so
i think you're you're talking about taking the trash out for trash pickup they would use the
alley is that correct no but for trash pickup i would uh most likely offer uh my tenants that's
there to uh to take out the trash on trash trash nights uh for a fee and um i i i think that uh
most uh i don't think they will have a problem with that so i would give the tenant a type of
like a management uh cleaning fee for them to take out the trash and keep the alleyway clean
all right but again the question is they would all three units would have would have access
to the yard yes correct okay does that answer your question tom thank you okay any other questions
no anyone else anyone else would like to uh testify in this case if so please raise your hand
Mr. Chair, I have a call-in user number two with their hand raised.
I will allow them to speak at this time.
Now I'm allowed to speak.
Hello?
Hello, hello.
Please identify yourself, first and last name.
Spell your last name, please.
Adrienne Fernandez, F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Adrienne Fernandez, F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Do you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I'm testifying for one of the affected RCOs, our RCO is Swampoom Neighborhood Process Association RCO.
We want to give provisos for this.
Overall, we're opposed to this project because it's multifamily.
However, we understand that there was unanimous vote at the meeting.
We're opposed to the rooftop deck, also the basement living.
And we would like to have provisos of all the trash being kept indoors or on the property
because it will end up in the front of the property or, you know, all over the sidewalk.
That's been our experience with the multifamily properties.
So we're asking for that proviso of all trash being kept indoors and or on the property.
The alleyway is a fire lane, and I don't think it's legal to keep to say he's going to keep his trash in the alley.
They're not keeping it in the alley.
According to the testimony, all three units will have access to the backyard for trash.
Okay, well, can we have a proviso that all trash be kept on the property, within the property lines?
And also, can we have a proviso of limited occupancy of six adults and three children?
I don't think we can do that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Sharon.
No, you're correct.
Okay, so we'll have one proviso just for the trash?
That's correct.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
Anyone else would like to testify?
Please raise your hand.
no further hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
good morning brian lenric city planning this property is indicated for single family residential
use on the comprehensive plan and is on an existing single family block the applicant
has not demonstrated any unnecessary hardship requiring relief from the zoning code according
Accordingly, we object to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
I do have a question again for the applicant or the architect.
The property to the right of your property, is that a multi-family?
I see multiple mailboxes on that.
Yes, it is a multi-family, three units right next to it.
And I would like to point out across the street, on the other side of the street, they have
of it's it's zone and more it's a zone all multi-family it's just on my side of the street
it's a zone single family and okay thank you uh zero zero one two six five three two five six
north carlisle my vote is yes with the following provisos all trash from all three units is to be
kept in yard until trash day. All three units must have access to the yard for trash. And the other
one is no bedroom and basement. I'm sorry, Chair, I missed the last proviso. If you could restate?
No bedrooms and basement. Thank you kindly. What was the second proviso, Mr. Chair?
No bedrooms and basement and all three units have access to the yard for trash storage.
yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you uh we
ready to go back to north 21st street yet yes we are okay zero zero zero one two six
zero two one five two north 21st street
ms clark yes okay good morning good morning carol did you uh read off the rest of the uh
requirement well we were trying to confirm before we went forward that she have her
send her email well i'm sorry have you found that miss sunkett oh no we're waiting for her
to let us know. Well, I did go through my email, and I do see where it was sent to rcozba
at filler.gov. Okay, but did you send the full? I'm sorry, somebody say something?
Yeah, when was that email sent? That email was sent last week. The only thing that it was missing
That email was sent last week. The only thing that it was missing was the compliance letter
was the complaint.
because I just got that two days ago. Was it also emailed to, was it emailed to any address
other than the RCO mailbox? No, I just had that one. I was going by the zoning notice paper
at the bottom. No, you had instructions. It needed to go to the solicitor who's speaking now,
Sharon Saleta. Also, my staff
research, and it appears as though all
documents was sent.
Let me go back to what they said.
Is it a summary form we have
and a traffic study?
Is what they
received, so that was
I'm sorry
to interrupt you, but that traffic
study might have been
a mistake on a traffic study. That was for
another address, my bad.
So was all the exhibits submitted?
can i share the documents that i have yes uh-huh okay i do have them and from what i can see the
only thing we have for the address right i understand you have them however you're supposed
to submit them and that's what we're trying to confirm that's a part of the requirement okay
so if you can provide the email where we have the addresses that were supposed to be sent
because it has to go to the attorney for her to review to determine if you okay with going forward
okay because i just sent it to that one email address so that wasn't correct is that okay yes
and unfortunately miss clark um the idea on the the instructions that we send out
is to ensure that those email boxes listed on the instructions receive the documents within five
days so that we can all review to determine that everything that should be submitted is and it's
for the record that we have to keep okay so it's it's up to the chair we could continue this case
and um i could work with miss clark offline to give her a good date yeah why don't we do that
okay miss clark okay this miss sunken will do her best to get you an early continuing okay
So 001260-2152-North 21st Street is continued.
Calendar number 1263-3901-North 3th Street.
I have no record of having received exhibits and I see no hands raised for that particular
address.
Tanya, was this case already been, has it already been continued?
It's number 10, Tanya.
Yes, I believe it was continued before. However, just the one time it was scheduled. And I believe we've been having problems communicating with this applicant.
Oh, never mind.
I believe we have been having problems contacting this applicant.
So if we could continue it, and I'll have Jason reach out to them directly.
Do we want to put a must be heard?
It's okay not to, because this was just taken in July.
The application came in July.
All right, thank you.
0-0-1-2-6-3
3-9-0-1
North Reese Street
is continued.
Calendar number
1-2-7-8-5-2-4-7
Frankfurt Avenue.
Wait a
Frankfurt Avenue?
That's a John Ward case.
What page is that?
I believe that was continued.
Go to number 13, Carol.
I think Cecily Moore Avenue
was continued also.
no that was another i don't have that no that wasn't continued this case we were going to hear
so i'm going to 619 cecil b moore avenue calendar number one two eight six
and the attorney is daniel mcelhetton
thanks sharon if daniel can raise his hand
Mr. McElhatton please raise your hand I have a hand to raise but it's good morning Mr. McElhatton
Good morning, Mr. McElhatton. Please identify yourself with the records by your last name,
please identify yourself with the records by your last name
and I'll swear you in. He's been promoted to panelists.
It appears that he is muted. If he could unmute himself.
I'm unmuted. Did you get my name and address or shall I repeat it?
Please repeat it. We didn't get it.
Daniel P McElhatton, 2000 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia 19103.
Mr McElhatton, please spell your last name for the court reporter.
M Small C, capital E-L-H-A-T-T-O-N.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. McVeigh-Hutton, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
We have met with the RCO on two occasions, and we do have a letter.
It's a letter which indicates a split decision, seven in opposition, two in favor, and that
is also included in our packet.
Great.
You may proceed.
All right.
If I get the opportunity to share my screen.
Are we good?
Not yet.
Not yet.
I'm still working on sharing the screen.
sorry mr chair working on it
if i might use this time while we're trying to get our screen to explain what the project
is. This is a request for a two-family dwelling where the RSA 5 only allows one family and
the property is at 619 Cecil B. Moore. It is currently a vacant lot. The property to the east
at 617 is currently zoned as a two-family dwelling and that was approved by the board
in the past two years. 621 Cecil B. Moore has been approved last year as a three-family
dwelling. That is currently under construction. The RCO, we met twice with the RCO, and it was
indicated that their concerns were around the issues of parking, and the parking is on-street
parking I would note for the board that the approval here of a two-family would
actually practically result in the loss of no spots on the street because if it
were as of right it would be the single family which would allow up to five or
six bedrooms. And the, can you, is my screen up now? Yes. Okay. And the, you know, the concern of
the RCO at the meeting we had was for stormwater management, which is a citywide issue because
they said there's some flooding at the intersection of Cecil B. Moore and Marshall. But in terms of
parking, if we do it as of right, it would considerably increase the parking. And the
RCO also had questions about the trash. I think that that was addressed also because the architect
raised the building up a few feet to be able to put storage for trash underneath the front steps
in a locked area. So that was addressed in the revisions to the architect's plans. We also filed a proviso with the
architect's plans. We also filed a proviso with the board with regard to the plans where
originally the lot was listed at 16 and one-half inches. We revised it to the accurate
it's 16 and 3 eighths. So it actually reduced it from the size. The corrected note at the third
floor on the plans also say that it's unit two instead of unit three. This will be a two unit
condominium. It will not be apartments. The condominiums will be obviously sold, but the
first floor unit is about 1,025 square feet, which is the basement, which is not to be used as a
living area it's the first floor and the basement will be a den area but not not a bedroom the
second unit is the second and third floors and that excuse me could you enlarge the floor plane
a little bit please it's if you can make that larger that would be helpful yeah let me
is that better Mr. Chair
we lost it okay
if you can do a little less than 300 percent maybe 200
that's good that's good thank you you're welcome so you can see that it's the pilot house is on
top of the second floor or second unit unit two which is the second third floor unit one and
indicates the first floor only. So I think the concerns of the RCO APM are legitimate concerns
except that if this is not permitted then there'll be a use that is significantly
possibly more intrusive. This is what the lot looked like and this is the projection of what
our building will look like here. Currently this lot at 621 is being developed and you can see that
in and there's the there's the current projected building and you'll see in the photographs of
the existing conditions.
621 is it being it's being developed as a multi-family three three units sir three units
thank you and that's this is the lot currently and this is the the current unit in uh in
construction at 621 um the uh the trash storage was addressed uh we believe that this is an
appropriate use. The single family is very difficult in this area, and because it's also
inconsistent with what the community wants, as the proximity to Temple University and Temple's
expansion increases, community would like to have less student housing. And if it's a six-bedroom
house, that is ripe for student housing as opposed to two families that might be in two separate
condominiums. The area is undergoing renovation. There was properties across the street that
have been recently developed. So I would ask that you unmute and promote the owner, Nate Oda,
who is the principal of 1A Development and Contracting, LLC, to join the meeting so that
he can confirm possibly my testimony before the board.
So he would have to raise his hand.
And Jason, you can just open up his audio.
No promotion necessary.
Problem.
One second, I'm allowing to talk and become a panelist or just allow to talk?
No, just allow to talk.
Thank you.
Understood.
Mr. Atta, you are now allowed to talk. Please wait to be sworn in, sir.
Good morning, sir. Please identify yourself for the record. Spell your last name.
Good morning. My name is Nathan Ota, spelled O-T-A.
We're infirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. McElhatton.
Thank you. Mr. McElhatton.
Nate, you've heard my testimony this morning before the board.
Nate, you've heard my testimony this morning.
Is that correct?
Yes, I have.
And if you were present and wanted to testify, would you confirm and adopt my testimony as yours?
Yes, I would.
All right.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I've also put up on the screen the south side of the 600 block of Cecil B. Moore.
And you can see that there is no parking on that side.
I mean, there's no extensive parking.
and there's no housing directly across the street.
So on-street parking for two condominium units
we don't believe would be a burden to the community.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
I want to.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, at this time I have Ms. Mary Jones,
whose hand is raised.
I will allow her to speak right now.
Morning, Ms. Jones.
Please identify yourself with the record.
I'll swear you in.
Good morning.
Mary Jones, Council President Darrell Clark's office, City Hall, room 494.
Where do you from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
yes um our office is in receipt of a letter of opposition from the rco um stating uh seven in
opposition two to two and so we just adopt the position of the rco and opposed experience thank
you thank you mr mclahatton what was the objections that were raised i'm curious because i see a
multiple, not a lot of properties on this block are multi-family already.
The RCO report is attached as one of the exhibits and they gave a, as APM normally does, they
give a chronology of things and they indicated that the first one is the two units and that
parking was increased congestion or traffic and then they mentioned the flood you know the flood
plane and the flood water matters possible flooding was raised and you know that was they had a series
of questions the question was will the builder live in the property we answered that no and that's
this is at tab 21 of our exhibit and they indicated that the properties they had a question about
condominium sales and we indicated that with a condominium sales would be to whoever buys the
particular unit unit one or unit two they asked how garbage would be handled that we indicated
that building would be lifted to hide the trash discreetly under a gate and this is what the
architect did in the revised plans and they also planned to install exhaust fans in the closets.
The next objection was the storm water which I think we've addressed and the architect responded
also they'll plan to install black backflow preventers and other things to install protections.
That was one of the reasons why in the original meeting with the RCO the first floor the first
unit one had a bedroom in the basement. We agreed to take that out because of prior
flooding in the general area. And then they had questions about what the sales price would be
and what the homeowner fees would be. We deferred on that because that's up to the two particular
owners. Correct me if I'm wrong. The opposition was not basically related to the density,
the fact that it was multifamily. Is that accurate? That's correct. I think the opposition
was more community-based in terms of parking is a significantly difficult issue throughout the
community where APM, more so in certain areas, the area across the street from this unit,
as I pointed out, has an open area that doesn't have housing on it. So this may not be as intense
as in other areas. So I think their experience has been that it increases density. This we don't
believe does. In fact, it would reduce density if, in fact, a blasterite was built.
Yeah, understood. Thank you. Anyone else wish to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
No further answer at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good morning. Brian Wenrich, Planning Commission staff.
This property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan near to RM1 zoning in
an area with new multifamily construction along Cecil B. Moore Avenue. Accordingly,
we have no objection to the granting of the variances for a two-unit owner-occupied condo.
Thank you. 001286619, Cecil B. Moore Avenue. My vote is yes.
Thank you. 001286.
My vote is yes. Excuse me, is that with revised plans?
I'm sorry. How many pages?
One page, sir. Submitted.
Part of the package.
All right. Am I? Let's go. 001286619, Cecil B. Moore Avenue. My vote is yes with the revised plan.
one page uh adopted today my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes proviso
you i think excuse me um this is sharon seleta before mr mckelhatton leaves could you please
you submitted the proviso plans form and the revised plans as part of your exhibit packet
could you resend them to me as a separate pdf please so that i can stamp them and return them
to you. I will. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Number 14. Yes. Calendar number 1282 823 North
Woodstock Street. I have a Joel Ziegler whose hand is raised. I will allow him to speak right
now, sir. And Mr. Ziegler is one of the property owners.
Good morning, Mr. Ziegler. Please identify yourself with the record, spell your first
and last name, and I'll swear you in.
Joel Ziegler, J-O-E-L-Z-I-E-G-L-E-R.
We're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Can we share our screen?
Please do.
Jason, can you promote him? He's the owner.
Understood.
He is now promoted.
Sir, are you an attorney?
Mr. Ziegler, can you unmute yourself and answer the questions of the vice chair, please?
Yes, sorry. I am the owner and an architect. I'm not a lawyer.
So you're not a lawyer. Have you submitted the exhibit packet, including proof of ownership,
tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes. Thank you. You may proceed.
our project is a we would like to add a sunroom on the back of the first floor of our residence
we were refused because we are we don't meet the open area requirement by a little bit
the the reason we're asking for a variance is similar similar first floor you know back
uh additions on the houses around us and across the alleyway on corinthian avenue
are are similar or larger than what we are proposing um the uh we we uh let's see
these are some photos from our house looking out the back um back to the alley this is corinthian
street across the the alley uh two the two adjacent houses to the north have similar
additions on the first floor. Several other houses on Corinthian also have similar additions on the
back of the house. This is directly across the street from us or from across the alley from us
and then two neighbors to the south and across the alley also have additions. This is a view from
across the alley from Corinthian Street. This is our house. This is the proposed location of the
the sunroom. Again, neighboring additions are similar. This is sort of the proposed addition
for our house. We did send out a small summary of our addition plans to the neighbors. We got
signatures from both Brinthian and Woodstock Street in support of our letter to the RCO,
which is the Fairmount Civic Association, or non-opposal of the of the addition.
And then, you know, we have the deed, tax clearance, all the other appeal, the refusal,
and have posted the zoning notice in the front of the house.
Okay, Mr. Sigler, thank you. Any questions from the board?
any questions from the board no no no anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise
your hand
i'll answer at this time mr chair thank you planning commission
Brian Wenrich, City Planning Commission staff. This property is indicated for single-family
residential use on the comprehensive plan and is zoned for that use. Accordingly, we
do not object to the granting of dimensional variances in scale with similar first floor
additions on the block. Thank you. 001282. 823 North Woodstock Street. My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes okay carol we're gonna have the the
add-ons that were for two o'clock or really uh they should have been for this morning
uh i don't know if you have the list but i'll read it off zero zero zero zero eight nine
three eight oh one brown street i believe we were waiting for some communication from
councilwoman got the a's office and is there anyone here to testify on this
if i can interject or is 15 number 15 continued north 50th street
yes i was going to ask the same the attorney on that is michael lambert i don't have that
okay uh well all right let's do let's do this brown street first and then we'll go to that
one i don't have that for some reason don't have that soon mr chair um sorry jason yeah
is this for a eight six seven north 50th street yes it is yes okay i've seen no hands go up for
If you want to go on to the add-ons, the attorney on, or if you want to go back to North 50th Street, the 3801 Brown Street, the attorney is Michael Mattione.
I will try to contact him.
Again, I think Sharon wasn't, we were waiting for communication from the councilwoman's office.
um yes i have that they were returning this morning on brown street for input from the rco
and the councilwoman all right and then the other one number 15 i don't have that sheet carol so
oh i'm sorry i yes i do apologize so it's zero zero one two six one eight six seven north
50th 50th street 50th street
The attorney's Michael Lambert.
I think Mr. Lambert is with us right now.
It doesn't seem as if Mr. Lambert is present.
He's not here, so we might want to do a continuance.
Continue before?
We'll do a must be heard.
Let's see where this is at.
No, this was just July, case from July.
Very good.
Thank you.
0 0 1 2 6 1 8 6 7 north 50th street is continued now we can uh well sharon's working on the brown
street actually i just spoke with mr mattione they are still trying to schedule an rco meeting
so that um if we could further continue that we don't have to do that put that on the record do
we have a further continuing it um miss sunkett can we this is a follow-up hearing but yeah we
would have to continue um and then send out posters okay so because it's nothing soon that
i have so we have time to continue it all right thank you thank you zero zero zero zero eight
nine three eight oh one brown street is continued
the next one is zero zero zero
the next one is 000303 3643 north 19th street we were waiting for communication i believe from the
rco and the attorney in this one is leo mulvihill
Mr. Mulvihill, Mr. Mulvihill has now been promoted to panelists, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill.
Please identify yourself for the record and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.
there we go
good morning chairman members of the board leo mulvihill for the property at 3643 north 19th
street please call your last name for this reporter please m-u-l v as in victor i h-i-l-l
thank you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed good morning members of the board this is a follow-up to a hearing that we
previously held. This was an application for a special exception for a personal care home
in the property at 3649 North 19th Street. What I'm going to do is share my screen just
to have the board's recollection be refreshed. One moment.
So when we previously presented, my client, Ms. Johnson-Baron, who I believe may still be on the
line, discussed the fact that she had been in the personal care wellness industry for 20 years.
She and her daughter, who has a master's in social work, if I recall correctly, had sought to open
this location a number of years ago. We originally presented this to the board, I believe, back in
2017, and were given a three-year temporary proviso in March of that year. Unfortunately,
due to financial issues my client was never actually able to open in the building but we're
now getting past that and we have our funding and everything is in line so the clients
change this view here members of the board so my client intends to open hosana personal care
home for purpose of the record that's h-o-s-a-n-n-a which is a personal care home to provide
assisted living facilities, specifically focusing on women with Down syndrome. The ultimate goal
of the organization is to end the stigma of mental illness in the community and to help
those women and this population, members of the board of my clients on, will testify. And I can
at least assert to you that this is a traditionally preyed upon population among many personal care
homes due to the fact that women with Downs are very trusting, loving individuals, and easy to
take advantage of. So my client and her daughter are seeking to target this population, have no
more than 12 people living here, to assist them in the activities of daily living, feeding,
help with medication, helping them get along throughout the community.
What I have up on the screen right now is the holistic style community living flyer that we
It gave out to members of the community, and we previously provided this same flyer to you at a prior hearing back in 2017.
The site is going to be staffed 24 hours.
Either Ms. Johnson-Baron or her son, or pardon me, her daughter, Ms. Barrow, will be on site for most of that time.
There's going to be a number of people who are on site as well.
It's highly structured, and essentially we're trying to keep this population integrated into the community.
It just so happens that Ms. Johnson Barron picked up this home several years ago and wants to renovate it.
What I'm showing right now is the special exception referral that we received on 2-4-2020.
This is an RSA 5 district.
This board, with application number 714340, calendar number 28546,
granted a temporary three-year permit for this exact same application for providing assistance
with bathing, dressing, diet, financial management, and other things as well. So
we never got the CO for this. We are back in front of you because we wanted to either, one,
get an additional extension, or two, get a permanent permit to be allowed to operate.
We did have a community meeting for this project.
We did have a community meeting for this project. We previously had showed up for a community meeting with the 13th Ward RCO. That community meeting was canceled due to lack of attendance. Then on the 17th of November, we had a second community meeting in person, which was attended relatively well by members of the community.
I did never receive a copy of correspondence from the RCO, although I believe it may have been submitted to this board.
So I can't speak as to what the specifics of that communication were from the RCO.
What I can say, however, is this.
I was personally very disappointed in how the meeting was run.
What happened is that the exact population that my client is hoping to help integrate into the community and become neighbors in a community, we faced a lot of fear and stigma by the members of the community.
If I may, just for one moment, members of the board, I'm going to put up a copy of the photograph that I took of the house itself, which is a large three-story row home.
I have floor plans that I'll be showing you as well.
What happened at this community meeting is that the exact mission that my client is working on kind of played out in real life in that most of the comments and concerns that were about this population, vulnerable women with Downs, who are the most targeted for abuse in these circumstances, in a personal care home that's going to be run by women for women.
The neighbors said things like, we don't want them in our neighborhood. They suggested that perhaps these people would be better put somewhere else far away out of the neighborhood. And there was a lot of ableism and otherism that rose to the surface during this meeting.
um i was very upset with the comments that were issued but that was ultimately my understanding
as to why this project was not supported by the community despite the fact that we'd previously
been issued a permit for this exact same use um it's a special exception members of the board
we're talking about a vulnerable population that my clients are trying to help integrate into a
neighborhood. The community leaders who ran the meeting routinely referred to this as a rooming
house or a boarding house. It is not. And I believe that that helped to poison essentially
the ultimate community vote against us in this matter. So I'm happy to put up my plans at this
point. I'm not sure whether my client is still on the line. But if she is, Ms. Johnson Barron,
And if you're on the line,
would you please raise your hand so you can be unmuted?
Ms. Phyllis Johnson raised her hand,
I want her to speak.
Okay, all right, I'll wait until she gets on.
I'm gonna pause my video while I have the screen share up.
hello hello hi good morning ma'am please identify yourself for the record first and last name
yes phyllis johnson baron um that's a ph i'm sorry johnson baron hyphenated
the b-a-r-o-n b-a-r-r-e-n thank you you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. Mulvihull. Yes. Now, Ms. Johnson-Barron,
you've heard my testimony today with respect to this application. Yes, I did. Okay. Ms. Johnson-Barron,
would you please elaborate for the board the nature and breadth of your expertise in this field?
Well, I have over 15 years experience working with those with special needs,
and this what we went through at the community meeting is something I've seen many many times
over. Working with this special population to me is very fulfilling. I want to do this to
to bridge the gap so people can realize that just because you have maybe a disability doesn't mean
that you're going to bring harm to them
or disrupt a neighborhood or anything of that sort.
Experiences, we're working with those with special needs
has always been a good and positive experience.
Let me ask a question, and I don't want to interrupt.
Let me ask you a question, and I don't want to interrupt. I'll refer to the women who would be occupying this property as clients, for a lack of a better description. How do you get them? Where do they come from? Are they folks that are recommended to you? How's that process work?
Yes. A lot of them are referrals through different agencies.
You start that.
Most of them will be, like I said, referrals through the state.
Okay, continue.
Yes, I'm here.
Yeah, you were breaking up in the beginning.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Yes, we will have referrals for our special individuals.
And you're licensed, I assume, by the state?
Yes, I am.
So does the state come to your facilities to see if it meets the requirements?
Yes, they will.
So in addition to whether if this board will approve your application,
there are other steps that need to be taken and approved correct by other government agency
that is correct and were you the applicant i believe you were but
correct me if i'm wrong you the applicant back in 2017
yes i am okay and either did you experience any opposition back in 2017
no we did not right and this board the board i don't know if i was here at the time but this
board approved the application at that time correct
that's correct chairman i think i think miss johnson barron might be experiencing a delay
yeah well you can answer if you could too uh and that was you said it was a temporary
Yes, it was a three-year temporary proviso that expired 3-14-2020. Chairman, you were present, if I recall correctly. Ms. Tenere was present, and I can't remember whom else was present because I recall Ms. Tenere specifically asking very pointed, detailed questions of Ms. Johnson-Baron and her daughter, Ms. Sparrow, during that hearing to ensure that my clients were qualified, well-versed,
and able and equipped to be able to have a personal care home along these lines in a residential area.
I'm showing now on the screen for purposes of record members of the board page 23 of the original zoning submission that was previously presented at the prior hearing.
this is the notice of decision that was dated oh where's my date on here the date of decision
3-15-17 calendar number 2-8-5-6-4 and where I'm showing at this point now members of the board
is page 22 of my packet for the record this was the original zoning referral from 8-11-2016
application number 71430, indicating that this is the same location and the same applicant
for the exact same use that we're seeking today.
And it notes in this original refusal that we received previously that the Department of Public
Welfare in Pennsylvania requires that my client and any personal care home complies with all
the necessary regulations of 55 Pennsylvania Code, Chapter 2600.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Chairman, before we continue with that, if I may interject,
other concerns that were raised at the community meeting,
I'm referring to my memorandum that I prepared immediately after the meeting for purposes of
being able to elucidate here. The other concerns that were raised at the meeting
were trash. We explained to everybody that the trash would be stored in the rear yard.
I don't believe this is a matter that would require commercial trash pickup,
but we're not opposed to that. There were concerns about staffing and we explained
that there was 24 seven staffing and we included a handout which I previously presented to this
board earlier during my presentation regarding the programs and the staffing on site.
There are other concerns again about the members of the community saying that
There are other concerns, again, about the members of the community saying that people like this don't belong in our neighborhood, and that they should be put, open quote, somewhere else, close quote, open quote, not close to things.
And there were some inexplicable concerns about NSF kitchens, which are not a requirement for a personal care home along these lines, and nevertheless, is not a zoning issue.
So overall, members of the board, the opposition that I observed that day is related to a fear and lack of experience of those individuals with Downs.
And that's exactly what my client is trying to remedy, to help these special needs individuals be able to integrate into a neighborhood, take care of themselves, and have a little bit of help that they may need as adults who are suffering from this disability.
Your client owns this property?
and the last time the board approved it was a three-year temporary permit three-year temporary
use permit for the special exception uh personal care home maximum 12 people it's a it's a six
bedroom house numbers of the board there is sufficient space to house 12 but that would be
the absolute maximum and my client isn't at this point intending to be at maximum capacity
but that's just the option for the future for us so temporary use permit maximum capacity was
Any other questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
At this time, I have Ms. Shameka Sparrow.
I will allow her to speak right now, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with a record.
could spell your first and last name and provide us with your address yes hi my name is Shamika
Sparrow my home address is 368 East Church Lane Philadelphia PA 19144 uh would you please spell
your first and last name sure uh Shamika S-H-A-M-E-K-A last name Sparrow S-P-A-R-R-O-W
you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do and your residence in proximity to this application how far away are you chairman miss
farrow is miss johnson baron's daughter and is affiliated with the project she is the person
about whom i spoke who has a master's degree in social work if i recall correctly and miss
farrow please forgive me if i got that incorrect that's okay um allow me just chair to ask a few
questions of miss farrow just to verify her credentials with the board uh miss miss farrow
I've already testified that you're affiliated with this project, along with your mother.
Would you kindly explain to the board briefly your credentials, education, and background
in working with this vulnerable population?
So I have close to seven years of working as a clinical social worker.
I graduated with an honor from Temple University's Master's Social Work Program.
I am an independent licensed clinician for both Pennsylvania and Delaware.
I currently am in private practice, and I provide services for vulnerable populations, victims of trauma.
I'm a trauma specialist, and I have experience running Comars, long-term structure residence at that facility.
I was there for approximately two years and assisted with those with intellectual disabilities, schizophrenia, and some other developmental delays.
Now, Ms. Sparrow, you've heard my testimony with respect to why you and your mother are seeking to open this type of personal care home.
Would you explain what bearing your experience in dealing with trauma has for the population that is affected by Downs that you're trying to service in this neighborhood?
Sure. With women with Downs, they are often a prime target because of the fact that they're very childlike and very trusting.
Many times these women are preyed upon by so-called family members, members within their community, because they're trusting.
Ms. Barrow, may I stop you for one second?
I don't know if you're in the room with your mother, but I'm getting a feedback loop from another computer.
Could we mute that computer so we don't have that happening?
It's difficult to understand.
And Mr. Mulvihill, with all due respect, if you can make this, summarize her testimony, that would be helpful.
Sure. So, Ms. Barrow, all in all, you heard my testimony today?
Sure. Yes.
And it's true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Great. Thank you, members of the board. I don't have anything else at this time.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
no anyone else would anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
Anyone else? Would anyone else like to testify in this case?
we're getting a lot of noise in the background somebody there you go
see no further hands at this time thank you planning commission
Good afternoon, Brian Wenrick, City Planning. This property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan. We do not feel that this proposal will have a negative impact on the surrounding community. Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the special exception.
Thank you.
000 303 3643 north 19th street my vote is yes with the following provisos
a three-year temporary use permit commercial trash pickup maximum 12 individuals
my vote is yes with provisos yes with provisos yes with provisos excuse me this is sharon
seleta can we put a definite end date on the three or ten i'm sorry i actually wrote it down i forgot
to so the three-year temporary use permit will expire january 1st 2024.
24. That's three years, correct? Yes. Yes. Yes. So do we revote that? Yes. No, we don't
have to revote that, do we? No, that's fine. Okay. Thank you, members of the board. You
do likewise thank you uh i believe that we go now to uh do any any uh communication sharon with uh
mr marionne regarding brown street uh yes you continued that um okay right so it's hancock
street is the last one for today okay thank you zero zero one three one five one three three four
for North Hancock Street.
Ms. Rachel Pritzker has her hand raised. I will promote her to an analyst immediately, sir.
Thank you.
good morning miss pritzker please identify yourself with the record spell your first and
last name and i'll swear you in good morning uh rachel pritzker r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r
1635 market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 we're in front of the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes miss prisker do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy yes and have you emailed the packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance refusal referral photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing and have
you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes thank you you may proceed
Okay. I'm going to share my screen. This is, as the board may remember, a follow-up hearing
for this case that we already had. So this is for 1334 North Hancock Street. I believe
I'm just going to go back through it, just to refresh the board's memory.
This is, our proposal is for the relocation of lot lines to create three new lots from
an existing lot.
I'll show the site in a second.
The lot currently is sort of this odd shaped, pull it up on Atlas, it's probably easier
to see. Sort of odd shaped lot that goes sort of in this L-shaped formation. So it's comprised
of frontage on Palethorpe Street and frontage on Hancock Street. As you can
see all the properties to the north here are half block properties split in
um our half block properties uh split in half and so our proposal is to make our project and our
half and so our
property lot lines uh consistent with the north side of the block and to provide three new single
family homes two of which will have accessory off-street parking on the palethorpe side and
one of which on the hancock side will not have parking to reflect uh the fact that there are not
a lot of off-street parking spaces and garages on the Hancock side. I'm going to have our architect
go through our plans, but just wanted to bring to the board's attention sort of
the lot sizes, as that is one of the refusals that we have. So as the board knows, lots that
are zoned RSA 5 require 1,440 square feet and 16 feet in width. However, most of the properties
on this block, as you can see, are around 18 feet in width and 51 feet in depth, which is anywhere
between 1,030 and 927 square feet. Our lots that we're proposing, the two lots on Pailthorpe, are
going to be 20 by 51, so slightly larger than the existing properties or lots on the north side
of the block. And then the proposed lot on North Hancock Street is going to be 20 by 51. So
about 19 by 51 and 20 by 51. So sort of a little bit larger than what's there, but still in
character. Again, around 991 for the Pailthorpe lots and 1055 for the Hancock Street lots. And
as you can see on this chart, we sort of made an outline to kind of show where we're going to be
proposing the relocation of the lot lines and how it's consistent with the properties on the north
side of that block. Additionally, we have our plans here. I'm going to have our architect Gabe
Deck. Tanya or Jason, do you see Gabe Deck so that he can share his screen and go over
the plans for the homes? Yes, I see Mr. Deck. I'll promote him to panelists as well.
Thank you.
Welcome.
As Mr. Deck is getting prepared, these lots, as they are, around 3,000 square feet, again,
they're oddly shaped, and we're proposing three lots consistent with the north side
of the block, around 900 to 1,030 square feet.
Again, we're proposing single-family homes, two of which have off-street accessory parking.
Just on the Pailthorpe side, there's no parking on that side of the street anyways, so the curb cut will not affect anybody's ability for on-street parking.
As you may be familiar, a lot of times people park on the curbs here, so we thought that the off-street parking provided for two parking spaces for each property would be ideal to help deal with the parking congestion on the street.
um i'll have uh gabe go through the plans and also address the last refusal we have which is for the
pilot house we are going to be setting it back from the rear but we have aligned it so that
it's in configuration with the existing homes as well so gabe if you want to go through the plans
for the board i would appreciate that
sure um again my name is gabe deck with gnome architects can you spell your name for the record
please sure first name gabriel g-a-b-r-i-e-l deck d-e-c-k you're swearing a firm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed rachel
Thanks, Gabe. If you could just go through the plans, you know, briefly to highlight the project, that would be great.
Can you see the site plan on your screen?
Okay. So as Rachel mentioned, three single family dwellings is the approach here.
So we're dividing for three individual parcels, two homes facing Palethorpe Street, one home facing Hancock Street.
so as far as the plans go uh the pale thorpe street side um is going to be a slab on grade
four-story uh structure for both of the homes um so we have ground floor garage front uh accessory
parking the fourth floor we're setting back um you can see in the elevation to minimize kind of
the impact of the four-story structure on the block uh to look through the plans for that uh
house layout first floor plan on the left side here we're proposing um again each home has a
single garage but we're we have a car uh deep tandem parking arrangement to to keep as many
cars off the street as possible so the ground floors is primarily all parking uh garage um
Upstairs on the second floor is living spaces, living kitchen and dining in the back with a small walkout rear deck.
upstairs on the second floor is living spaces um living kitchen and
The third floor plan is a master suite as well as laundry.
And then the fourth floor plan has two additional bedrooms and a full bath.
again the fourth floor wall is set back about six feet from the front wall to minimize kind of the
impact of a four-story structure these homes both have full roof decks with a pilot house that's in
compliance with the zoning code for the Hancock side the floor plan or the arrangement again is
a cellar plus three-story structure, no garage. So first floor plan, open living, kitchen,
dining, and powder room, steps to the rear yard. The cellar just has additional living space
and a bathroom and mechanicals and an office. The upper floor plan, second floor has bedroom
in the front bedroom in the back um and then the top floor third floor is a master suite
um we have a full roof deck with a pilot house that's held to the rear of the property
um again that was to kind of a design element to uh keep the the arrangement on the interior
as open as possible um so as far as the elevations go again this is the pale thorpe street side all
red brick for the first three floors and doing a fiber cement cladding for the rest of the
materials, keeping the railings of the roof deck open to minimize blocking anyone's view
for other roof decks up the block. This is the Hancock side, similar in material palette,
all red brick facade with some fiber cement panel cladding accent. Some of the RCO boards
concerns were regarding the uh walking zone in front of this house um so to to work with them
and appease that those concerns we set back our entryway for um the front door and the stairs to
as well as provided a size street tree pit uh to maintain a wide walking zone and also add a street
tree so that'll be subject to streets and parks and rec approval but um it shouldn't be a problem
um that is the gist of the design can you just also um provide the board with the illustration
that we have to show um what what the buy right option would have been just because
i'll go into sort of the community considerations but just so that the board can see sort of the
odd size and shape of this lot and sort of why we decided to go with three homes instead of two
and to keep in kind of context with the block. If you could zoom in a little bit, it's kind of
small to see. So this arrangement is a kind of a buy-write arrangement for what we could have done
for two homes. So we kind of, in order to hit the minimum lot areas, we would have to kind of have
like an interlocking lot line arrangement where we have an l-shaped parcel facing hancock and um
you know straight parcel i'm sorry i'm pale thorpe and l-shape um but the you know the house sizes
and the footprints of the homes for buy right footprint are just much larger than the context
of the the neighbor structures that you can see to the north and the south so um all the more reason
why we feel that this application is much more in conformance with with the neighbor structures
thank you um so just before i move on i want to just pause see if the board had any questions
um for gabe or for the plan regarding the plans any questions from the board no no okay thank you
no thank you um so the last piece we met with the south kensington community partners we had two
meetings with them one of which was a design review meeting in which uh gave detailed the
changes that we made specifically to uh they wanted changes with the glass they wanted it
to be glass doors on the garages uh so it was more open we did that and they wanted us to recess
um the stairwell in the front so that there was more of a walking zone which we did in addition
to wanting us to make sure that we consider providing a different material on the side of
the building where the existing home is. So all of which we agreed to. Then at the larger community
meeting, there was mostly concerns around construction and how this would fit in. As you
As you can see from both these plans and from the street view that was provided, if you can bring that back up, Gabe, you have an interesting block where the north side of the properties are all these three-story single-family homes, and that's sort of the context that we're trying to provide.
can see from both these plans and from the street view that.
and then you kind of have the other side of the block that has these uh two-story homes um some
of the concern was sort of around the height differential however if you can see kind of how
it exists now this is existing uh it's actually going to be exactly the same as what we're
proposing although we are going to we're proposing a slightly nicer facade and sort of the side um
wall here so uh it's not really going to be much different than it is now the there's still going
to be i believe gabe correct me if i'm wrong an alleyway that's between the properties as well
so they're they're not going to be uh directly abutting or if they are i believe that mr zubek
who is the owner has done some a significant amount of door knocking to make sure that any
construction concerns are met he did a similar project i think on the 1800 or 1900 block uh
almost exactly identical and and had no issues so i just want to lastly bring up the letters of
support that Mr. Zubek got from the near neighbors. There was, we got a letter of non-support from the
RCO. However, we didn't get a vote count, so I'm not sure how many were in support and how many
were not in support. I can show Gabe, if you can stop your sharing so I can provide my screen to
board. This is a letter from 1343 North Palethorpe and we have one as well from 1342 North Hancock.
I'll bring Mr. Zubek on in a second because we did do a significant amount of outreach
to the other near neighbor. This was the letter from South Kensington Community Partners where
they didn't want three lots they wanted two as we provided to the board. It really makes it even
more out of context and significantly larger homes and lots and sort of besides the sizing
of the properties, which I know we don't always have to build to the maximum allowed, just the
odd shape of it is more out of context for getting the size. And then this was sort of the meeting
summary form. There was 102 attendees supposedly, but we weren't given a breakdown of the vote
count. So I'm not exactly sure how many people were in support or not in support and if it was
near neighbors or not near neighbors. A lot of the conversation was also around construction
issues. And Mr. Zubek has done a good job to in the past and going forward to make sure that
that's not a concern. So I just want to have my client, Brian Zubek, sworn in and just him speak
to the outreach that he's done. And then happy to answer any other questions and move forward.
Thank you. Mr. Zubek, please identify yourself with the records for your first and last name.
And I'll swear you in.
Mr. Zubek has been out to talk, sir.
Thank you.
Brian Zubek, B-R-I-A-N, last name Zubek, Z-O-U-B-E-K.
Thank you.
Are you swearing to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Rachel?
Brian, I just wanted you to explain to the board sort of the outreach that you did to the near
neighbors and kind of what some of the concerns had been that you had tried to address and also
you know kind of the other project that you did as well to make sure that the board is aware and
it's on record kind of the way you've handled similar projects in this neighborhood in the past.
Yeah, thanks Rachel. I think the two things you know are the parking on on Pailthorpe
and construction techniques and so um the vast majority of the rco meeting was about you know
construction techniques and making sure that the near neighbors were informed and okay with
everything uh considering that you know the structure is attached right now i got letters
of support from the two north neighbors uh the attached uh neighbor to the south i've left three
letters on his door i've called every single number i can i've knocked on it at different times
for the over the last six months you know we sent out that we put the notice up we sent the notice
to them um you know i spoke again with marco from the rco uh yesterday via email and he indicated
that they that um you know they hadn't been able to speak with him either some other neighbors had
supposedly spoken with them but um at this point i've kind of exhausted all options in terms of
contacting them. In terms of construction techniques, we're obviously going to be
having everyone provide a certificate of insurance to the neighbors, the demo
company, the construction company. We always like to meet with the neighbors
Construction company, we always like to meet with the neighbors before any digging starts
before any digging starts.
and are very conscious of how it affects the direct neighbors.
And most of that meeting was structured on the direct neighbors, which we're very conscious of.
In terms of parking on Pailthorpe, there's obviously no street parking there.
From speaking with other neighbors, everybody's happy about the ability for more cars to get off the street
because people, you know, park on the curb anyway, so that avoids it. I did an almost exact project
like this on the 1900 block of North Hancock and Pailthorpe, which was street to street,
five townhomes subdivided into smaller 15-foot-wide homes on Pailthorpe. The ones I'm proposing now
are 19 and a half, and the same on Hancock, no parking on Hancock, which is what the neighbors
had uh had wanted um there are no front garages and those homes are 17. the homes home i'm proposing
now is over 20 feet wide so um the uh and that was unanimously voted for yes um so you know in
my talking with you know direct neighbors i've been trying to you know do as much as i can for
the construction you know concerns um and make sure that the you know i'm allaying the parking
concerns as well to the best of my role thanks brian um i don't have anything further at this
point mr chair any questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this case if
so please raise your hand hello
Mr. Chair, I have Ms. Mary Jones, whose stand is raised. I will allow her to speak right now, sir.
Good morning, Ms. Jones. Please identify yourself with a record. You're still under oath from earlier today.
Yes. Good morning. Mary Jones, Council President of Daryl Clark's office, City Hall.
um yes i just wanted um upon review of the uh the community concerns i just wanted to clarify that
there had been um outreach to this near neighbor who was not at the meeting at 1332 north hancock
are you asking mary yes i'm asking if there was i just i i i know he said he reached out to a lot
people but i wanted to make i wanted to make sure that he reached out to yes no yeah no absolutely
brian could you just repeat um yeah absolutely i've i've left uh notes on his front door
multiple times i've called and left voicemails text messages um the rco head has reached out
as well and been unable to get in contact with them um i've knocked on door at during the day
at night on a weekend um and haven't been able to get in contact with them i'll still be sending
a certified letter um you know if this is approved to them informing them of what's going to be
happening in terms of construction and happy to set up a meeting with them in terms of discussing
construction techniques and how we're going to be doing it and if they have any concerns
as we do with all neighbors um they're directly affected so yeah there's i've honestly tried as
much as I humanly could to get in contact with this person. In addition we did post the property
and we did do the um mailing for the RCO meeting so um those were some additional outreaches that
our office provided as well. I would ask if this board approves this application that any outreach
to that the next near neighbor uh whether it's certified mail or whatever please copy Ms. Jones
from the council president's office absolutely of course okay thank you okay thank you
uh any other questions anyone else to testify in this case
no further hands at this time thank you planning commission
Brian Wenrich, City Planning Commission staff. This property is indicated for single-family
residential use on the comprehensive plan. We have no opposition to granting the dimensional
variances since the subdivision is in character with the adjacent lots. Although RSA 5 does not
allow front access parking, Pailthorpe Street would be the front street for lots B and C and
is out of character with the housing on those blocks. Therefore, we oppose the granting of
the variance for front access parking.
Thank you. Were there any revised plans, Rachel?
Yeah, I sent them to Sharon.
How many pages?
I believe just one or two. Sharon, do you remember? Sorry.
one or two jaron do you remember sorry let me check take me a minute to find them hold on
Thank you.
one page one page thank you okay um zero zero one three one five one three three four north
hancock street my vote is yes with the proviso revised plan one page approved today
yes for proviso yes for proviso
okay before we go uh sharon just sent me a an email i think the other board members got it we
have to revote cecil b more um so i'll put it out there now zero zero one two eight six six one
nine Cecil B Moore Avenue my vote is yes with the following proviso revised plan three pages
approved today my vote is yes with the proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you uh
does that conclude the morning session it does okay see everyone back at two o'clock stay safe
Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board
of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our Vice Chair, Ms. Carol
Tenere, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkett and Board Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you agree, you're in agreement to be, acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
that I apologize. Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an apparent statement, call Google
267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue. Before we call our first case, I'd like to announce
the following case so far that we a continuance has been requested for that's uh zero zero one
eight three four two four four five Martha Street that's number five on our list
and if any of the applicant or an attorney is in disagreement with that request please
raise your hand at this time
i see no hands at this time mr chair thank you if anyone else would uh is requesting a continuance
or a withdrawal for this afternoon's hearing list please raise your hand at this time
i have a mr harry cook
good afternoon mr cook please identify yourself for the record and i will swear you in
i'm not on set up right like i'm having difficulty here
mr chairman madam vice chairman anastasia law i'm representing the property owners
of 189 to 13 Oregon Avenue.
Let me swear you in, please.
Do you swear and affirm, tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman,
we're requesting a continuance
of appeal number
2020-00828
2616 South 18th Street.
My clients
are in the process of
closing out a real property agreement that relates to number six i didn't mean to cut you short we
got it okay so zero zero zero nine one six two six one
OK, so zero zero zero nine one six two six one six South 18th Street is continued.
Thank you. Thank you.
Oh, your honor, I am representing the protestant and I know that I just wanted it to be clear.
I'm not representing the applicant. Oh, I'm sorry.
Is the is the applicant and or his his or her attorney available?
He should be.
i'm sorry i thought you were the applicant i'm a little confused what what was mr cook requesting
he said he's representing the protestants
but you're not requesting a continuance or anything yeah he's
had a respect for uh council i just wanted and i wanted to make sure the board was clear on
on who i was representing in this matter
is counsel for the applicant in agreement to the continuance he is not in agreement for
the continuance that we need to hear from him sir that's correct
and he should be on ron patterson are you counsel for this case i am thank you kindly
sorry about that ron please identify yourself for the record
Sure. Good afternoon. Ronald Patterson, Claire Harrison Law Firm, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia PPA 19103. I represent the equitable owner.
You swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Yeah, so we've been in contact, Mr. Cook and I and Mr. Anastasio. And this is a second hearing. I think it's a must be heard because it was continued once.
It went through civic design review
and we met with the Girard Estate Area Residence Association.
This is a neighboring property owner,
which we share an easement.
We are working out a side agreement,
which I don't think is relevant to the zoning case.
And we would like to move forward with the case.
Okay, we'll move forward with the case
and then we'll get into if any time is needed
to satisfy whatever the agreement is.
Okay, for example, like hold the vote or something like that.
Yeah, we'll talk about that.
Okay, great.
All right.
Thank you.
Anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
Please raise your hand.
We have a Mr. Albert Littlepage.
We should speak.
I'll introduce her right now.
Mr. Little Page good afternoon chair afternoon please identify yourself for the record and I'll
swear you in my name is Albert Little Page I'm with the Point Breeze Community Development
Coalition the coordinating RCO you swearing for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
about the truth yes I do please proceed uh chair I'm just uh on the continuance we were requesting
the continuance for 2027 Ellsworth Street.
Is the applicant and or his or her attorney available?
Chair, I'm not sure.
Is that for 2 o'clock?
That's a 3.30 case.
Yeah, it's a 3.30 case, Albert.
Am I jumping the gun?
I'm sorry.
I'm trying to go home.
I'm sorry.
No problem.
I wish we were at 3.30, but unfortunately, no.
I'll lower my hand.
Thank you.
We'll talk to you later.
anyone else
okay mr chair we have a mr george felici that i will i'll just speak right now
mr felici please wait to be sworn in sir good afternoon sir please identify yourself with the
record spell your last name and provide us with your address yes uh george felici uh i am uh with
the applicant at 2616-26 South 18th Street. Ron Patterson already spoke up on our behalf there.
So who are you? Who are you representing? We're representing the applicant for 2616-26
South 18th Street. Your co-counsel? No, no, I'm sorry. Maybe I used the wrong term. We are the
applicant if you will ron is okay okay we'll get to you we'll get to you shortly thank you
anyone else
ready to proceed thank you before we begin i just want to make sure
Thank you. Before we begin, I just want to make sure. We had a case that was going to be the first case this afternoon is 0889-3929 Ridge Avenue. Am I correct on that?
Thank you.
That's correct. That is a resumption hearing and there is also a request for reconsideration on another case. I can read that out.
yes 36 streets reconsideration yes as it relates to ridge avenue are we prepared to go forward with
this case it's the attorney is alan knockinson what number is that case well that's an add on
from this as an add-on. It was a case for reconsideration and Mr. Nockamson has contacted
me about this so I know he is planning to be here. Let's move it back. He's on right now.
Good afternoon Mr. Chair, members of the board. Alan Nockamson of Nockamson,
MPC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Learn to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Carol?
Mr. Nockamson, do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents?
I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Carol. I just wanted to mention this is a resumption.
So we don't do that?
No, it's not necessary.
That's not necessary.
Okay, cool.
You may proceed.
I'm going to share my screen.
Thanks, hon.
Yes, sir, you can.
Do you see my screen?
Oh, there it is.
I didn't see it.
Again, Alan Ockamson and Ockamson PC.
I'm here to present 39-29, 39-31, and 39-33-35 for Ridge Avenue.
We were here a month or so ago regarding this property. We were waiting for community input.
We met with the Ross Civic Association and I'm glad to say that we have their support
and I have exhibit number eight which has a letter of support as well as a letter of support from
Councilman Jones as well just a little background so if you may not remember this project we are
looking to now put based on revised plans and I'll go to far back because we presented all these
materials before by the way this is an RSA 5 property and that's why essentially we're here
today. But we have revised plans where we are reducing the height of the building, which will
eliminate one of the refusals, reducing it from 55 feet to 35 and a half feet, making it from a
five-story building to a three-story building. We're reducing the amount of units from 14 to
eight uh so on the first floor uh there will be uh two commercial spaces on the corner of allegheny
and ridge and then on the on the second and third floors there will be a total of eight units four
in each uh four on each floor we're also as part of this revised proviso plan we're also eliminating
the roof deck and the three roof deck access structures uh so that eliminates another refusal
AS PART OF OUR NOTICE REFUSAL. WE ARE ADDING RESIDENTIAL BALCONIES AS PART OF OUR PLAN.
AND WE ARE SHIFTING THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, BUT WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE ADDED ANY
REFUSALS. NOW WE DID, AS PRECAUTIONARY MATTER, SUBMIT A SECONDARY ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
WITH L&I BY WAY OF AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ZONING BOARD. WE HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM THEM,
despite my repeated emails from them, but we do not believe that it would cause any additional refusals.
So we have, as part of this, as part of the revised proviso plan, we have one, two, three, four, four pages.
And then here's our letter of support from Ra, as well as the letter of support from the councilman.
And then just to push up way forward, this is our notice.
you know just to push up way forward this is our notice of refusal for ridge and again
one of the refusals has to do with the fact that we're an RSA5 property and that we're looking to
put a commercial component in there as well as a multi-family component in there. The other
refusals have to do with the deck access structure and the height. The only refusal that's in any
way a dimensional one is the rear yard depth. But as you can see from the irregular shape of
you can see the regular shape of our lot. That's the reason why we have the dimensional refusal.
okay thank you any questions from the board no no no anyone else to testify in this case if so
please raise your hand at this time chair thank you uh planning commission this is uh ronald bednar
city planning uh ronald do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do thank you ronald based on the revised plans we have no objections thank you 0889 3929
ridge avenue my vote is yes with the proviso revised plan four pages approved today
my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
thank you we now have a reconsideration i believe and chiron you'll correct me if i'm wrong
000886 615 north 36 street i believe it's 650 north 36 615 i'm sorry 615 north 36
um no i thought that it was 650 north 36 is that wrong it might be right i don't know
yeah that's correct says 50. 650 north 36th street uh i honestly don't recall any of the
this case uh at least not at the moment and i understand that there were three no votes
prior to this were those no votes on they weren't for reconsideration they were votes on the
you voted no to the variance to the variance
um if you want chair and um wait a minute i can pull up some information for you it's your call
might be helpful i know there were three no's myself jim and tom i believe i don't know why
we voted no not if you'd like to wait until 3 30 i can send you the supporting documents for
the reconsideration that would be helpful okay and then sharon what if we're going to do the
the only case at uh at 3 30. okay all right i'm sorry if anyone's confused but honestly actually
we don't we don't know what we're doing right now all right uh okay i think we can begin with the
first case uh zero zero two zero four three five one two parker avenue
brettfeldman has raised his hand i will uh promoting the panelists right now sir
i'm sorry say that again
mr brett feldman had raised his hand i just promoted him to panelist
thank you good afternoon mr feldman please identify yourself with the record then i'll
swear you in uh good afternoon uh mr chairman members of the board brett feldman 1835 market
street philadelphia pennsylvania i represent the applicant uh legacy living llc
do you swear in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you also emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents consisting
of proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans
five days prior to this hearing and have you met with the rco and did you get a letter
yes to all we have a letter we also a letter from the district council person and we also have
revised plans I believe there are two or three pages and with the proviso form that we would ask
that the board approve if the board approves this application thank you you may proceed
uh that the board approve if the board approves this application thank you you may proceed
thank you if i may i'll share my screen
can you see my screen now
yes we see the desktop now your exhibits are coming up okay thank you here
the setup I didn't realize we were number one um so could you make those a little bit larger
please yeah hold on here
Mr. Feldman, if you want the 45.8% up at the top, if you could just enlarge that to maybe
See how we do.
That's good.
That's better.
Thank you.
And I'll move it around as we go.
I'll get right to this one.
I represent the Applicant Legacy Living LLC, Principal Doug Pfaff.
We also have our project architect, Rustin Oler, who should be on the line as well.
And then we have our engineering consultants.
This is a project in the Ridge Park neighborhood of Philadelphia off of Ridge Avenue.
It's been about a year and a half in the making with extensive work with the streets department planning, the community, as well as the district council person.
And it also involves a city council ordinance.
So that's actually been approved already.
So there's been a lot to get us to this date. What we're basically doing here is we're taking four lots.
We're consolidating them down to two lots. On Parcel A, we're creating 12 single-family, three-story townhomes.
And then on Parcel B, there's an existing home.
So you have in front of you your exhibits, Exhibits 1 through 15, which involve, including
among other things, all the photographs, but as well as our letter of support from the
councilperson, as well as the letter of support from Ridge Park Civic Association.
So let me go to the pictures.
this is this is the site itself you can see here in the blue off of Ridge Avenue which is right
here and this is a good photograph to give you a sense of what it is so there's this
parker avenue which is right here um and it continues on as a paper street uh where that
where that hydrant is and what working with the streets department and that's our site the green
you see in front of you working with the streets department and planning and the council person
parker street is a paper street uh we have that stricken um so we'll be creating a condominium
here with the 12 homes on the site. And almost all the refusals that you see here are all because
of instead of us, we initially tried to have Parker Street extended. We would have homes on
the right and homes on the left. The streets department did not want to take ownership and
have to build a new street. So we're taking that on our own. And as a result, need to create a
condominium, a PUD for this property. So it's treated as if it's multifamily, but the homes
are traditional single-family look and feel, and that's what created the main refusal for
multifamily. If we had been able to just subdivide this and create the homes on the street, most of
the refusals that you see would not have been in front of you, but that was part of an extensive
of discussion that we had with all the different city agencies in the community.
And then I'll just get, you know, here's some of the posting photographs here.
Refusal.
Let me go right to, this is the letter of support from the community.
Their proviso was no roof deck, and you'll see that on our revised plan.
letter of support from the councilman, but I'll get right to page 34, which is our
rendered site plan here. And this is really kind of the best way to see it. At the top here is
Parker Avenue. We're going to be creating this street below, as I mentioned, and then you have
the homes six on the right, six on the left here with a.
Six on the right, six on the left here with a drive aisle that accesses rear parking for each one of these.
And then another drive aisle curb cut that accesses parking in the rear of these homes.
So that gets you to 12 homes here.
And then this is the other lot where there's one home that remains.
It looks and feels as if it's just, you know, fits right into the neighborhood, a single family.
But this is actually on one lot. And again, that's that's why you have the multifamily refusal and some of the dimensional refusals that you'll see.
Looking at the elevations, you know, here are the elevations, you know, nice, high quality materials, three stories we've removed.
And on the revised plans, we've removed the roof deck.
There's a balcony area atop atop the second floor at access by the third floor, which is in negotiation with the community.
And I'll just take you through some of these additional floor plans.
Again, the parking is in the rear for these homes.
So there's ample space for the homes, three stories.
And then we have the revised plans.
Rustin, as a project architect, are you on the line?
It's been a lot of talk.
Do we need Rustin?
I don't know if we do or we don't.
And I just, you know, I don't know if there's anything else.
Why don't we just keep them on the bench for a minute?
If you want to get your client to adopt your testimony.
Yeah, sure.
Doug Faff, Doug, do you want to jump on?
On behalf of Legacy Living, I'll see the equitable owner.
And just raise your hand so the board can include you.
I'll talk right now, sir.
Thank you.
yep doug's here can you guys hear all right yes we can please identify yourself with the record
name and address sure yep uh doug faith um address um 257 north third um blood lppa 19106
and how do you spell your last name it's pronounced without the i it's f as in frank
A as in Apple, C as in Thomas, H as in Harry, pronounce the faith.
Thank you.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Faith, can you just provide your title with the entity?
President, principal.
President.
And you've heard my testimony concerning the consolidation of the four lots to two lots?
Correct, the consolidation of the lots, yes.
And then the resulting development on Parcellet of the 12 three-story townhomes?
Correct.
And is it true and accurate?
As far as the development and the discussions with the community and the streets department and city planning and the councilman?
Correct. Yep.
And do you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Great. Great.
Thank you.
you know we're certainly willing to answer any questions that you might have i just would say
that this is uh uh we've tremendous amount of work to get to this point uh we had a creative
innovative solution to to the project and we're uh real pleased with the way this has turned out
um and uh the support that uh all the parties uh gave us to make this to make this possible here
okay thank you any questions from the board no and we do have revised plans again we have
I'm going to get that. I'll get that. No. No. Anyone else like to testify in this case? If so,
please raise your hand. I'll answer this time, sir. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning. The Platte and City Plan change necessary for this development was
approved at the November Planning Commission meeting. In addition, we support the RCO and the
provisos that have been agreed to with the applicant and have no opposition to the granting
the variances thank you uh brett um yes sir how many pages i don't want a second here it's two
pages yes two pages and you mentioned something about no roof was it part of that's part of the
yes it's it's if the board yeah atop the atop the roof yes uh and and if the board approves
the revised plans and the proviso form we've spelled out all those changes that are consistent
with the provisional letter.
a proviso letter i'll just put that on the record and going forward if someone a homeowner wants to
I'll just put that on the record
and going forward,
if someone at home
put a roof deck they'd have to go through the whole process okay all right uh zero zero two
zero four three uh five one two parker avenue my vote is yes with the following provisos
revised plan two pages approved today and no roof decks yeah mr chairman the only thing i
would say is there is a there is a balcony off there is a deck off that's reflected in the plan
right yeah so but yeah i just want to make sure no one thinks that that a roof deck i know is on
the top um this is off the rear atop the second floor on the third floor so we just don't want
to have that as a problem um actually is that that could end up being a problem if you could
just do the revised plan since they do spell out that the roof cap that the neighbors were
concerned about is removed. It might be less confusing to do it that way. That would be great,
Ms. Saleta, because we spell out that we removed the pilot house also, so that removes any
confusion. But I just, I can see at L and I, that rear balcony becoming a problem.
All right. I'm sorry. I can confirm that I've read the revised plans form and it does spell
that out so no need for that that proviso right that's right thank you okay so let's do it again
zero zero two zero four three five one two parker avenue my vote is yes with the proviso revised
plan two pages approved today my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with
behalf of the whole team thank you and uh thanks to everyone who's made this project possible
thank you zero yeah you want to call it carol okay calendar number 0848 4457 main street
you know hands coming up for that address sir tanya was this uh continued this the first time
or has it been continued excuse me this is sharon saletta we did receive exhibits for this
and the attorney is um daniel reissman if he's present
his hand is not raised unless we want to move it to the end why don't we do that i'll move this
today back and uh maybe he's having technical difficulties okay there he goes jason you can
promote him oh we got him all right yeah good afternoon sir please identify yourself with
the records by your name and i'll swear you in can you give him one second he just got promoted
hello can you hear me yes we can uh would you please identify yourself in the records by your
last name and then i'll swear you in sure it's daniel reisman eckert siemens to liberty place
22nd floor philadelphia pa 19102 and reisman is spelled r-e-i-s-m-a-n yes that's correct
Do you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Sir, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans, five days prior to this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes to everything.
you may proceed okay thank you um will the screen be shared
um yes you have authority sir okay thank you
can you see it
yes okay good thank you um good afternoon mr chairman members of the board again my name is
dan reesman i'm representing the applicant on this project um here with me today are also
hymie kaplan and yvonne roa who are the principals of the applicant and erin monahan who is our
architect. The property is a, well, the proposed, but let me start again. The exhibits that I've
handed up and sent in earlier are exhibits A1 through A11.
and sent in earlier are Exhibits A1 through A11.
I've tried to order them in the order
that Ms. Saleta had requested in an email.
So you'll see A1 is an application and the refusal.
A2 is a letter in support
from the Mayunk Neighborhood Council.
A3 are photos and so on.
And all together there are 11 exhibits that the board has.
much appreciated Mr. Reisman sure the property is located at 4457 Main and I have a google map
just to show you the general location so you'll see this is Main Street so it's one
property in from Main Street and then it's at the corner of Main Street and here is Green Lane
I'm going to move to the photos.
The property is a three-story property, this is it right here.
And the proposal is for a sit-down restaurant in the three stories of the property.
The historic uses of the property, most recently, prior to the current use, it was actually
used for a pizzeria my client purchased the property a number of years ago and currently
the first floor right here is used for offices the second floor and the third floor are just
storage as is the basement and there are other photos of the interior that shows those current
uses as i mentioned the proposal and these are just some more photos these are main street here's
the property there's the property as I mentioned the proposal is for a sit-down restaurant with
118 seats now under the zoning code typically the use for this would be grandfather the parking
requirement would be grandfathered in because the building predates 2012 and it and so a change of
use under the zoning code uh it's grandfathered in without a parking requirement however magnunk
the magnunk overlay has a parking requirement of um one parking space for every four seats
in a restaurant um l and i interprets that provision as overriding the general provision
of the code that says it's grandfathered in so the reason we're here is because
at the one to four ratio with 118 seats, that would require 30 parking spaces. And that's the
sole refusal. The use as a sit-down restaurant is permitted as of right. Now, I have a photo for you
that shows both the building right here, and then it shows right up on Green Lane, a parking lot
that has 176 spaces so i would say it's a couple hundred feet away and i'm pointing my arrow to
that right now um and then here's the parking lot from the other direction on the right in
this photo and here's the interior of this parking lot so you'll see it's a very large
parking lot so we think this is a very appropriate use um the variant is satisfied because there's
no feasible way that there can be parking at this already developed site. There's certainly
no adverse impacts on the community. This, as I mentioned, was previously has been used
for commercial uses. And we have a parking lot that is a very large parking lot within
200 feet for which we can certainly satisfy the normal onsite requirement in the manual
overlay for 30 spaces. As I mentioned, you have a letter in support from the RCO, and they voted
unanimously in support of the proposal. That's really it for my presentation. As I mentioned,
the architect is here. We have floor plans in the exhibit package. If you have any specific
questions about the floor plan, she can answer those. And as I mentioned, my client is here.
If you want, you can bring on your applicant, your client, rather, I'm sorry, and ask to adopt your testimony.
Okay, thank you.
So that's Jaime Kaplan.
Tanya, are you able to give him access?
if we're not able to reach him hello mr kaplan yes yes hi good afternoon please identify yours
if we're not able to reach
could you have to identify yourself in the record spell your first and last name and then i'll swear
you in uh jamie kaplan j-a-i-m-e on last name kaplan k-a-p-l-a-n and you swear and affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed mr reissman okay uh
mr kaplan you heard my testimony is that correct yes my statements and are they are they true and
correct to the best of your knowledge is correct okay and do you adopt them as your own testimony
Tony? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the board? No. No. Anyone else like to
testify in this case? Please raise your hand. Thank you. Planning Commission. Ron Bednar,
city planning this property is indicated for commercial mixed use on a city plan especially
enacted district area overlay from main street requires 30 parking spaces for the proposed use
due to the physical constraints there is no possibility that the property can be used in
strict compliance with the provisions of the zoning code we believe that the approve that the
approval of a variance is necessary to enable the viable economic use of this property.
Accordingly, we support the granting of the variance. Thank you. 0-0-0-8-4-8-4-4-5-7 Main
Street. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you and good luck to
you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Have a good day.
Calendar number 2137, 3670 South Lawrence Street.
The attorney is Steve Paul.
I'm voting him to the panelists right now.
Mr. Paul, please wait till you want to enter.
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board steven pollock on behalf of the
applicant uh keystone outdoor and its principal dominic cipollini and uh please spell your last
name for the court reporter it's uh steven with the ph pollock p-o-l-l-o-c-k 1500 jfk
boulevard suite 1700 philadelphia 19102 and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed mr pollack do you agree to weigh the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do madam vice chair have you also emailed an exhibit
packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or
referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you
have a letter yes we do thank you okay um i just wanted to uh get started with this um this is
regarding a uh outdoor advertising sign that we want to uh put up at 3670 south orange street it's
down in uh right near darien right just a little bit north of lincoln financial field and we have
several witnesses but i think in one of these in this kind of a situation it might be advisable
if we could determine at the outset whether there are any other people that may want to
be heard today that are not here on behalf of the applicant before you begin steve we don't
have your exhibits up we still have the previous applicants right i see that i see that
oh and if i may tanya and mr chairman if i could have natalie young get privileges right away
because natalie is gonna run my screen for me
I promoted her to her panelists okay great thank you very much but as I said Mr. Chairman members
I promoted her to a panelist.
Okay, great.
Thank you.
of the board we have several expert witnesses we are and some fact witnesses so we're prepared to
put on a full-blown case in anticipation that we were going to meet the test of what we have to
prove for our use variants that we need and some dimensional variances I would suggest if the if
you would please also could you add I have co-counsel with me and they are Mr. Vincent
Mancini and Mr. Vincent Dufino and I adopted my name is Stefano Palacci because I'm with Dufino and
Mancini today. Make us an offer. A good one. So what are you saying Steve you want to have your
I want to have my whole, as we say in Yiddish, mishpucha with me.
I want everybody with me, if I could, all the co-counsel.
But you're presenting the case, correct?
I'm presenting aspects of the case.
I'm going to open, and Mr. Mancini is going to handle certain witnesses.
But as I said, we'd like to, if there's a possibility to streamline this case,
we'd love to do that for the board.
If there isn't...
We'd love to streamline it.
So that's why I'm saying if we could find out right now whether there's anybody out there that was opposed.
Yeah. Yeah. All right. I'll ask that question. Is there anyone who opposes this application for 3670 South Lawrence Street?
If so, please raise your hand. And I would ask the other folks to put their hands down so we don't get confused.
This request is for anyone who is opposed to this application. Please raise your hand.
I see no one chair okay thank you so Steve sounds like you can streamline okay with that
um Natalie could you pull up I mean have you been able to give Mr. Mancini and Mr. Dufino
status just uh whoever wishes needs to raise their hand all right so the two vince's
please raise your hand and we can get you on
mr vince uh mancini there's mr dofino
hello everyone who else do you need just vincent mancini okay he's promoted just vince and vince
and that's it yeah the two vinces right all right thanks thank you very much tanya and natalie if
you could put up uh the exhibits pages at 62 and 63 so we have the an aerial
here we go so the proposed sign would be put where the the blue area is we are as you can see from
this sign from this diagram we're at least 4200 feet away from the nearest residential area but
the important thing is that between our the residential area and our building our sign
location. We've got all the parking lots of Citizens Bank, the Xfinity Live, Citizens Bank
Park, and other things that intervene. What we are in is we're in a I-2 industrial district,
which does allow an outdoor advertising sign, but for the fact that there's a prohibition
between the expressways and Darien Street. We're a half block away from Darien Street,
which is closer to the stadium to lincoln financial uh it is a remnant of the old food
distribution center district and we do have an ed ed duffy who is going to who would testify and
will summarize his testimony i'll have mr mancini summarize it very quickly but mr ed duffy was the
vice president for special projects for pidc and the manager of the food distribution center
And he could go into the fact that if you look at the Food Distribution Center's formation, it was to prepare and protect the historic character of the Food Distribution Center.
The Food Distribution Center, when the Produce Distribution Center moved out to Essington Avenue, ceased to have any historic character, and Ed could testify to that.
So, however, the remnant of a prohibition was kept.
However, the remnant of a prohibition was kept, that you still couldn't have an outdoor advertising sign.
We have also a David Babbitt, and we have his report, and Mr. Babbitt is a land planner.
Mr. Babbitt, during his testimony and his report, when we ask that, gets introduced and accepted,
says there are about nine other outdoor advertising signs on our side of 95.
we're on the east side and I mean west side and then the east side of 95 there are 14 signs we
are refused for a couple reasons one use variance because you're not allowed to have an outdoor
advertising sign in this district although essentially this is I would say the corridor
between the Walt Whitman Bridge and the stadiums where you do see as you're headed out to the
airport or back in from the airport, you do see that there are other outdoor advertising signs
so that we're not changing the essential character of the neighborhood by doing what we're doing.
We also are faced with, we have Mike Tantella who's our professional engineer who
crafted this exhibit that's in front of you to show you that Mike would talk to the safety
We need a height variance because we're going up.
And Natalie, could you get the sign detail?
It's just before these.
Oh, go back down.
Go back down.
Here's just an overview of where we are.
You see where we are?
That's us at 3670.
Next to us is 3660 where Novak Seafood is.
Next to that is 500 Pattison, which is a terminal for the Procacci brothers.
480 Pattison is a Wrigley Nut distribution center.
3655 South Lawrence is the other Procacci terminal.
And we have, can you show us that sign?
Detail.
It's in Tantella's.
It's A13.
Just to go into it a little bit more, here it is.
So we have to put up a sign at grade level on Lawrence Street that goes up above the I-95 road surface.
But we have to go above 65 feet instead of the 25 that you're allowed to the bottom of the sign
because there is an obstruction with the Broad Street exit sign as you're headed southbound on 95.
And I believe that we have that showing you at A10 just before.
So this is, I don't know if you can turn it.
I think the next one does better, the next picture.
This is as you're headed southbound, the arrow.
If you see in this picture that's before you, that is the sign that blocks.
So if we're headed northbound on 95, that if we were at the 25 feet, we'd be totally blocked by this existing sign.
So going up the extra feet that we need as the refusal states allows us to get above that.
Michael Tantella would testify that it's significant to do that because you don't want signs in the same plane so people would get confused when they're looking at it.
The digital sign will comply with everything in terms of, you know, it'll be eight seconds, it's low on maintenance and those kinds of things.
Real briefly, Michael Tantella would talk about the safety factors and all that, that it doesn't cause congestion in the public streets.
and people do understand where it's coming from and they get to see it and they needed a certain
amount of time so people can see it and understand it and not be distracted. Also, Jack Coyle, who is
a, John J. Coyle, who is a registered and licensed MAI as well as an former, as an industrial
developer and is also as a degree in land use planning, would testify about the hardship to
this property there is in your packet and before i forget we have a letter we have petitions of
support that were signed by um seven people who are immediate neighbors this is a significant
thing vincent defino was able to get us not one but two letters from city councilman why
this is in councilman kenyatta johnson's district but what is happening is mr cipollini as part of
Mr. Cipollini, as part of this, is taking down because the zoning ordinance says if you're going to put up a new sign, you have to take down somewhere else.
this is taking down because the zoning ordinance says if you're going
And what we're doing is we're taking down an existing roof sign on the Frida building, which I'm sure Chairman DiCicco knows because it was in his old councilmatic district at 1300 block of South Front Street.
And we're taking that roof sign down.
And what has happened is that, and that because we'd like to have a certain kind of commercial, a real estate residential development that we do have at our exhibits A31 through A31.
We have a whole packet of what we would propose, but the billboard, the roof billboard is getting in the way of the residential development of that neighborhood.
So we do have Brian Newswanger, who's on today, who would read a statement from the Penn Sports Civic Association as Brian's the zoning chair.
And I don't want to put words in his mouth, but it's basically as we can't tell you we're in favor of the new project.
However, we are grateful that and happy that the sign is is going to move because we have a residential community.
And with that sign being moved, our neighbors will probably allow us to give full consideration to the project.
So we also then have a letter from Councilman Squilla.
Steve, excuse the interruption.
Maybe it might be helpful if you just show that sign on Front Street, if you have a photo of that.
Yeah, we do.
That'll explain.
I mean, just the visual should explain what it is you're talking about.
I think we, Natalie, go to the very end of our A31.
And while we're waiting for that, I want to do a little housekeeping.
I want everybody to, we have a pre-marked exhibit package A1 through A33.
I would ask that I've read everything into the record, that we've introduced everything to the record,
and the board consider that all documents that are contained therein be included in our record.
So keep going to the end.
oh not to the end but before that is where we have
go up go up it's go up we do have that whole packet of what the
the exhibit looks like for Penn support keep going
Natalie can you keep going back it's at page
at 829 what it's a page 204 205 natalie there it is all right here you go i think that's what
chairman de chico wants everybody to see this is uh our exhibit 831 at page 204 and 205 but this
is the existing roof sign on the existing frida building the frida building used to be a vibrant
you know meat terminal it is no longer a vibrant meat terminal in fact they're basically at they're
they're out of there and so um if you look to the left of that picture that shows the existing roof
deck signs coming down that is what we're proposing uh mr cipollini is proposing to happen
at the frida site knock down the whole frida site we don't have approval for it but as part of this
whole thing to as in order to comply with the zoning ordinance and the zoning ordinance is sort
of working in this case for billboards because it says if you want to put something up new remove
something we're fortunate that this is the kind of case we can remove this sign and under the new
zoning code that went in and i still call it the new zoning code instead of the old zoning code
because i'm used to the old one too in 2012 roof deck signs rooftop billboard signs became really
taboo so we're getting rid of not only a billboard sign but we're getting rid of in this neighborhood
in pensport we're getting rid of a rooftop sign that's non-conforming and so the thought is if we
have mike tantella's zoning plan which is part of michael's exhibit list we can maybe just show
the board what the future sign will be it'll be a 20 by 60 v-shaped digital and uh can you go to
that most recent plan that we showed for michael
go down you know the sign plan that we had that's the original plan 120 i think you put it on 122
maybe let me just get my list flew away from me
let me just get my list flew away from me here it is so I mean again it's a detail we don't
really have a you know a simulation of the new sign for you to see but it would be a sign that
would be in the right up in the in the corner it's the farthest the way that we could make it
from the sign that's across the street at 3655, the Percocci sign.
And our problem is there's a sign on the other side of I-95 that's within about,
I got a Michael Tantello could say, it's probably about 200 feet away from us.
There's no other place we could move this sign on our lot and still not be next to somebody
across the way because philadelphia has the imposition of that you have to be 500 feet
from another sign no matter where it is pendot which will also oversee this you know because
we need to get pendot approval after if we are fortunate enough to get your approval today
uh pendot only will not allow you to be within 500 feet of the sign on the same side so that's
why we can't move any closer to the broccacci sign and that's why we've put it up in the up in
this corner um i think i think again i need to um again apologize for interruption so the purposes
of this hearing uh if you is there anything that you'd really need to get on the record in the
event that there's some uh just that all i want to do is possibly mr chairman have the mr ed
duffy mr jack coil and mr david babbitt uh you know um could be sworn and just say they heard
what i state what i babbled on the record they'll adopt it that'll that'll be good thank you and
then we'll end we'll rest i just wanted my board fellow board members to see the sign that was
being removed and right what what that was okay thank you right okay so if we could get tanya
In whatever order you want to give us, Edward Duffy, John Coyle, and David Babbitt, if you can get them all on, you know, and then they can all be, you know, here you can handle how you want to swear them in.
Yeah, when I said my board, I meant to say our board.
Sounds like I'm saying my generals.
Anyway.
Steve, you may want to summarize the hardship.
David Babbitt is the only one who had his hand up.
anyone who wishes to testify has to put their hand up.
Mr. Babbitt, please identify yourself for the record. First and last name. Spell your last name.
I am David Babbitt. Can everyone hear me? Yes. Oh, good. David Babbitt spelled B-A-B-B-I-T-T.
David C. Babbitt and Associates LLC. The address is P.O. Box 922 in Frazier, F-R-A-Z-E-R,
pennsylvania 19355 and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do mr pollack david babbitt uh you we've submitted a report for you that we have at uh our
a16b uh you've heard what i've stated on the record uh do you adopt what i've stated that
did i say what uh is contained in your report do you adopt that as your testimony i do and uh
So didn't you specifically found that if you were to lay this out, this sign is set away from City Hall.
If you had to go to the Pico building at like 23rd and 24th Market, that's how far away this is from the nearest residential, correct?
That's the equivalent distance, correct.
All right.
And I'll ask that you take his report in.
Now, is Ed Duffy in?
Edward Duffy, are you on?
John Coyle? Jack Coyle? Hello? All right. Mr. Pollack, as an officer of the court,
I stipulate that your clients would adopt your testimony. Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman,
members of the board. I don't mean to cut you short. I just want to make sure you,
whatever you need to get on the record in the event there's an appeal,
please feel free to do so. If you finish, then we'll get to the vote. One more thing. Vince
mancini do you want to state the hardship real quick real quick can we give vance vince mancini
all right we can get uh exhibit mr mancini you need to identify yourself with the records by
your last name and i'll swear you in yes my name is vincent b mancini n-a-n-c-i-n-i uh and i'm here
as co-counsel for keystone outdoor advertising thank you and you're swearing the firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed steve let me if
well vince is co-counsel so he'll just oh okay i'm sorry if it may please the board i'll try
to summarize the testimony of mr duffy uh mr tentel already i mean steve already stole the thunder on
Mr. Tantel already, I mean, Steve already stole the thunder on Mr. Tantel.
Vince, just state the hardship.
All right.
The hardship would be basically that this parcel is a leftover parcel from a 1962 taking for the I-95 roadway.
If we can put up Exhibit A9, I can use that as an explanatory basis.
It's in the beginning, Natalie.
Exhibit A9. That's it.
The orange portion was what was taken by PennDOT.
And it also included the taking of the cul-de-sac that was on South Lawrence Street.
So essentially, about 50% of the lot was taken, and the fronts on Lawrence Street, and basically the turnaround area, the cul-de-sac was taken.
So both this lot and Lawrence Street dead ends without any turnaround.
And the lot in question, the leftover portion, is simply too narrow.
It does not have enough turnaround area for any industrial uses in the I-2 district and for the truck traffic, the ability of truck traffic to turn around.
It has been undeveloped since 1962.
It basically is isolated.
It butts up against the I-95, which the roadway is 32 feet above level.
It also abuts up to the, on the western side, it abuts up to the parking lot for the Lincoln Financial Park Field parking lot, which is also 20 feet above the level of that lot.
It has been used sporadically for, you know, occasional parking and whatnot, but it hasn't been utilized for its intended I-2 district.
It used to have a spur on the western side, a railroad spur, and Mr. Duffy was going to testify
that this particular spur is no longer available, hasn't been available for years. It's been ripped
out and it no longer connects to the main switching station down at the Conrail lines,
which are now south of I-95. Essentially, every other development on that street,
or every other lot has been developed and Mr. Coyle was also going to testify that
those lots have been developed because they have the configuration, the size
and the ability to have circulating access to and from that facility.
And again, this property has not been developed or there was one attempt to develop it in 2009.
somebody got a building permit or building approval for a commercial industrial building
never built had to sell the property and mr coil would testify that it was because
the lack of circulation and the lack of ability that's exhibit a14 that we have in the packet
essentially that's that's those are the hardships of the parcel uh narrow no front not enough
frontager access from Lawrence. Go to the next one. Go to the next one to show that it's go to
show the site plan that's attached to that. This was in 2009. They got a permit. Go there. And
they had it because of they had to build a projected a perpendicular building to the to the
street because we only have one curb cut. We have 90 feet of frontage or not. And it just that was
never built this thing never got built in 2009 permits could have been extended to 2013 never
happened it just shows you that this property is just not usable for that particular purpose
jack coil are you still on i see your name because i'd love to have him yeah could you
you heard what can you be sworn then and mike tantella too and then we'll be finished mr chair
if we can get those two guys i see them on so if i can get john coil sworn in and
i see his microphone is now off so he can probably talk john
yes can you hear me
yeah can you hear me now yeah we can hear you
chairman could you swear mr coyle in and we'll just
yes are you madam vice chair could you um square them in please
Yeah, it looks like one of you guys are, you're both muted, maybe.
Both are.
Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
yes i do jack you heard the my summary of the perceived hardships for the hardships of this lot
Jack, you heard my summary of the...
yes i did and you agree with that yes i do and it was your testimony that property could not be
developed for in a reasonable fashion for any i2 uses because of these hardships and also the
proximity and noise from I-95 and any number of things. Is that correct? Yes.
And in your view, is this minimum variance needed to afford relief for this application? Yes.
Is there any adverse impact on surrounding properties or on the general public health
safety and welfare? In my opinion, no. And you also prepared a grid chart. I believe that it's
exhibit A-19.
Could we pull that up, please?
This is the court reporter.
Could I have the name of the person who's testifying right now, please?
Andre Coyle.
Mr. Johnson.
C-O-I-L.
C-O-Y-L-E.
Thank you.
Mr. Coyle, could you explain to the board the significance
of this chart that you had prepared?
Committee members, I prepared this chart
to identify the relationship of land areas
and street frontages to all of the properties
in the immediate vicinity.
It's demonstrating the amount of frontage
that's customarily needed to have an adequate
industrial enterprise operate on a tract of land.
I created a range of frontage per acre.
the subject property has the smallest frontage per acre of any of the properties in the zone
and in my opinion the frontage is so limited that you could not put a building on here and have it
serviced by over-the-road trucking which would be a necessary feature which is the customary way
that goods are moved across the country shared by almost every other occupant in that vicinity
so I think that there's grave restrictions on the ability to use this land
All the other properties that you have identified are most of them developed?
Every one of them is developed.
Except this parcel.
Except the subject, yeah.
You can see I've identified the building area on every one of the parcels.
And you heard my testimony or my summary of your testimony regarding the taking in, I believe, 1962 for the I-95 right away?
And how much property did that take from this lot?
1.492 acres were taken. The remaining acreage is 2.09 acres. So what originally started out
as a 3.5-acre parcel with two and a half times as much frontage is now a 2.09-acre parcel.
That parcel had connectivity to the rails, right?
Yes, it did.
That connectivity or spur is no longer available?
That's correct.
i don't know who the questions of this witness and i would move all exhibits
into evidence as well okay and then just yeah can we just get michael tantel on very quickly just to
affirm everything michael are you still there i think
yes can you hear me yes please please identify yourselves by your last name for this
report reporter and i'll swear you in michael w tantella p e t a n t a l a tantella associates
llc engineers and architects we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth yes sir i do we're just going to be real real i i you know we're we're very mindful of
what you said though because i think mr bednar may you know have something to say about this at
the end of this presentation. That's why, you know, so we'd like to get our stuff in.
Mr. Tintal, did you prepare a study regarding the need for to elevate the sign to 65 feet
above the roadway, that is from the bottom of the sign face to the roadway, and thereby
requiring a variance from the 25 feet set forth in the ordinance?
uh yes sir they're contained in exhibits a 12 a and b go to those exhibits please
that's not it
it's before that now keep going keep going it's those two special ones
Line of sight is 12B. Exhibit 12B.
exhibit 12b there you go you had him yeah go back there you go that's it now why
do we need 65 feet mr. Tintela this we need 65 feet to overcome visual
obstructions from PennDOT directional signage that would block the cross-read of northbound
traffic viewing the sign across I-95. The directional signs identified on the lower
figure in red, it has a relative elevation of 77.44 feet. The next slide, which is also
part of this exhibit, shows a line of sight analysis. You can see in the upper right-hand
corner that directional sign, how that would be in a line of sight, and that's what we
need to vertically overcome. The lower half of this figure shows the challenges and the
analysis of drivers headed northbound in terms of distance, time, speed, and the amount of time they
have to see the sign and its relative elevation above those directional signs. Namely, the line
of sight right in the middle shows how the proposed sign will just overcome the directional
sign's height, which is about itself 16 feet tall, its face, and itself is 34 feet above
the grade of I-95. So this will afford drivers enough time to see the sign without obstruction
and without the sign to interfere with that directional sign.
So is this a minimum variance needed to afford relief?
Yes, sir, in my professional opinion.
excuse me i didn't get that question you're breaking up is this the minimum variance needed
to afford relief did you get that court reporter yes thank you mr chairman yeah is this the
minimum variance needed to afford relief yeah okay secondly is there any danger or a distraction to
do you have another device on yeah your microphone is really bad vince you were doing well
now are you able to answer yeah uh yeah um mr mr mr mr tantella um with regard to this matter
In your professional opinion, will this be detrimental to traffic safety?
It will not be detrimental to traffic safety, in my professional opinion, sir.
And what's your basis for that?
My basis for that are the analysis, the visual traffic site analysis that I did,
taking into account all the surrounding geometry, the proposed height.
Additionally, we look to research, which looks at traffic statistics and human factors of how long people glance at these signs.
And there have been a number of studies over the years by the Federal Highway Administration, educational institutions, and I myself have published with the Transportation Research Board and the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
I have over 30 publications, a number of them related specifically to traffic safety and signage.
So on the local basis and the greater research and the fact that PennDOT permits these signs
with the controls that are going to be part of it and the spacing are the basis for my professional opinion.
Okay, thank you.
Michael, I also made some representations during my presentation.
Did you hear them?
Yes, sir.
And did they accurately reflect your testimony?
Yes, sir, they do.
And do you adopt whatever I stated that may be attributed to you as your testimony today?
Yes, sir.
I adopt them as my own.
Okay, thank you.
I believe, unless he's, if he's on the phone, on the line, Richard Cedrone, who is the chair
of the south philly community association said that he might uh join in to verbally orally say
what they've said in their letter that they're supportive i don't know if rich is on the line i'd
great if he's not you know you have his letter and as i said you have two letters from
councilman squilla and councilman johnson with that we move to our record and we would rest
those letters will be made part of the record thank you thank you okay any questions from the board
thank you okay any questions from the board no anyone else would like to testify in this case
if so please raise it raise your hand mr richard santron has raised his hand i will
allow him to speak right now sir i didn't get that name so whoever you are sir please
please give us your full name. Was it Richard Cedrone? Mr. Cedrone. He raised his hand
a moment ago. Mr. Cedrone, please raise your hand. No worries. No worries. Chair already
stated that we don't need his testimony. We can continue. Those letters are part of the
record. Anyone else? Okay. No further hands at this time, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Planning
commission so ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for industrial use on the
city plan the application is within 500 feet of the existing non-accessory sign which could
create safety safety concerns to those driving along delaware avenue by having too many signs
too close together it's the planning commission's standing policy to oppose outdoor non-accessory
signage that negatively impacts safe transportation movement accordingly we recommend the request for
variance not occurring uh hold on zero zero two one three seven three six seven zero south
Lawrence Street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank
you thank you members of the board have a great day and I want I want to hear that I want to see
that Crosby Stills Nash and Young poster Crosby Stills I love it it's great I'm over anytime
thank you everybody bye thank you you got it carol go ahead calendar number 0367 2356 garrett street
now this is taryn saletta i just wanted to explain that this case was previously before the board
mr dofino made changes based on the neighborhood's requests we asked him to go back to lni to get
an amended refusal, which he did. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. DeFino. Please identify
yourself with the record and I'll swear you in. Sure, it's Vincent Anthony DeFino with DeFino
Law Associates. I represent Admir Valky. He's here with me today if we need him here. Okay,
thank you. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
yes thank you mr defano please begin do you also agree to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy yes have you emailed the packet with the required documents
proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or referral photos and plans um and have you done
this five days prior to this hearing have you also met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes uh this uh matter was originally heard on september 2nd uh 2020 at which point we did
put forth all the testimony uh necessary to come to a decision the only thing we had to do
was basically uh put in for a new refusal because the use was changing from uh well the original
the original proposal was uh basically one commercial unit on the first floor and a
residential unit on the second and one residential on the third uh also nine foot was required rear
setback and four foot was proposed so that was another refusal we met with the neighborhood
they were fine with the setback uh the only issue they had was the commercial unit they wanted us
to get rid of the commercial unit after many discussions thoroughly intense discussions with
the board and with the neighborhood uh they asked for three residential units which would be an
overuse uh so we had to go back for a new amended refusal for the three residential units which we
did and that was uh refused and we were told to bring it back to the board so basically everything
done. We had a proviso letter that's part of the record. The councilman, I believe it was Pierre,
i believe it was uh pierre uh france pierre testified uh that they were they were in support
of it so we had all the support and there is a proviso letter that makes up if you need me to
get that i can i can post that back up or whatever you need me to what is the contents of what is the
verbally tell us if you have it and if not you can pull it off oh yeah i have it right in front
of me right now okay so one affordable unit committed to below market rate um not within
our jurisdiction rounded bay windows on 24th street side which we did already in the revised
plan that you have uh we we removed the bay on garrett street that was done in in the revised
plan that you have uh the height was reduced to 36 feet and we have to remove alley trees
um and then remove the commercial space and have three residential units which we did
through the new refusal and a new sidewalk excuse me this is sharon sletta mr dofino all those
changes were included in the plans that were reviewed by l and i as part of the review for
the new refusal is that correct so that is correct so they would not need to be added as revised plans
right that's correct no there's no revision no revision revised plans
they were revised and they were included in the original uh hearing but the only problem was there
was three residential units versus one commercial and two residential okay but i don't need to
no you don't because he went back to lni and they reviewed the new plans okay just want to make sure
thank you uh mr dofino do you have your you want to bring your client on
yes i'm just going to spell his full name first and last name
hello guys my name is admir velco a d m i r and last name is v e l ko
do you swear in the firm to tell the truth nothing but the truth
yes i don't thank you and you heard my testimony you heard my testimony is it sure when accurate
yes i know do you adopt it as your own yes okay thank you any questions from the board no
anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no further hands thank you planning commission on bednar city planning while this property is
currently indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan based on the application
revisions we have no objection in the granting of variance thank you ron zero zero zero three six
seven two three five six gerrit street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you carol number six thank you very much everybody have a great holiday
and i look forward to seeing you guys in the new year get rid of 2020 right you got it take care
can't happen fast enough calendar number 0916 2616 south 18th street
ron patterson is the attorney
and i believe there was an attorney representing the protestants yes all right okay right now
Okay, I'll be promoting the panels right now, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. And Ron, just identify yourself, you've already been sworn in,
and then Cairo will ask you some questions.
Good afternoon. Ron Patterson, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia EPA 19103,
on behalf of the applicant who is an equitable owner.
Do you agree to weigh the reading on refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I would agree to weigh the reading.
There was one inaccuracy on refusal, which I can discuss as I go through it.
And have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal,
referral, photos, and plans five days prior to this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you.
you may proceed oh thank you so as you mentioned this regards 2618 south
So, as you mentioned, this regards 2618 South 18th Street, if I could share my screen.
Yes, you have authority.
Can you see that or is it just my file?
We have it.
okay no actually well we have your file i'm sorry okay all right we'll try it again
yes mr patterson great thank you uh so this is just to locate where the property is what you're
looking, the viewpoint here is at Oregon Avenue and 18th Street, looking north. There's the
Dunkin' Donuts here that I'm pointing to. The site is directly behind the Dunkin' Donuts
building as you travel a little farther away. But as you travel towards the property, there
it is. Two curb cuts there. It's an old building that was built in 1930. It's currently operating
as a plumbing and heating supply a business groves plumbing uh it's old uh the uses are
out of context and it borders uh the gerard estate homes which farther down here past this brick
building uh the property is located in the cmx2 a commercial zoning district what we're proposing to
do is demolish the building and in its place construct 22 homes arranged here as you see in
two rows of 11 with each house having two parking spaces in the front over here as well as
roof decks and rear nine foot rear yards. The refusals, there are a few predominantly though
they're there because of our configuration of the property. We could have, we did look at a buy right
plan in the CMX2 district. It would have been approximately maybe 70 residential dwelling
units as well as some commercial on the first floor. We felt that was a disservice to the
neighborhood. Also, the Girard estate area residence gear felt similarly. So we looked
at doing then single family houses. But of course, we could not subdivide them on the
fee lots because each fee lot would need a front on public street, which this does not.
So this is one of those common perpendicular planned urban development type arrangements
you would see 18th street being here and we'll go through the drive-in to access each of the units
let's see here
there's typical of what the building would look like this did trigger civic design review
because it's creating more than 50 000 square feet of new floor area bordering a residential
district so around that the property is rsa 5. so that's our rendering here we move to the refusal
so first refusal you see is has to do with not providing commercial on the first floor
we didn't see that there would be a viable business that would go there but then again
we'd have to do the apartment building as i had mentioned so the trade-off was for this type of
use that would fit in with the character in the context of the neighborhood that commercial
would be overlooked in this sense.
We see there's some refusals here about rear yard and side yards, and that, again, arises
because – go back to the site plan – one of the refusals, for example, states that
pilot house access structure should not be against the rear yard yes this is the rear yard but
in the alignment of the houses it's actually their side yard we have a refusal for not
we have a refusal for not providing any rear yard which this would be the rear
providing any rear yard which this would be the rear yard
yard but in fact we've provided nine foot rear yards in terms of the house excuse me the house
arrangement um tough parcel to work with um because it's narrow and deep but it necessitated
this design 24 foot curb cut two-way we did review this with with streets department who
who did sign off on the plan again as I mentioned we went to civic design review on October 22nd
we met with here on September 1st I believe Jody Della Barbera is here on behalf of them
I'd like to ask if you could allow George Felici F-E-L-I-C-I to testify
Good afternoon, Mr. Felici. Please identify yourself with the record and I'll swear you in.
You would have to raise his hand.
Please raise your hand, sir.
sorry sorry about that i'm sitting here at my desk actually raising my hand
okay that's a first george yeah i know thanks i appreciate that here's your hand
please identify yourself yes george felici with frost development company
are you swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed ground hi hi george uh as you just say sorry i'm sorry mr patterson
and the chair can we just have to spell his name just to put on the record yeah london did it for
him but okay please spell your name sure it's f like and frank e-l-i-c-i thank you uh george as
you just stated here with frost development could you just tell the board what frost has to do with
this property sure so we uh we have the property under agreement uh we've done a lot of development
throughout the city, and so we looked at various options for the site, and we felt that this was
the best use for the site in the context of the existing neighborhood. And George, you heard
and saw my presentation. Would you agree it is true and accurate, and you would adopt it as if
it were your own? Yes. Okay, thank you. Ron, the photo we're looking at, is that looking north to
south that is looking from the rear towards oregon avenue yeah north to south okay yes yes
will be west to east i think and this is where the parking would be in the front of the homes
if you go out scott woodruff uh to join us
and while we're waiting for for scott i just wanted to address mr
i'll have mr woodruff to speak good afternoon mr woodruff please identify yourself with the
records by your last name scott woodruff w-o-o-d-r-u-f-f you swear in a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing about the truth i do please proceed thank you hi scott uh could you
tell us your position with your firm uh yeah i am the uh director of architecture at design blends
architecture at LLP. And you're familiar with the project. Obviously, you've helped design and draw
these plans. Yes. And you were involved in our RCO and CDR meeting and hearing. And just briefly,
if you tell the board the materials of construction here, how you arrived at it, and any changes we've
made since we've met with the Civic Group briefly. Absolutely. So the facades are primarily
composed of a red brick material with a 12 by 24 cast stone that kind of wraps at a water table
and then up the first floor as it goes back the drive aisle. In meeting with the RCO gear,
they had suggested on some of the entries of the houses that face 18th Street that we look at some
of the contextual elements of Girard Estates, which we then included to involve kind of a little
bit more detail, including updated windows, soldier coursing, brick coursing, as well as
some of the planters you see at the drive, entry of the drive out, to kind of shield the parking
and create a better curb appeal to the whole development. And would you agree, as the statements
i made about the refusals that most of them are due to the fact of the configuration of the
are due to the fact of the um configuration of the property in this perpendicular arrangement
property in this perpendicular
yes okay thank you um that's all i have for uh george and scott uh i didn't want to address
yes i'm sorry is there an ho a hoa uh yes there would be they would uh uh would maintain
uh the property yes and the trash removal thank you i didn't mean to interrupt sorry that's okay
thank you uh i just want to address i know mr cook's going to speak uh adjoining neighbor uh
we don't have zoning issues with them it's just a side um agreement issue we need to work out so
um you know i would ask that the board vote the case and of course there's a 30-day appeal period
and when within which if we don't reach an agreement or you know as the board would please
to hold the vote and we could let you know if we've reached an agreement which i'm confident
we will yeah i think might be better for everyone rather than get through any testimony that you
guys might not even be uh germane to this in the end that we yes close this we can close this case
and and make a decision in uh at an executive session maybe in a month or so excuse me you
can do that but you cannot then consider any feedback from the um from any further meetings
or take into consideration any subsequently um agreed to yes i understand that but what happens
sharon if there is no agreement how do i mean it's really outside if we're doing damned if we don't
I mean, you could have a hearing for Mr. Patterson to come back and just report on whether or
not there was an agreement, but.
Well, resumption hearing.
I mean, as I mentioned, I don't think the discussion will result in any change to the
zoning plan.
That's not what this is about.
All right.
We'll vote this.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
But we do have the attorney.
Understood.
And that's Harry Cook.
Let me ask if there's any questions from the board.
Vote on the panelists.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify?
Please raise your hand.
I wasn't sure if Ms. Della Barber was.
Harry Cook is getting promoted
I didn't understand what you said
I'm sorry
I just promoted Harry Cook
Mr. Cook
hi good afternoon hi please identify yourself the record i don't remember if i swore you
i was sworn in harry cook h-a-r-r-y-c-o-o-k anastasia law 1315 walnut street you're still
under oath thank you thank you um mr patterson is correct to an extent there are uh you know
in terms of our real property agreement it is in relation to zoning issues that are in play
in this application. So the rear yard area that abuts the shared property line under the variance
would allow applicant to build 12 feet closer to Protestants' property. Protestants' property
is a medical office. With me today is Dr. Pascual Nestico. You have elderly patients that do
traverse that area into and out of the medical office, building that much closer to the property
line will impact, adversely impact light and air and have a knock-on effect potentially of
valuation. And again, not only is Dr. Nestico an esteemed doctor, he's a real estate professional
for 50 years, and he can testify to that. We would ask that the board hold a vote today,
give us a week to come up with a final resolution. We are very close. In addition, we also,
an email was sent to the board by Paul Rossi, the zoning chair of the Girard Estates Neighbors
the zoning chair of the Girard Estates Neighbors Association, asking that a continuance be granted
Association.
until these issues could be worked out. We obviously are past that point, but a hearing
hold would still meet those sort of needs and allow us to work out the real property agreement
that would be a quid pro quo for us not opposing the zoning, the dimensional variance requested
that impacts our property. I would have two things to say about that. One being Mr. Rossi
was the secondary RCO, the coordinating RCO being here. He's with Jenna. That's the first I've heard
about the request for the continuance. And second, this is the first time I'm hearing
from our neighbor that there is a dimensional or zoning issue with the project.
So I'm happy to now hear that, even though we've been discussing this for at least a month.
Without seeing what Mr. Cook is talking about, I don't understand.
Are you asking that certain buildings be moved further away?
We've already had an admission that there was a buy-write option here where 70 units could be built that would have included...
70 with commercial mixed use um we have an assertion that commercial is not viable here
there's a dunkin donuts on the corner and a medical office right next door so you know in
terms of uh hardship and and in proving up whether or not that it's not viable to have commercial at
this project has not been met potentially but if we have some time it sounds like you're going to
you guys are going to start from it sounds like you're almost beginning this this discussion from
day from the beginning no we're very close there there are final drafts before parties
share some of those final drafts what what what what are we talking about here
it's it relates to an easement in the rear yard um uh to the rear of the property where there is
now a nine foot um an easement will be made more narrow no the easement is going to be extinguished
and there are certain terms and conditions that we would receive on regarding that in exchange for
supporting the dimensional variance that would allow protestant excuse me allow applicant to
build 12 feet closer than the code allows so if i may this is the easement i believe which we have
access over to get to oregon avenue and it's about when and how this easement gets extinguished so we
relinquish our rights and some other related collateral issues and one of the collateral
issues is the 12 foot expansion. Mr. Cook, I think you said that you need a week? Yes. All right.
So here's what we're going to do.
0-0-0-9-1-6-2-6-1-6-South 18th. This hearing will be resumed. Could we do this
week, Tanya, it'll be
15 minutes at the most.
I guarantee you. Fantastic.
Thank you, sir.
Tanya?
The only thing I really...
We could offer
3.30 on Wednesday.
Wednesday is the 9th, correct?
Because if you recall, we have a couple specials.
Okay, this hearing will be resumed
on Wednesday, December
9th at 3.30 p.m.,
At which time we will consider any feedback related to the position of the RCO and the
neighboring property.
Great.
Thank you.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you.
We will get it done.
Thank you.
All right.
This is Ron Bednar from the City Planning Commission.
We'd like to...
I'm sorry, Ron.
I meant to apologize.
Go ahead, Ron.
So property is indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan.
Civic Design Review Committee concluded their reviews of this proposal at their October 22nd
meeting where it was recommended additional green space, landscaping, parking space reductions,
a clear definitive separation between space and between cars and social spaces in the parking
court and a more articulation of the 18th street facade. We recommend that these issues be addressed
before the variances and the special exceptions are approved.
the variances and the special exceptions are approved. Okay thank you so noted. All right
I think I failed to ask you if anyone else wanted to testify in this case beside Mr. Cook. I would
like to just bring my client on just to adopt my testimony or would the board stipulate? Okay we'll
stipulate you being an officer of court we'll stipulate that the your client would adopt your
testimony thank you thank you carol number seven i'm sorry yeah yeah there was someone with a hand
up if you will oh i'm sorry okay okay it's like the case that never went away calling user
calling user please hit star six to unmute yourself
Last time, call in user, unmute yourself by pressing star six.
So this is Dr. and the speaker.
I just wanted to thank you, Mr. Chair, for all your help and the work you're doing for
our community.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, since he's on the line, can I just have him adopt?
Please. Why don't we do this, Ms. Hutton spell his last name, please.
N-E-S-T-I-C-O. Thank you. Dr. Nesco, you heard my testimony previously.
Say that again, please. You heard what I said to the board earlier about the dimensional issues
and the use and the impact this would have and the fact that we are very close to coming to a
final agreement yes i did do you adopt that testimony as your own absolutely thank you sir
thank you you're welcome thank you have a good night thank you
yeah get it in quick tanya calendar number 1851 2629 north 27th street
sharon sletta the attorney is michael lambert thanks
I just promoted Mr. Lambert to a panelist.
Hi, good afternoon.
Can everyone hear me?
Yes, we can.
Can I share my screen, please?
Did you swear him in, Carol?
No, I did not.
Please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Yes, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
Michael Lambert.
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Absolutely.
And please spell your last name for the court reporter, please.
L-A-M-B-E-R-T.
Thank you.
Mr. Lambert, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Absolutely, Vice Chair.
Have you also mailed the email, the exhibit packet with the required documents,
consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, a refusal or referral, photos and plans?
Have you met with the RCO?
Did you receive a letter?
And have you done all of this five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, we have done at least two emails.
and I know yes at least two all right thank you um you may what does that mean you've done at
least two emails um no I just wanted to make no we usually send emails to two different addresses
and make sure everybody receives it so okay you may proceed thank you so much sure may I share
my screen yes thank you so much
uh ladies and gentlemen i wanted to briefly ask the uh panel or this board rather i wanted to
give you a little bit of background my client purchased this property at a sheriff's sale
in 2017 and when he purchased it all five units were occupied by tenants he obviously believed
that the zoning was proper, but obviously it was not. We are asking this board to allow my client
to continue operating this property with the proper variance. As you will see, it's a fairly
large property. There were five electrical panels that were already there. There's also five
um there's also five different water heaters keep going this was all done prior to my client
of different water heaters.
Keep going.
This was all...
uh purchasing the property from the sheriff's sale in 2017 um there's also five separate mailbox
uh we also have approval from the um from the rco as well as um
As you can see, this is a pretty, the property is pretty nice, well taken care of.
There are also, if not all, a lot of multi-unit family
properties in that area. And we're just asking the panel to grant us experience due to the hardship.
Excuse me, would you go back to those photographs?
okay all right and then show us the photographs of the outside of the building outside sir one
moment there you go now when were those interior photographs taken uh they were recently taken but
i don't know the exact date my client is here i can find and when when was the photograph you're
showing is now taken yeah of the building outside uh recently um maybe a few days ago
i'm trying to go back you know why i'm asking yes sir the interior photos would you go to the
interior photos yes sir now those windows yes sir don't look like the windows on the photograph
you're showing from the outside well there's nothing nothing included they don't have the
what they call that the great some correct tom i know you know what i'm talking about
millions or the may i ask you um if that bay window on the second floor and i don't know
what exactly your grants is and i apologize mr chairperson chairman um but i the gray
with the window at the second floor in the back the bay the bay that you're looking at
that second floor bay there's their their windows without grates in them the photo you show of us
of the interior has windows which look like they're brand new windows with grates in them
doesn't look like the same bay window area that i'm looking at could you do you have any other
photographs of the interior? Yes, we have more.
Those are the same ones. Not every window that I've seen so far in these photographs
is not reflected in the windows that you're showing us at the exterior of the building.
okay keep going
well those are it's the same three photographs are for you keep showing us
i see what you're saying mr chairman how about the first floor could you have any
have any photographs of the first floor the interior any photos of the interior
i do not have any photos uh besides what i've been provided so far
well i would suggest that your client do a better job because i i for one i don't to me it doesn't
look like the same building from what you're showing us of the interior compared to the outside
mr chairman i'll ask my board members if it's me or is it just my imagination i don't see any of
that mr chairman if i could ask and i apologize for wasting the board's time could i briefly ask
the panel for continuance and get the proper get this completely sorted out. I don't want to waste
the panel's time and I feel like I've done that already for a few minutes so if I could ask the
panel for continuance I'd be able to provide all the necessary photographs and have everything in
order and I apologize again sir. Well it's not your fault your client whoever took the photographs
if you did then they did it's it's misleading as far as I'm concerned. I don't know if my board
any of my board members see it any differently please speak up because I I'm just I it doesn't
look like the same building to me I I agree with you Mr. Chairman there's not one window that has
greats in it not one in this photograph not one at all I am going to fix this I agree with you
Frank and I apologize again all right I I'm I'm we're gonna have to you're gonna have to go back
and revisit this whole thing so um any questions from the board no no anyone else like to testify
in this case?
Mr. Chair, please.
We've got their hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Well, sir, I was asking.
I know what you're asking.
I'm just...
I'm sorry, I would like to just ask a question for clarification, Chair.
Because there are a few hands up.
If it's going to be continued, would we have their testimony provided at the continued
Well, I was going to vote it, but we'll take some of the testimony then.
Oh, okay.
So this is not a continuance?
The applicant is not demonstrating unnecessary hardship regarding requirements of the code.
It's an inappropriate overuse.
We recommend the request that the variance does not be granted.
001851 2629 North 27th Street.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
Thank you.
number eight calendar number 2134 2900-12 north 17th street
and the attorney is rachel pritzker
i'll promote it to panelists right now madam chair she's now a panelist
rachel identify yourself please spell your name you're sworn in earlier today
yep rachel pritzker r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635 market street suite 1600
philadelphia pa 19103 good afternoon do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? Yes. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents consisting of proof
of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing
date? And have you met with the RCO? And if so, do you have a letter? Yes. Thank you. You may
proceed. Okay. Thank you. So we're here to discuss 2900 North 17th Street, which is an existing
structure. I'm going to share my screen in North Philadelphia. It is this large site here.
It is zoned I-1, and we are proposing for the use as a child daycare center on the first and
second floor. I have the floor plans here for the board so that you can see. The organization's name
is Ocelero. We have representatives from Ocelero. They are part of the Head Start program providing
daycare services throughout Philadelphia and the Camden area and other places as well
and have a wonderful reputation and we have a community that's very excited about this proposal
as well. So just this is the floor plans of this building. It's owned by the Philadelphia
suburban development corporation i have uh mark nicoletti here as well for any questions as far
as ownership is concerned and essentially we're here in front of the board today because the
property is zoned i1 it doesn't allow for a daycare center there was a proviso um put in in 2017 by
the board um for the uses that were granted approving all cmx uh sorry can you see that
all CMX3 except for daycare, nightclub, takeout, restaurant, medical officers, casino uses.
I think that was relative to the proposal that was provided for in 2017. The only other use in
the building right now is for veteran services, and there's no concern by the daycare or the
neighborhood about having a daycare center for child care in this building. We met with the
Tioga United as the coordinating RCO and Allegheny West and have a letter of support from them. We
also entered into a community benefits agreement as Ocelero does a lot of local hiring and recruiting
certification programs and is a really wonderful advocate for early childhood learning. So I don't
have much more than that, given I don't believe this is a heavily opposed matter. I would like
to at least have Mr. Nicoletti and Victoria, who's the executive director of the Acelero
Learning Program, just speak on the record if the board is interested. And otherwise,
that essentially concludes my testimony for today.
Thank you, Mr. Nicoletti.
Mr. Nicangardi has been announced.
Mr. Nicoletti has been allowed to talk, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Nicoletti.
Please identify yourself with the records by your last name and I'll swear you in.
Mark Nicoletti, N-I-C-O-L-E-T-T-I.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Ms. Pritzker?
uh mr nicoletti have you heard my testimony today and you adopt it as your own
i did and i do okay um i would like to have victoria on unless uh mr nicoletti of anything
else you wanted to add um i'd like to share a few thoughts maybe at the end and i think victoria
really should have the floor right now and give her presentation wonderful
Jason or Tanya Ducea, Victoria?
I think her last name is Ankra.
A-N-K-R-E.
I think so.
I'm going to say I'll raise her hand first.
Okay, Victoria, I'm able to raise your hand.
Okay, I won't allow her to speak since she raised her hand.
Good afternoon, ma'am.
please identify yourself with the records, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Victoria, B-I-C-T-O-R-I-A. Last name is Akra, A-N-K-R-A-H.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Your affiliation with this application?
I am the Executive Director of Accelerial Learning Camden, Philadelphia.
Thank you. Ms. Pritzker?
Yeah, Victoria, could you just please briefly explain to the board a little bit of just about the Ocelero Learning Program and the commitment to Philadelphia and sort of the importance of the location of this site specifically, so that we can kind of just speak to the hardship and importance of this application.
Yes. So Accelerate Learning Camden, Philadelphia is a Head Start program. Our program basically provides high quality early childhood services to children from low income families.
We currently have seven centers in the city of Philadelphia. This particular center,
it's so important to us simply because we recently are going to, you know, receive funds to do an
expansion to our current program. And when you look at the population in which this location is
in, in the need. It is definitely underserved in terms of high quality early childhood education
and that's exactly our mission to, you know, close the achievement gap for children
in the city of Philadelphia and there are many children who are currently in this area right in
the vicinity of where the center is located that would highly benefit from our services.
we're a comprehensive program where um while education is our primary focus we realize in
order to educate a child you need to make sure that child is healthy well fed um and so those
things are important we are we often um are employing our parents and because our parents
are residents of this community that means we will be employing the residents within that community
So we're excited about that. The way in which we will approach that is through, you know, providing them with information on upcoming job fairs. We do door to door in terms of, you know, getting the word out.
We also are looking forward to being able to provide them, you know, with a space.
All of our centers are outfitted with beautiful meeting space in which we're hoping, you know, if they need to have space to do meetings for the local community, that they will, you know, think of us and utilize us.
In addition to that, a core component of Head Start is about program governance, where our parents and our local community work alongside me to make decisions in the best interest of the children and families we serve.
So I look forward to the residents of this community also working with me to make sure the program is enhancing their current neighborhood and basically providing that high-quality education to the children and the services.
Thanks so much, Victoria.
Have you heard the testimony I gave to the board today?
Yes, I did.
And do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else who would like to testify?
No, excuse me.
I'm sorry.
Any questions from the board?
no yeah anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there's a chair there's a call in the user who's um
Mr. Chair, there's a call-in user who's hand just went up. I will allow them to speak right now.
Hello. Good afternoon, ma'am. Please identify yourself with a record name and address.
Yes, this is Adrienne Fernandez, Swamp Little Neighborhood Process Association, RCO.
Adrienne, you're still under oath from earlier this morning.
Yes, I am.
We have a proviso where we would like to trash any dumpsters or trash and recycling to be
kept inside the property lines.
And also, we would like if Ms. Pritzker could provide us with a copy of the CBA.
We aren't aware of the contents, so we can also share the information as one of the effective RCOs.
And also, we approve of this project because it's going to be a head start.
We have a lot of really good children in our neighborhood who would benefit from that.
and also I heard the testimony about the jobs.
And I guess the only question we might have is
if the applicant party can discuss drop-off traffic
and parking during drop-off and pick-up
because it's a fast-moving curve that ends at the property.
Sorry for the background noise.
And we just want to know what considerations
the owner has for decision-making.
safety as uh people are um dropping off and picking up children around the curve
of near 17th and indiana yeah i can i believe if there's going to be a drop off zone that'll
be established uh in cooperation with the streets department there's also going to be there's also
on street um off street parking mr nicoletti can speak to that there's there's a parking lot
associated with this um so in regards in regards to the trash issue do you have commercial trash
pickup i assume yes okay so we'll have commercial trash pickup all right any anyone else wish to
testify in this case please raise your hand as the chair there is an under trunk whose hand is raised
i will allow her to speak right now sir thank you
Ms. Trung, please unmute your microphone and please wait to be sworn in.
I don't know if that was on purpose.
Linda, are you speaking to this case?
If you could open your mic and let us know.
Yeah, I kind of don't think so.
I think Linda's from Xin Jin's office,
so we can move forward.
All right, planning commission.
I'm Bednar City Planning.
This parcel is a part of a industrial corridor
proposed to remain industrial,
the zoned in the comprehensive plan.
The parcel was granted a variance for uses permitted
in CMX3 in 2017 with provisos for no daycare uses
among other uses.
This property has already received many entitlements beyond what would be permitted in I-1.
Due to these reasons, we oppose the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
002134-2900 North 17th Street.
My vote is yes with the proviso commercial trash pickup.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Calendar number 1460, 1419 West Grange Avenue.
The attorney is Alan Nockamson.
Madam Chair.
good afternoon okay mr knockinson good afternoon please identify yourself for the record
uh yes alan knockamson of knockamson pc one two three south broad street suite 1600 philadelphia
pa 19109 thank you you're still under oath from earlier okay 30 agree to waive the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do and have you also emailed an exhibit packet with
I do. And have you also emailed an exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
proof of ownership
refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing and have you met with the
RCO and do you have a letter? I do not have a letter. I did do everything else but I don't have
I'm going to share my screen.
So I'm here to present 1419 West Grange Avenue.
With me is Fran Popak, the owner of the property in question.
So our first exhibit is proof of ownership, showing that Grange Development LLC owns the property.
The second exhibit is the tax clearance certificate, showing that they're in good standing with the City of Philadelphia.
There you go they owe no taxes. The third exhibit is the notice of refusal.
So this is a CMX2 property and we are looking to put 36 dwelling units
as well as having interior parking of 48 spaces in total on this property.
And we received a refusal first for the parking lot.
We're not providing the required landscaping and screening that's required under the code.
And I'll show you that the reason why we did that was to provide more off-street parking.
Second, we were refused because we are not proposing to put any commercial units on the
ground floor as required by the code.
You'll see from the pictures that Grange Avenue is a block and a half away from North Broad
Street, which is a commercial corridor.
But Grange itself is in a residential neighborhood.
So we're heading into a residential neighborhood.
And we didn't think it was appropriate to have a commercial component in a residential neighborhood of this sort, especially if you're near a commercial corridor like North Broad Street, where it would be better to support the commercial corridor by directing traffic to North Broad Street.
And then the third exhibit, the third refusal is a height variance. We're seeking 42 feet in height, while 38 is allowed by the code. Again, you'll see an article from the Inquirer showing that there used to be a pretty massive apartment building on here, which is much bigger and was much taller than what was here.
are you going to get to those yeah i am okay okay sorry sorry all right yeah so you know i i provided
a an article from the inquirer which kind of explains how we got here today and how this is
a vacant lot uh this is um you know an article which shows that the you know that this was a
much larger building back in its day that it showed there was 60 units at one point and we're only
asking for 36 units.
And then the application will go to application appeal. Here's the zoning map.
And again, you can see we're a pretty large property in comparison. Our lot size
is pretty significant in the grand scheme of things here.
And as you can see, we're in a commercial corridor on North Broad Street.
And then here are photographs of the property. This is our property right here.
and then you can see pictures of the property from the right of the property you can see
we're in a residential neighborhood or we're heading into a residential neighborhood
you see properties to the left again residential neighborhood over here is north broad street
and then you can see our orange posters that we put up and then here are plans
and then here are plans and drawings the first page is a rendering of the property as you can
and drawings the first page is a rendering
see the first floor would be dedicated to interior parking for the residents and then you have
three additional floors second third and fourth floors which would be for the actual units
themselves. You know, we're heavily landscaping the area, brick facade, interior parking spaces,
exterior parking spaces. So with respect to the first refusal, if we did the shading that was
required on the code right here, we would lose probably one if not two parking spaces. And given
that there's a setback here this is a shared driveway with the residents here given the
you know the setback here we thought it was appropriate to add additional parking rather than
to lose a parking space or two counselor can i ask you a question sure is the additional parking
adjacent to residential it is set back from the residential so they're parking in the rear
They actually have a driveway.
This is a shared driveway because they access that shared driveway to park in the rear of their properties.
But it is adjacent to residential.
It is adjacent to residential.
That is correct.
Then there should be some landscaping.
So we can take a look into doing some landscaping.
Just so you know, the coordinating RCO, my understanding is that the representative is online.
I did speak to her yesterday.
They are in full support of this project, which includes, you know, the request for, you know, having no shading over there in terms of, you know, allowing for those additional parking spots.
And then here are the floor plans.
I can go over them if you want, but they're 36 units.
And then here's an example of a one-bedroom, one-bathroom
that I kind of blew up for the board's, you know, convenience.
There's no roof decks.
There's no basement living.
Here's an example of a two-bedroom, one-bath.
here's an example of a two-bedroom one-bath another version of it
and here's another example of a two-bedroom two-bath
and we did meet with the uh well we didn't meet but we gave a detailed letter uh to the
a concerned community association uh it's a 10 page letter they had they did not want to meet
in person they did not want us to communicate directly with the affected properties they wanted
us to give a detailed explanation in writing of what the proposal was and we prepared a pretty
extensive letter uh detailing exactly what this project's about and this is the this is a copy of
that letter and then as part of that just like the what you saw then i gave them a copy everything
that you've seen today they've seen so then they had like a pretty detailed understanding of what
was going on here and like i said i did speak to uh sandra from a concerned uh uh community
Association. I spoke to her yesterday. She indicated her support. She indicated that
there would be a letter of support sent to the board. I haven't received it. So I don't know if
you have received it. So, but that concludes. Jaren, have we received that letter?
all right move on uh and that's it that's that's basically our presentation in a nutshell we can
go through the floor plans uh or no i think we can bypass that unless the board has any specific
questions no other than the issue that tom raised all right so we can move on and do you have a
client you want to yes yes uh fran popak can you virtually raise your hand
uh mr popak uh can you state your name full name and address for the record
Fran Popec, 1546 Packer Avenue, Philadelphia PA.
1546 Packer Avenue, Philadelphia P.A.
Mr. Chair, would you like to?
Could you spell your last name for the reporter?
P is in Paul, O is in Oscar, P is in Paul,
P is in Edward, K is in Kevin.
We're in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Nocklinson.
Yes, Mr. Popak, you heard everything I stated today.
I did.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Tom, I know you raised a question, Tom, about some greenery.
uh mr knockinson explained i think that the community was not uh that was something they
were interested in or it wasn't a concern of them we do have a significant amount of landscaping
if you look at the rendering itself um and then we can go through the rest but like there's a
significant amount of landscaping throughout this project you know yeah does landscaping meet the
code requirements the landscaping that we did provide yes other than then and you can see the
why'd you get a refusal no i was going to say other than having the this this one area right
here this is the only part that we did not meet this one little area right here and there's no
way to fit landscaping in without losing and again i don't want to i i don't want to misstate
but at least one if not two parking spaces we're trying to give we're trying to give as many
parking we're trying we have 36 units we have 48 parking spaces so we're trying to give one
parking space per unit and then have a floating like 12 for guests so you know we we really given
the fact that you know this is a common driveway uh that's pretty wide uh and that the neighbors
and i think i have pictures but they're the people here on this street they they also have their
driveway here and that's all they have it's not a backyard for them we thought it was appropriate
under circumstances but we defer obviously you know to the board thank you okay thank you
any other any questions mr pobak you were going to say something oh yes adam was going to chime
in as well for the landscape in the in that back corner there okay i do have the address yeah so
the architect's on on on the call so i think it's probably more appropriate for a real the architect
to give an explanation and see you know if there's any alternatives so um adam can you virtually
raise your hand long time to talk now mr chair thank you sir please identify yourself with the
record? Hi, this is Adam Rogers, ROGERS of Cadre Design, 123 Leverington Avenue, Philadelphia PA
19127. Thank you. And you're swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you, Alan. Okay, Mr. Rogers, did I explain it accurately about this issue,
the landscaping refusal? Yes. So what I wanted to add was actually more of a civil engineering
The issue was less about how many parking spots we would lose and more about the turning radius because of the shape of the shared drive and the one way traffic that we have going through the rear here.
We were cutting off a lot of turning radius to be able to provide the code required landscaping.
We would actually have to pull it in almost three spaces to be able to make the turn back on to that shared driveway.
um does that answer your question okay okay thank you all right thank you um okay uh
any questions from the board no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise
your hand.
Chair, there's a Sandra Broadus whose hand is up. I will allow her to speak right now,
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please identify yourself for the record. First and last name.
My name is Sandra Broadus, S-A-F-D-R-A-B-R-O-A-D-U-S. I am representing a concerned community association,
the rco on um this particular appeal and he's swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
um this particular appeal and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do please proceed um first of all i'd like to say that um i apologize that we sent
our letter to both the board and to um allen's office this afternoon so they are in their in
everyone's inbox if you have not seen it but i would like if you would indulge me for one minute
to read the contents of that letter for the record. Is that okay?
Yes, please.
Okay, so this letter is to note for the record that the community represented by a concerned
community association is literally horrified by the prospect of a new apartment development
being built anywhere on the 1400 of West Grain Street. To clarify this fear, this fear stems
from the following. A wave of shootings and gang warfare over the past several years that has
resulted in frequency of helicopters flying over the 1500 block of West Grain Street as altercations
randomly break out leaving death and property damage. Teddy bears, large memorials on the sides
of buildings police cars permanently assigned to randomly sit along 16th street from chance
plus street to on the avenue to deter congregation ma'am i'm sorry sorry for the interruption
but if you can speak to the issues of this particular application uh we understand the
other issues that are going on and if you can just talk to the development of this project
Okay, I had a feeling. Okay, so particularly, this particular development is proposed in front of yet another development, which if you go to the location is literally the same spot where 63 apartments are being proposed.
They are both proposing to use the same curb cuts, meaning adjacent to the residents on
the 1500 block of 5600 on 15th Street is the block that you're talking about with regards
to the landscaping.
And then on Grange Street, there is another curb cut that used to be a parking lot, a
huge parking lot, which is where the other property is proposed.
We are concerned that, A, the curb cuts are not going to adequately serve the purposes for which they are proposed.
And we would hope that, well, that's going to reveal itself as time goes by.
We're concerned that the traffic that the community relies on to access Grange Street,
which is our way in and out of off on and off of Broad Street from the community will be congested as a result of of the congregation.
And further, the the saturation of the use of the space is an issue because the apartment directly behind the driveway that this property is being proposed on
has been a nuisance property and significantly responsible for a lot of the unrest in the
community because there are residents in the property with no place to go because there is
no outdoor space proposed, similarly proposed by this unit. So the neighbors are fearful of what
going to look like. They are fearful of how this property is, that the property owner
has maintained it in a very egregious manner in the past. It's been a junkyard, a parking lot,
and a lot of things with thousands of 311 calls and requests for interaction with,
interception from the council office. And having said all that and wanting that
clearly documented on the record. The last thing that we were concerned about is the fact that
because there is another project being proposed, we were not clear, except for the statement that
was just given to us by the developer that these are not one in the same development, meaning
they're proposing 34, I think, units and the other one is proposing 63. And we are very concerned,
which is what all the confusion has been, because when these projects became before us,
we were not getting any information about what was going on.
about what was going on. We just saw two developments going up in what appeared to be the
We just saw two developments going up in what appeared to be the same.
same location, front and back. And when we made inquiries, we were not getting that information.
And I apologize if ACCA has become a nuisance with regards to this property, but we have valid
reason to be concerned about the saturation and unloading of lots of tenants in apartment
building in a space where the community already has unrest from people who are hanging out loitering
in an area because there is no outdoor space proposed for those apartments. Now I'm sure you
can see that based on the reasons that this property was refused, there is really no recourse
and as a community we have looked at this property it is a handsome property it is the lesser of some
of the alternatives that could go in the space and so we are making a point um for the property
owner who i hope is listening the attendant on the attorney i did talk to alan about ma'am ma'am
if you can summarize we'd appreciate that summarizing um yeah i mean summer in summary
ACCA, send a letter of support, okay? Wow.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
We'll leave this in my hands, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Planning Commission.
this is ron bednar city planning properties indicated for commercial mixed use on the city
plan of the existing zoning of cmx2 and recommended zoning and the comprehensive plan of cmx3 with a
transit-oriented development overlay requires active ground use to foster walkable public realm
The building, enabled by the proposed variances, would present a blank masonry wall adjacent to a sidewalk. In addition, the hardship is self-created by the applicant's design decisions.
The two use refusals are driven by a very high number of off-street parking spaces.
Given the excessive high number of parking spaces in conjunction with 1407-09 Grange,
which is also being redeveloped, we recommend the request for variances not be granted.
um i'm a little i'm not i'm a little confused about the parking you're saying there's an overuse
of parking ron is that what you're saying what we're saying is is that there's already a very
high volume of off-street parking in that location based on the other redeveloping
new development that's occurring at 1407 to 1409 Grange. So in other words it's a very high
concentration of off-street parking which you know could result in safety issues and a lot of other
concerns. Yeah Mr. Chair a couple things. First we're utilizing a pre-existing curb cut
and this you know the history of this property shows that the use that we're proposing is a lot
lesser than what has been done in the past as far as any proposed project to the rear of us
my understanding is that the board has not decided that matter yet but you know as far as our project
as the community stated they're in support of this project
and this will help support the commercial corridor without taking parking away from the
from the residents on a lot size of almost 30,000 square feet okay thank you but the community did
send a letter of support correct they did actually I found them I wasn't paying attention at 1 50
p.m. they sent it to me I don't know who's on it but it's a letter of support okay there's no
letter or any correspondence from the council president's office i've reached out to them i
haven't heard back this jones is not on i assume um i believe it's mr richardson
oh green javan i apologize yeah is mr richardson on
Mr. Richardson, please raise your hand if you're on.
mr richardson please raise your hand if you're on
I believe he is on, Jim.
No hand?
No, sir.
Okay, thank you.
0014601419 West Grange Avenue.
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you my question thank you my question to the sonographer
we have three cases do you need a break now would you like a break now
three cases left before we get into the 3 30 list
if we can wait until we start to 3 30 and do it then i'm fine with that
okay thank you thank you thank you so number 10 calendar number 2041 101 east sedgwick street
the attorney is rachel pritzker
Brandon Savern from my office is going to present for this matter and I'll take care of 1029
East Columbia that's okay with the board
okay Mr. Savern a panelist Mr. Chair thank you good afternoon please identify yourself
for the record spell your last name and i'll swear you in sure my name is brandon saverin
um s as in sam a v as in victor r a n uh of pritzker law group uh 1635 market street suite
1600 philadelphia pa 19103 thank you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do thank you carol yes do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy yes i do have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or referral photos and plans
five days prior to this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes yes and
yes thank you thank you thank you you may proceed thank you madam vice chair um i am going to share
my screen. Okay. Can everybody see the satellite image here? This is the property. It's in East
Mount Airy. It's a single family home with, on the corner of Sedgwick and Chew, large lot,
21,000 square feet lot that has this little outbuilding here that is currently, let me get a
better look at it for you there's a property from the street by the way um here's the outbuilding
it's a garage at the end of the driveway um that is currently you know set up for automobiles on
the bottom floor and has sort of like a little attic space um the project is that the owners
would like to turn that outbuilding into a separate little mini house for um their mother
and mother-in-law for her to live in. This isn't allowed under the code, and we got our variants
prohibiting that use. And basically, in a nutshell, this is called an accessory dwelling unit,
and ADUs are currently only permitted in historically certified structures, which this
is not. And it's kind of funny because there's this .2 reserve there. It's almost a place where
the code seems to contemplate designating non-historic structures in which these would
be permitted, but that hasn't occurred yet. So that's why we require a variance.
We met with the RCO twice. I have a letter of support here. And I'll leave it up to the
board. I have the architect on the line, and he is able to run through these plans, but
I have site plan elevations and floor plans um I also have the um one of the owners um
here um and uh we'll have him adopt my testimony at the end um would you like to hear from the
architect uh do you have any other diagrams uh that other than the one that's on right now
yeah sure so that's visual and then then we can move on yeah these are elevations and again this
is this is the structure in a photograph so here are the elevations and um really the only
But really the only construction that is noticeable from the exterior would be the extension of the roof dormers to create some additional space on the second floor.
construction that is noticeable from the exterior
That's indicated in these shaded areas here in the bird's eye view.
Otherwise, it's really a refurbishment of the interior of that outhouse.
And it's going to be somewhere suitable for the mother to live in.
and beyond the property, but not driving her son crazy in the same house, which I think we can all
relate to. And here is, here's floor plans. I think that's okay. I just wanted to look at what
there's really no other than the roof. There's no other change to the structure, correct?
I believe so, Mr. Chair. Let me just pose that exact question to Ryan so I don't misspeak.
Is that okay by you?
Ryan, can you raise your hand if you're out there?
Ryan Luceno would be the person we're looking for.
Okay, Mr. Luceno has his hand raised, and I will let him speak right now.
Good evening, sir.
Please identify yourself with the record.
Spell your last name.
Ryan, you there?
Mr. Lucino, are you available?
Okay, it doesn't appear that way.
It just looks like the roof.
like you said a lot of interior work so we can move on if you want to get your uh
yes client testimony yes absolutely um dan um can you raise your hand um
daniel cruisen is uh who we're looking for
thank you sir please identify yourself for the record uh Daniel Crewson that's k-r-e-w-s-o-n uh
101 East Sedgwick Street Philadelphia EPA 19119 thank you swear in the frame to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth I do thank you please proceed
uh dan do you adopt uh my testimony that you've heard today as your own um and can you um certify
that it's accurate i do uh and it is accurate yes thank you thank you any questions from the board
no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no more hands mr chair thank you planning commission property is indicated for ron bednar
city planning sorry this property is indicated for residential use on the city plan
proposal is consistent with the comprehensive port comprehensive plan support for accessory
dwelling units and existing accessory structures. Therefore, we have no objection to the ground.
Thank you, Ron. 002041, 101 East Sedgwick Street, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Number 11.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Which one is next, Frank? There's one that I'm missing.
101 Ellsworth.
I have that. Calendar number 0051, 101 Ellsworth Street.
So Chair, Yan Jin has his hand raised. I will promote him to panelist right now.
Mr. Jin is our panelist.
Good evening, Mr. Jin.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Good evening.
Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103,
here on behalf of the applicant.
Thank you.
Swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Please proceed.
Sarah, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
30 agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
Have you also emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, and plans five days prior to this hearing?
And have you also met with the RCO and have a letter?
I have, and we do have the letter, and it was submitted.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you. Good evening.
this is an application for lot line relocation. We were actually before the zoning board once before
with this case and due to the number of changes made on the overall design,
the board asked us to obtain permission to obtain a new refusal from LNI and then come back before
the board. I'm going to go ahead and share my documentation so this way we can re-look at
this application. We sent the updated refusal along with the prior refusal to the board,
the community letter and support from Pennsport Civic Associations, photos, plans, tax compliance,
deed, appeal, and the hearing confirmation. The updated refusal is due to the fact that we had
redesigned this project with rear access parking as part of what the community and the developer
negotiated during our meetings with them. Because of this change, some of the parcel
rear yard space has been reduced as compared to the original, while the lot sizes have not changed
and the proposed open area did change due to, again, the parking being part of the rear of the
parcel at this point. If we compare it to the prior refusal, one of the primary things we
have removed from that refusal is the need for parking. So I'm sorry, the need for parking that
it's access from the rear rather than being accessed from the street. So from the perspective,
the overall design, really not a whole lot has changed from the last time we presented
to the board, except that we are now providing again, this access driveway, and this was requested
and approved by the community to provide parking spaces.
Let me zoom in because I can see
this is very difficult to read.
Let me zoom into the plan better
so we can see it more clearly.
Is this sufficiently large for the board to see clearly
or should I zoom in further?
Just tiny bit more.
that's good that's good thank you so this is a proposed driveway in the back that allows
each of the new units to have a off-street parking space and as a result what we did with the space
is to have a little bit of overhang on the upper floor which took away slight bit of the open space
in the back it did change the design slightly however by providing these parking spaces
the committee felt that it's still a better design than the original. The proposal again is for a
subdivision of what used to be a very large parcel into five separate parcels and each of these
parcels would then be built as a single family dwelling. The actual parcel right now is the
combination of the parcels actually covers the entire corner and a deep part of the block by
redesigning this what we have done is we have made the parcels five individual parcels that are
very consistent to what is now there on the block and our height and design would also be consistent
generally to the neighbor's properties because of the depth of the lot even with five parcels
the width of the buildings are almost 20 feet in width which is if it goes any greater it would
actually be out of character with the neighborhood. So as a result we have the final design as five
units single family access from Ellsworth Street with the parking in the rear access from front
south front street i'm going to go ahead and go down to the
floor plans for the board so that it's so this is the uh rendering of what the
end result would look like and we have the layout here of each floor starting from the basement
first floor where the parking is and the upper floors again this is a single family design
so these are designed to be
So these are designed to be household living
and for sale for those who's interested in purchasing.
The community, again, supported our application.
As you can see that the community
spoke with, met with us multiple times
and they were aware of all the ongoing issues
with the refusal and after the modification and design including providing the rear access parking
to each unit and only one curb cut located on front street they support the application for
variants that we're seeking before the board. I'm open to any questions and I will now
also share some photos with the board. This is the existing property. This is at one point
used as a community center, but it's been vacant for some time. And all this will actually be
demolished when the new construction takes place. Do you have a client you want to bring on?
Yes, I should have either Grace or Ms. Peggy Tang waiting.
Teng has her hand raised and I will come up and I will allow her to speak right now sir thank you
Ms. Teng good evening ma'am please identify yourself for the record spell your last name
last name is Teng T-A-N-G first name P-E-I-H-O-N-G
You're in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Ms. Tang, you heard my testimony and representation to the zoning board, including the updated refusal and the changes.
Can you verify that what I have presented is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there's no one else Mr. Chair thank you planning commission on Bednar city planning
this property is indicated for single family residential in the comprehensive plan it is
zone for that use. The proposal is consistent with the surrounding development context therefore we
have no objection to the grounding of the variance. Thank you Ron. Mr. Jenner is there any revised
plans? Well since we have the revised refusal Mr. Chairman I do not believe we need any
okay good enough thank you thank you zero zero zero zero five one one oh one Ellsworth Street
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you thank you
Calendar number 0301, 1026 Pine Street.
Mr. Daniel Mita has his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak right now, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
please identify yourself for the record and i'll swear you in
good evening uh this is dan meta uh of duane morris representing the uh applicant and owner
mrs christina house the media would you please spell your last name m-i-t-a
and you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do. I'm sorry. Could we pause for one second? Jason, can you promote him to panelists,
please? He's now a panelist. Excellent. Here we are.
Hello, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, with one caveat, which is that the rejection mentioned that the applicant was in connection with a visitor accommodation.
a visitor accommodation. And in fact, it's somewhere in between there. So I'll just reserve
And in fact, it's...
that of record. And I'll be glad to expound on that as we go through the presentation.
Okay. And have you also emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof
of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, Madam Vice Chair, we do.
Thank you, you may proceed.
Thank you very much.
Well, thank you for bearing with us.
If it pleases the board, we're here to present the,
we're applying for a zoning variance
in connection with a use of 1026 Pine Street,
unit number five which is a three-story trinity home of four floors including the basement
this as a traditional trinity in philadelphia it's a little over a thousand square feet of
improved space sitting on a lot of 273 square feet so it's a typical stacked room per room
The applicant purchased the property back in 2015 and has been using the property for several years prior to 2018 for short-term rental stays consistent with an Airbnb, if you will.
um it came to the applicant's light uh knowledge that they had to acquire the proper permits and
license that the city has for such use and in the process of applying for it uh realized that the
current zoning uh is incongruent with uh her use of the property as an airbnb and just by way of
background um the property could be used for a series of evenings uh or it could be for weeks
uh etc thereafter uh and even there's been some instances of uh individuals staying for you know
over 30 days excuse me counselor you have any you have pictures or drawings yep yes i do
So I'm adjusting to the virtual platform, so bear with me here.
I will share my screen.
Sorry, I'm having some issues with my computer.
Can you see my screen now?
yes okay great um bear with me uh as i kind of muddle through this if you will on the technical
side so uh you'll see the property itself we'll go to a visual and i'll give you some um uh we'll
we'll get into uh pictures of the actual home itself but just so you can see it um we're in
between 11th street and 10th street in the washington square neighborhood uh just south
of pine street and there's actually in the vicinity here if you can see my cursor off waverly
there's a cloister of uh homes that open up into this courtyard space right here uh and that is
uh kind of the general area i'm now going to shift over to uh our application packet which contains
pictures of the home of the both the cloister and then can actually show the residents as well so
this is kind of the the cloister area I mentioned earlier where you have this very nice well-appointed
kind of bucolic courtyard here sounding like a realtor right now that's probably an upgrade
and then we have here the kitchen here you can see kind of the well window looking out
but it's your typical trinity where you'll have a kitchen in the bottom a sitting room another
sitting room and then a bedroom it's a one bedroom there's sometimes a cream two in there but that's
a kind of the sitting area on the second floor if you will and these are these are actually taken
off the the airbnb page the applicant uses this is the the bathroom
the airbnb page uh the applicant uses this is the the bathroom
another kind of sitting area off the stairs
and then the uh the single bedroom
and that's a thousand square feet uh 1095 square feet it's you know the wide angle lenses really
do a miracle job. Right. Invite the space. But so it is very cozy. But one of the interesting
things about this, you know, it being a typical Trinity, as you kind of highlighted with this
space, Madam Vice Chair, is this is really kind of habitable for one purpose. And I mean, you have
the one single bedroom, not one person, but it's a single occupancy, one bedroom unit, if you will.
um so what it does is for the purpose of kind of airbnbs and short-term stays like that
because you have a much smaller living space you have a different type of
individual that's going to be going in here usually one or two people a couple
um and it's there's not a lot of if you've been in trinity it's not a lot of space for
entertaining things of that sort so um it's well situated for the kind of quieter area
um in connection with the application uh also submitted uh uh for your review uh there are
uh four neighbors uh at 1028 unit 3 1028 unit 8 1026 unit 6 and 1026 unit 3a all of which are
neighboring uh these are all street addresses on pine street uh neighboring the property that
we're voicing uh support for the variance uh submission um and uh one of the things that
been acclaimed is that it you know it's been running smoothly it's you know it's unfortunate
there's this uh the need for the variance but insofar as practically it's been used
for this kind of short-term lodging use there have been no issues and the neighbors have been
it's been a pleasant experience if you will. Are there any immediate questions before the board
before I kind of get into the elucidating kind of the discrepancy and the rejection and kind of
what it is exactly, what relief the applicant is looking for.
Any board members?
And Mr. Amita, if you could summarize, that would be helpful.
Yes, I'd be glad to.
So practically speaking, the unit has been used for an Airbnb kind of short-term temporary
lodging that has a lot more flexibility dexterity than uh what you otherwise would have uh you know
the other forms that are uh more tailored in the zoning code uh would be things like hotels uh bed
and breakfasts commercial uses of that sort um or you know leases and we all know airbnb is kind of
a hybrid so what you end up having is you have a use that is practically become kind of adopted
but it is not necessarily congruent and when circumstances permit this is when we would look
to you as kind of the relief valve for the zoning variance so what the applicant is requesting
in summation is essentially that they would be permitted to continue to use the property as an
airbnb without it being used as a primary residence is currently required under the code
tantamount to it essentially being more or less a limited lodging home use,
but it would not be subject to either the less than 30-day minimum
or the no more than 180 days a year.
Counselor, the adjacent units, what are they?
The adjacent units are likewise residential dwellings.
But not AB&B?
So I can't speak to whether or not they utilize those properties for Airbnbs.
I don't know if the owner can, but as you know, Airbnb can kind of be, it can be used
on different degrees.
I mean, it could be used sporadically if it's not prohibited under certain condo docs, but
typically, but generally it's permitted as an accessory use under the code, under the
the limitations I've kind of requested relief from such that it's also used as
a primary residence and then certain caps and limitations on the frequency of
stays so whether or not they're operating in that realm I don't know what
So whether or not they're operating in that realm, I don't know.
What I can speak to that is this unit is being used as an Airbnb, but based on it being a Trinity, it's almost prohibitive that it could also be utilized as a primary residence as well.
I can speak to that is
Thank you. Any other questions?
Mr. Meeta, do you want your client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, I would.
I'd like to invite my client, Mrs. Christine Howes.
Raise your hand and I'll swear her in.
Mrs. Howes, let's not allow you, sir.
Thank you. Good evening, ma'am.
Please identify yourself for the record.
First and last names by your name.
Yes, sir.
My name is Christine Howes, C-H-R-I-S-T-I-N-E.
last name H-O-W-Z-E.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Ms. Domita.
Thank you very much, Mrs. Housen.
Have you heard everything that I have said here this evening?
Yes, I have.
And can you confirm the truth and accuracy of it?
I can and do.
I would add that in the courtyard, there are single-family homes and co-ops.
I mean, yeah.
Excellent.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, just for the purpose of the record,
Mrs. Howes, do you also adopt the testimony as your own?
Thank you.
I got ahead of you.
I thought you weren't going to ask that question, but I apologize.
I was maintaining the suspense.
I got you.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
There are no other hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
this property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan
due to the changing retail environment city planning staff supports the need for commercial
corridors like antique road to diversify visitor accommodations will maintain existing businesses
on first floor therefore we are in agreement with the rco for a conditional approval of a
temporary variance to be granted for a limited time only.
Did the RCO, and maybe I missed that, Mr. Media, did they come up with a timeline on this?
They did. So the RCO submitted a letter from our October 27th meeting. No opposition. They did
condition that no opposition upon a three-year temporary permit for the granting.
Okay, thank you. 000301 1026 Pine Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. A temporary
permit to expire January the 1st 2024. My vote is yes with proviso. Yes with proviso.
Okay, thank you. I believe that concludes the two o'clock list.
sorry to interrupt um i i believe 20 10 29 um this is rachel pritzker sorry i believe 10 29
um east columbia um it's a going for three two o'clock yeah i believe so i don't i didn't see
it does anybody have that let me check i did not have it i'm sorry but what are you saying
Tanya, do you know if 1029 East Columbia, I have it on my calendar as it was continued from before, we were making some revisions at the request of the board.
And it was supposed to be today?
Yes, ma'am.
At 2 o'clock, Rachel?
Would you mind if we took a break and I will look for it if it should be added.
we'll consider whether to do it at the beginning of the 3 30 would that be okay with you yeah
absolutely thank you yep all right uh so let's come back at 5 30
thank you good evening everyone my name is frank de chico i'm the chair of the zoning board of
adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with our vice chair miss carol
tenere board secretary confessor plaza and board members mr thomas hollowman and mr james snell
and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkit and Board Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta
Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkit and
are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual
hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering
oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to
be recorded. Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your
hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone participating
by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six
to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548
and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat. To enter an
appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of
the property at issue. Before we call the first case, I'm going to announce one of the cases that
we've been asked to continue. Number one on our list, 001333, 2027 Ellsworth Street. If the attorney
and or applicant for this application is not in agreement with the continuance, please raise your
hand. If anyone here presenting a case today, is this when I say that Frank hasn't met with the
RCO or hasn't emailed her? Carol, excuse me, excuse me, Madam Vice Chair, I got to then ask
if anybody wants to continue the cases. That was the only one we know of. Okay. All right. At this
point i will also now ask if anyone uh excuse me uh if anyone would like if anyone is requesting
a continuance or withdrawal for this after this evening's hearing please raise your hand at this
time um chair if i could also put on record for number two on your list continuance
any which requested by the attorney of record okay so that's uh 001312 2117 south 66th street
is continued thank you thank you any other requests for continuances or withdrawals
Mr. Chair, I see no hands at this time for further continuances.
And, Carol, before you begin, I got some house cleaning to do here.
MI 2020-000886-650 North 36th Street.
My vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
yes to reconsideration and rehearing yes to reconsideration and rehearing thank you
001539 1401-1403 south 21st street my vote is yes with proviso revised plan one page approved
today yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you zero zero one
two five nine two one two nine dash three three south eighth street my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes uh let's see what's her number but
zero zero one one zero one one seven three two north grats street my vote is yes my vote is yes
yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
uh sharon on the 650 north 36th street i don't have a i'm sorry i found it i got it
so it's 0886 650 north 36th street um my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
yes to reconsideration and rehearing yes to reconsideration and rehearing yes to reconsideration
and rehearing okay zero one one zero one one seven three two grass street uh
my vote is yes with proviso maximum five residents my vote is yes with proviso
yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you uh sharon and or tanya
did i leave anything out that's all i had um it's up to sharon
you have one you have one add-on at 3 30 but this is it just thank you which uh the add-on is
um am i 2020 000 826 6301 north broad street yeah i got that one i'm sorry okay yeah i didn't know
i had to read it in yet all right i'm sorry you probably didn't i'm part of an interruption
sharon when did you want to do the other one Columbia avenue uh no the the one from yesterday
I believe I mean early this morning I think they voted that did they um they did 8th street
we did the Mattione case from this morning uh I think and we did the 8th street that was the
Amoroso family okay sounds good then we're ready to go yeah that's all done all right um so Carol
did we work out uh did we figure out what was the what was going on with the Columbia Avenue case
is that case going to be heard
could you do the first add-on and then i will figure out that one what's going on okay the
add-on the north broad street yes 63 ohm okay um i just want to remind everyone please do not
attempt to testify in the chat any comments please direct to the board administrator miss
time you sunk it. I believe with that, Madam Vice Chair, we can proceed. So we'll do the
add-on. Carol, you need to unmute. I'll read it in. It's the add-on. I don't have the calendar
number, though, for 6301 North Broad. Anyone have the calendar number? Give me one moment.
I do. It is MI-2020-000826-6301-North Broad. Last continued on 1110.
Thank you. So with that, we'll begin with 000826-6301-North Broad.
And Kyle, we already heard this before, so I don't know if you have to.
Wave and step.
Anyone here for 6301 North Carolina?
Okay, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, Ms. Don Tancredi has put her hand up. I will promote it to the panelists right now, sir.
Thank you. Good evening, Ms. Tancredi.
Please identify yourself with the record, spell your name, and I will swear you in.
good evening hi identify yourself and i'll swear you in good evening dawn tancredi on behalf of
the applicant the equitable owner of the property your last name dawn sure t-a-n-c-r-e-d-i
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed uh carol
i don't think we need to read but maybe we should do you have to meet again with the community group
was that part of what we held this for that was part of the plan um mr chair however there have
been additional meetings however my client was not invited to those meetings the rco and the
council person's office have met. However, we were not made part of those meetings.
Okay, I guess we'll proceed.
Just a little different.
A new one on me. Anyway, all right.
So we did present our case in chief. This evening with me, I do have my client, Mr. Carl Wright,
Mr. Carl Wright, who is a principal of Wright Partners, he's available to answer any additional
who is a principal of Wright Partners.
He's available to...
questions. Also here this evening is Greg Newell, the engineer who had also already testified in
this case. He's available in the event there are any additional questions from the board or
he's available as a rebuttal witness. And Marshall Cook, the regional manager from AutoZone is also
available to answer questions um that yeah so given that you were not invited uh you and or
your clients were not invited to the rco meetings i suspect there's nothing new to add or if there
is please tell us okay well i believe that the representative from the council person's office
is on the call. I'm unable to see who else is here. I would ask the board to limit any
additional testimony to include only those who attended at the last hearing on October
6th because this today is a resumption hearing.
Well noted. Thank you. Chair, I have unmuted Ms. Hilary Emerson.
Just one more note. Mr. Chair, I do have a summary of this case and closing arguments
as to why we've met the hardship standard, and I would reserve all that for the end after any
testimony. Not noted. Thank you. Ms. Emerson, please identify yourself with the record.
Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board, Hillary Emerson, on behalf of Councilwoman
Sherelle Parker.
You're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please, Christine.
Yes, just one note, which means Ms. Tancredi's request about individuals not testifying unless
they were at the October 6th hearing.
There's been multiple continuances in this case, and I have no way of knowing who is
present previously at the different hearings that have been held. And I don't believe any
neighbors have testified in this case, other than, well, not a neighbor, but I believe a
representative from the RCO has testified previously. But I don't believe any neighbors
have yet testified. So I'd be concerned about limiting any testimony from neighbors.
I could be wrong, but I thought we had some neighbors testify, but correct me if I'm wrong.
I knew the RCO, head of the RCO, but I thought there were other folks that testified.
Yes, we had neighbors as well.
I'm sorry, Tanya?
Yes, we had neighbors as well.
But it wasn't everyone because we said we were going to return and they will continue to provide testimony.
Thank you for refreshing my memory.
Thank you.
Yes, I'm sorry.
I don't recall other neighbors.
Yeah, no offense.
But I do remember there were a number of people who testified.
I just wanted to note about the meetings the last time that this case was scheduled, our office requested a continuance because we had learned a few days prior to the hearing that some members, some of them, your neighbors, had changed their minds where there had been previously unanimous opposition to the project.
So we asked an additional continuance specifically so our office could speak to the neighbors because the councilman's position rested largely on the position of the near neighbors.
So that is why the last meeting that was held was between our office and the neighbors, because we were trying to understand their position, not because we were trying to exclude the applicant.
so i just wanted to be clear there there have been a couple meetings by the rco where neither
the applicant nor our office um were included in in the meeting um and you know that that is what
it is um in terms of the the councilwoman's position um while she is um generally supportive
of uh development in the ninth council district she is opposed to the proposed auto zone at 6301
North Broad Street, because there is not support for this project among the majority of the
near neighbors. As I mentioned before, at our last meeting, we did hear that there were some
changes in position of some of the neighbors, which is why we wanted to talk to them further.
Upon further discussion, there is not a majority of support among the near neighbors for this
project which is why the councilwoman um as opposed is it remains opposed to this project
um there is a there appears to be a split among the neighbors um and there's um concerning that
there is little to no support for the project from the neighbors on the midairi avenue side
of the property which the auto zone would face that's the south side of the property
um concerns that have been consistently raised to our office
Concerns that have been consistently raised to our office about this project include the
Thank you.
presence of illegal mechanics in and around the property if the AutoZone opens, as well
as resulting trash, parts, and mechanical fluids littering the neighborhood.
Residents have mentioned negative experiences with an AutoZone at another location in our
district and also referenced the presence of other automotive businesses in close proximity
to this location.
other mentions from residents of concerns include an increase in traffic on the surrounding blocks
from people circling to get to the auto zone honey hold on I'm sorry as well as a lack of
parking we do recognize and appreciate the efforts of the applicant to address matters
raised by the near neighbors particularly as it relates to hours of operation curb cuts and
particular access and fencing we also greatly appreciate the engagement of the near neighbors
throughout this process and i believe that some of them are here today to share their perspective
on this project in closing the council and wishes to incorporate her prior statements that she made
to this board regarding the lack of hardship in this case um because it is because the zoning
does allow for a number of other buy right commercial uses uh the board has any questions
i'll be happy to answer them thank you thank you hello mr creaky i don't have i'll call up other
witnesses but i know if you had any comment uh we can you want to wait until i get the other
witnesses yes thank you okay uh anybody anyone would like to testify in this case please raise
your hand and i would ask in advance uh as you speak please give us something new and different
please do not keep repeating the same issue of your if it relates to your opposition
give us something new and different please we have
several other cases and it's already 10 of six
anyone would like to testify please raise your hand we have frida williams frida you can um
mute yourself and wait to be sworn in good evening miss williams please identify yourself
with a record name and address and i'll swear my name is frida williams i'm at 815 asbury terrace
19126. I'm the chairperson of the RCO for OCA. We're in a firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you, ma'am. Please proceed.
Okay. Can you spell your name, please? Oh, never mind. It's on the screen. Sorry.
I forgot the S. Sorry. That's okay. I just wanted to make the chair and the board aware that
there was a directive to OCA as the RCO in the previous hearing that we meet with the
neighbors to go over and go through all of the elements of the community benefits agreement.
We did send you back a report. We had three separate meetings with the community as a whole,
as well as with the near neighbors each one of those meetings a report was submitted to the
zoning board and to the council office and so we just want you to be aware that we were in
compliance with your directive and that even with the community benefits agreement going through
each one of those uh discussing alternative uses of the property if possible and also that the
community was aware that in the event of a buy right, they may not have the opportunity to have
an input, that they still were unanimous at that time in their opposition. I also would like to
note that I did speak directly to the owner of the property who stated that he would be willing
in the event that the variance was not granted, he would be willing to meet with members of the
community to discuss uses of the community as far as appropriate.
Objection as to what the owner said.
Yep. Okay, continue, ma'am.
Okay, so essentially, that's basically it. The RCO is in opposition. We stand with the
community, and we do understand that there are some residents who may have changed their
minds on an individual basis, but it is not our understanding that a substantial number
of the residents near or far have changed their opinions and therefore we are in opposition to
have changed their opinions and therefore we are in opposition to the request for zoning variance.
the request.
That determination that has made you said there may be some people who have changed their mind
do we have any way of identifying where they where they live in proximity to this application?
I do not I received and again because I don't know about the objection status
I received a direct email from one of the near neighbors on Park Avenue indicating that she remained opposed.
So she was a near neighbor. There has been some discussion and there has been some identification.
I won't identify who that is, but there certainly has been some discussion that there was a near neighbor who was who at one point had been adamant and now has changed that position.
that's a single resident that i am aware of no one else to my knowledge has been named
as having changed their mind but there has been some general discussion
so our last hearing was there a petition circulated
to notify people of the follow-up meetings that you were having
the follow-up meeting was not held by oka that was held by the council office right so i'll
i guess i'll ask that question of hillary okay i'm just trying to get a sense of where
if there's still opposition where that opposition is coming from because apparently you have one
neighbor according to your testimony who was vehemently opposed does that mean the others
are not opposed or does that mean they are i'm not trying to get a sense of that all right where
this opposition is coming from okay given that hillary hillary yeah this is hillary and
councilman parker's office um when we had um we had a meeting on november 19th with about a dozen
um near neighbors um and subsequently one of them submitted a petition with four names on it for
people who supported it. When we looked at the people from that meeting who were on the 1300
block of Maderi Avenue versus and the 6300 block of North Park, we had a split of five and five
who supported and um to oppose so and the the support the people who um supported were on park
avenue um we um we are not aware of any particular individual um by name who has is supporting on the
1300 block of midairie avenue that we've only heard opposition from the individuals we have
had contact with don't might correct and you said there were in that meeting you had there were five
yes so there yes and then whether but there were four yes from immediate neighbors so so sorry let
me let me because i i so we had about 12 neighbors at our meeting um the two and subsequent to that
meeting, we received a petition with four neighbors in support, one of whom was at that
meeting. And we're advised of support from two other neighbors as well. At the initial
meeting on the 19th, only one neighbor indicated their support. So looking between that meeting
and the petition that we received later showed that there was support by five households on
park avenue but there was opposition by two households on park avenue as well as three
households on the dairy avenue that attended the meeting pretty much a split exactly and there
was a couple other addresses around that um we heard from either at the meeting or by petition
and that was a two oppose, one support.
You're on mute.
Either way, it appears to be a split vote, but okay.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, just a couple of clarifications.
After the October 6th meeting before this board, hearing before this board,
OCA did meet that Saturday on October 10th.
And in fact, they had asked us to be available for that meeting.
My clients and I made ourselves available for a meeting on that date, and we found out later in the day that a meeting was held without us.
So we had been on call for a meeting, and the meeting took place without us even knowing that the meeting took place.
In addition, as far as the opposition, I do believe...
In addition, as far as the opposition, I do believe that Ms. Joanne Eggleston is on the call tonight, and she's in support, and she's on the appearance list from the October 6th hearing, which we have a copy of that appearance list.
However, we've continually asked who's in opposition to this so that we would be able to speak with them and find out the concerns to talk to them.
And only two names from the councilperson's office were given to us.
Those names were Ms. Joanne Eggleston, who is on this call tonight in support, and Barbara
Coffey.
Barbara Coffey attended the virtual meetings in this case.
The main concern that Barbara Coffey raised in this case had to do with a curb cut on
Madari Avenue.
We've addressed her concern.
My client removed the curb cut on Madari Avenue.
So those were the only two names. We've been in communications with OLCA, with the council person's office since May, and those two names were given to us. So if there are additional names and discussions here, they're behind a curtain that we have no idea who they are or what those concerns are, because any concerns that have been raised throughout this case have been addressed by my client.
And that's evidenced by the CBA in this case.
We've addressed hours of operation, fences, curb cuts.
We've addressed all kinds of issues.
And in fact, the community group was pleased enough to sign that CBA and support this project on October 6th.
So what happened after that, I'm not really sure.
Thank you.
All right.
I want to move this case along as best we can. So is there anybody who else would like to comment
on this case? Please raise your hand. And we would ask that whoever's speaking. I'm sorry.
Ms. Joanna Eggleston, she's on the call. She's been about to speak.
Good evening, ma'am. Please spell your full name for us.
Sure. It's Joanne Eggleston, J-O-A-N-N-E, Eggleston, E-G-G-L-E-S-T-O-N.
Your address?
6302 North Park Avenue.
Thank you. You're swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I just wanted to know, because my name has been bounced around a few times.
initially I was opposed to the auto zone and then after having discussions with my neighbors
we have agreed a few of us that I'm now not opposed to it and I had neighbors on my block
who are also not opposed to it I just wanted to my name was being bounced around so I just
wanted to let you know that I was on the call I appreciate it but we can only testify on your
behalf. Okay. Okay. But thank you. Thank you for hanging in there. Thank you.
If I may, just one question for Ms. Eggleston. Ms. Eggleston, can you describe for the board
how close you live to the property? I'm sorry, I was muted. My property is directly behind
the auto zone. So my property butts up against their property. Thank you. I forgot to ask that
question. Thank you. Hillary, did you want to speak? Yes. Yes, I did, Mr. Chair. Just two points
of clarification. I wanted to note in terms of the community benefits agreement that that was
signed by the RCO without the knowledge of the near neighbors, which is why they had to have a
meeting afterwards um and then that was revealed that the neighbors were opposed which is what the
rco's original letter said to the board um i also want to note um council for the the applicant
has brought up oh we're not giving names
lori we lost you
miss emerson
you have to unmute i'm trying to control everybody because everybody's speaking out of
terms so i'm just keeping you all muted so unmute yourself that's fine that's fine um i think you
heard my point about the community benefits
agreement, about how
was signed by the
community organization. I would object to this.
I mean, I don't think that she can speak
on behalf of the community group,
the RCO, to say whether or not that was
signed without authority.
The neighbors told me it was
signed without their knowledge.
Well, except that she worked for the council.
And that's that's why there was an additional meeting. So and Frida, I believe, just spoke to how they had an additional meeting at the board's request to discuss the community benefits agreement.
That's why
there was an additional meeting.
And Frida, I believe, just
Secondly, I just wanted to note that it is not our office's policy to give out names and addresses of constituents in zoning matters.
The applicant can certainly canvas the neighborhood, knock on doors, send mailings out as they are required to.
We have been very forthright with the concerns that have been raised by the neighbors, and the applicant has done their best to address them.
But unfortunately, the neighbors still remain in opposition to the project, which is why the councilwoman is as well.
I do have one question for Ms. Emerson.
Ms. Emerson, can you tell us the address of the auto zone that you mentioned that was of concern?
Yes, it's one at Stenton and Washington Lane.
that was specifically referenced by a couple members a couple residents rather at um our
november 19th meeting okay and that address is 1.7 miles away from 6301 north broad are you are you
familiar with that don't know the exact mileage but that that sounds right this is east oak lane
that's West Oak Lane. And that auto zone has no fencing around it whatsoever. Is that correct?
I'm not aware of fencing at that auto zone. I'm not aware of the fence situation at that auto
zone. I've looked at images, but I don't recall off the top of my head whether there was fencing
there or not. So you're not that familiar with the site? I'm familiar with the location,
but I have not been there recently. Okay. Thank you. Anything else, Dawn? No, thank you. Okay.
anyone else wish to testify in this case please raise your hand and we're going to ask you again
not to repeat anything that has already been testified to we have numerous cases still to be
heard we have a smiling smilery or something you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
please identify yourself with the record spell your first and last name and provide us with
your address mr chair i would object to this testimony as this person is not on the appearance
list from the october 6th hearing and i was on an appearance briefly ma'am please spell your name
first and last name yes good evening my name is smiley farabee s-m-i-l-e-y last name is f as in
frank ere b as in boy ee and your address is 1220 shelton avenue 19126 swearing a firm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth absolutely sir proceed um so i am president
of oka and um the meetings that dawn is referring to again was in regards to the community benefit
agreement that was offered after an initial vote of opposition. At that meeting, Joanne and I guess
about 25 neighbors were there, and we wanted to present the applicant in a fair light and their
proposal of the community benefits agreement. We did so, and there was adamant, adamant opposition
in that regard to accepting the community benefit agreement and to the auto zone being placed in our
community. Also, I don't believe a split, I'm not understanding a vote that was taken that
is called a split. You initially got the vote. It was not a split. If one person chases their mind,
that's their prerogative, but the community still stood strong and starts in their decision of this
being opposed to. I was only commenting on the numbers that I was being told. I know it's
misrepresented. It's not the full picture of what that was no vote taken. That was a petition that
had names on it. We took a vote at the initial RCO meeting. And I'm wondering why that doesn't
stand. Well, we're not saying it doesn't stand. We just don't know who they are. I mean,
that there was a petition you said no there was a vote taken there was a vote taken at the meeting
we don't know who those folks are were they nearby neighbors were they yes we
I don't know oh well we know we have a record of it I'm just talking about the last meeting where
oh well we know we have a record of it i'm just talking about the last meeting
where a position where a petition was presented um that's different from a vote would you say
well it's not not necessarily okay i'm sure we have like six people with their hands yeah i know
i'm okay we can go to the next person thank you ma'am now i'm going to say this one more
time we hope dawn before you go whoever the next witnesses are please do not repeat what has
already been said several times not only tonight but in the prior hearing i don't mean to be
disrespectful but we don't we need to hear something new and different just mr chair
regarding the concerns that were raised by the neighbors they were raised at a public meeting
with me with my client and that was on September 30th and since that time my client has addressed
all the concerns raised and those concerns are even addressed in writing in the CBA.
Anyone else?
So Chair, someone from the number ending in 8685 had their hand raised, I have allowed
them to speak.
Caller at 8685, you must unmute your microphone if you wish to speak.
Let's move to the next person.
anyone else
mr paul brown he's had his hand up i'm allowed to speak mr brown good evening
please identify yourself with a record name and address i would object to this testimony
as someone that's not on the appearance list for october 6th no i'm at this point i'm going to have
to agree with you only those people whose name i've lived here for 50 years and i don't
he's muted you can continue
anyone else excuse me mr mr chair this is hillary can can i ask um because i'm not sure what list
Dawn is referring to, what neighbors are on that list that she's saying that were present
at the October 6th hearing?
I can share my screen.
I can share the document.
It's a document provided by the zoning board.
And as far as neighbors, other than the parties involved in this case, the only neighbors
that were listed were Joanne Eggleston, Freda Williams, Barbara Coffey, Hillary, your name's
on there. That was
it. Those are the only people that showed
There's only two neighbors in.
Barbara Coffey is on the line.
She just called me. She would like to speak.
Okay, Ms. Coffey?
I don't know where
Ms. Coffey is.
Does she have her hand up?
Is she on a phone?
She's on a phone.
What is her name?
Is it a 9980?
I don't.
The number I have is 6708, but she could be calling on a cell.
That's her landline that I have.
going way longer yeah we can't all due respect to already we just we just have to keep moving on
uh all right at this point on do you have any closing remarks or any comments you'd like to
make at this time i do and and i understand the board wants me to keep this short so i will just
by the way i just saw everybody understand it's not that we don't take this serious but
But, I mean, we do have, you know, other cases, and it's already past 6 o'clock.
We don't want to get out of here at 10 o'clock tonight.
So, Mr. Chair, my clients have worked hard with the community to try to reach an agreement, and we thought we were almost there.
In any event, if this project is approved, my client does agree to maintain the CBA agreement,
including the commitment to make donations to the community, which are earmarked
for such concerns as cleaning and security. As far as the legal arguments supporting a
variance in this case, first, if we take a look at the history of the property here,
First, if we take a look at the history of the property here, it has never been used
It has never been used
for a permitted use.
The history of auto-related uses on the property, specifically those permitted by variants,
justify the unnecessary hardship.
As evidenced by the archives, the property has been used for auto-related uses, including
a gas station, since the zoning code was enacted in 1933.
So that's over 85 years.
The property has been used as an auto sales lot since 1948.
In fact, the zoning board previously found a hardship existed for this same exact use in 2005
for an advanced auto parts. The circumstances have not changed and the hardship still exists.
Besides looking at the history of the property, if we look at the current use of this property,
the current use permits the sale of cars. The use falls within a vehicle and vehicular equipment
sales and service use category. The proposed use falls within the same category. It's a different
subcategory, but in essence, rather than selling an entire car, car parts are being sold. Third,
if we look at the surrounding area, the proposed use for an auto-related retail business,
it keeps with the character of this neighborhood and the surrounding uses. There's auto sales
lots, gas stations, auto repairs, and painting shops along Broad Street within five blocks on
either side of this property. And all of this is shown within the packets that we've submitted.
So because the property is surrounded by auto-related uses, it's virtually impossible
to use it for any other use. And finally, I would just say that strict compliance with the Zoning
Code is infeasible. While there are many permitted uses in the CMX 2.5 zoning district, due to the
particular nature of this lot, considering the location, the features, the size, development
of this property in strict conformance with the zoning code is impracticable. We're seeking
minimum relief necessary to develop this property under the zoning code.
And the physical constraints here that you've seen on the plans and you've heard testimony
about from the engineer include the lot size. It's 120 feet by 160 feet. It has two street
frontages. It has an access easement along the north side of the property. It has an existing
retaining law on Madari that we have to deal with. And so for all these reasons, along with the memo
of law that we've submitted as part of our packet, we would ask the board to grant the variance
requests. Thank you. Were there any provisos? I don't recall. I don't recall. That's why I'm asking.
Well, I mean, as far as provisos, we've put in writing agreements that we agreed upon
with the community that's part of the they're part of the community benefits agreement okay yes
all right all right the community benefits agreement uh was withdrawn the rco wrote in
an email that they withdrew from the community benefits agreement so there's nothing in writing
right now that's in effect understood and and mr chair my point is that my client is willing to
keep up his end of the
proposal and
follow through on all
the promises that they've made.
Are you saying
if the board approves you
would, that benefit agreement would
be in effect? Yes.
All right.
Any questions
from the board? No.
Planning
Commission.
This is Ron Bednar with City Planning.
Property is indicated for commercial use on the city plan.
Given the property's history and its current use, we have no objection to the granting
appearance.
Thank you.
I'm going to suggest that the record be closed.
The Board will render a decision next Wednesday, December the 9th at 9.30 a.m.
in our executive session okay yes thank you thank you everyone thank you
columbia avenue yeah calendar number 1855 1029 east columbia avenue
good evening uh rachel you're still under oath okay rachel pritzker
Do you want me to say and spell my name?
do you want me to say
Yeah, please.
R-A-C-H-A-E-L
R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos and plans?
and have you done that five days prior to this hearing also have you met with the rco and do
you have a letter yes excuse me this is sharon saleta this is a resumption hearing so we oh so
strike all of that okay okay hi rachel hi proceed thank you so i'm gonna make this brief um so the
board has had already seen this i think on november 18th this was the property located
on Columbia Avenue. And we originally proposed a subdivision of the existing large lot that had a
vacant corner parcel. And we originally had proposed two units and two parking spaces in the
back utilizing the existing curb cut. At the recommendation of the board, we took a look back
at the plans as it was indicated to us that a single family home with the parking would
be more likely to get support from the board. In addition, we took the chairman's comments
to reduce the size of the building to allow for more green space in the rear as that was
part of the concerns of the community as far as the parking was concerned. So we have submitted
revised plans that show a single-family home instead of the duplex with a smaller footprint
so that it can provide green space in the back and still maintain the two off-street accessory
parking spaces that we had provided support from the near neighbors, even though the Fishtown
Neighbors Association board was not supportive of the parking. So I think at this point,
we're just asking that this variance be approved as a single family home with the two accessory
off-street parking spaces with the approved plans two pages that were submitted to Sharon
on the 24th I also have the architect the client here if the board is interested in hearing from
either of them you're on mute chairman questions from the board thank you no
okay carol i don't have the the information in front of the address and the
calendar number so would you read that off please sure calendar number
1855 1029 east columbia avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes with revised plan two pages
two pages approved today with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
calendar number one two eight nine twenty nine oh one grant avenue thank you sure thank you
Mr. Chair, we have Mr. Adam Laver speaking.
Good evening, Mr. Laver.
Good evening, Mr. Laver.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Adam Laver of Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes mr chairman i do thank you carol mr labor do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy yes mrs tenary i do have you emailed an exhibit packet with
the required documents consisting of proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the
refusal or referral photos and plans and have you done this five days prior to this hearing
Have you also met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Mrs. Tanari, I did submit all of the required documentation.
I'm disappointed to share with you that for the first time in my career, I was not given the opportunity to meet with the RCO in this case, despite efforts that I can get into if the board wishes.
In two words, what happened?
uh i reached out i didn't receive a response i followed up with councilman o'neill's office
and uh the councilman's office was very professional of course as always
but uh did express opposition unfortunately and uh in some i was basically told
And in sum, I was basically told that there would not be a meeting, I'm sorry to say.
Well, you did your due diligence.
We'll go forward with the case.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
I am here today on behalf of 2901 Grant Properties, LLC, the owner of 2901 Grant Avenue,
and its parent entity, Poverni Sheik Group.
The Poverni Sheik Group specializes in the development and management
of self-storage facilities throughout the Mid-Atlantic region.
They are known for this industrial use.
Eugene Poverni, CEO, and Shimon Piantor, who's vice president of Poverni Sheik.
Excuse me, I'm sorry to interrupt.
Did you spell the company name and the two individuals you just mentioned?
Yes, I apologize.
That's Poverni, P-O-V as in Victor, E-R-N-I, Sheik, S-H-E-I-K-H, Poverni Sheik, Eugene Poverni, E-U-G-E-N-E, Poverni, same spelling, Shimon, S-H-I-M-O-N, Cantor, K-A-N-T-E-R, CEO and vice president, respectively.
Also with us is Matthew Kearse, K-E-A-R-S-E, who is Senior Design Engineer of Fuller Engineering.
The board has the exhibit package that I've submitted, along with revised proviso plans, which have been shared with Ms. Saleta.
Members of the board, in the midst of the present pandemic, which continues to wreak havoc on so many sectors of our economy,
and at a time when job stability remains a challenge, the proposal before the board concerns
the efforts of this property owner to preserve their existing industrial campus.
The subject property is approximately 375,000 square feet in size. Hopefully you see that on
the screen it's surrounded with the red property line so that you can get a sense of it the
property is owned i2 medium industrial the industrial campus is home to a cube smart
self-storage facility i'm showing you the location with with the hand maybe i should
actually zoom in a little bit. So the CubeSmart is here in the rear. A daycare center exists on
this industrial site, which provides child care to employees in many of the industrial businesses in
this area. And I should note it predates Poverni Chic's acquisition of the property. The child
care center has been there for some 30 years, serving approximately 100 children on site per
day a few more photos by way of background i'm going to pull out here
on the right hand side is grant avenue and you'll see a curb cut leading into
the industrial park the large self-storage that i mentioned the child care that i'm pointing to
right now we'll talk about the proposal in a moment let me just show you a couple more
photos. I think these aerials do a nice job for such a large site to help put it
in perspective. Again, the one curb cut in and out, the self-storage in the rear,
the childcare in front. I'd also like to note that CubeSmart is expanding at this
site and is under construction to increase its footprint, which is
wonderful for the neighborhood, the city, and the future of industrial here. That's
not before the board, it's a permitted use. That would occur in the location here that
I'm indicating in front of the existing buildings. And just another photograph, again, showing
you that the site here, just another view of it. In order to support the existing industrial
uses that I've described on site and in the immediate vicinity the property
owner has proposed that a very small area of the site be utilized for a new
food service use so if you look right off of Grand Avenue at the green area
where I'm showing you with the cursor that would be the proposed new 1720
square foot building miniscule on the almost 376,000 square foot campus so
almost 376 000 square foot campus so minuscule i can't even do the math in my head to tell you
miniscule I can't even do them
the small percentage that that takes up i'd like to move to a couple other photographs here is
a photograph taken from grant avenue showing that entrance and showing the potential area on the
grass where the small food service might go and another photograph also showing the location
there's only one curb cut the curb cut to the left is the neighboring property
the campus itself does not have a cafeteria it does not have food service used to support the
existing on-site businesses this would fill that need to keep the industrial campus viable
whether it's a starbucks or a dunkin donuts or something else the area is not walkable
unfortunately in fact certain sections of the uh of grand avenue do not even have pedestrian
sidewalks so here in this photograph you can see some pedestrian sidewalk on the right but on the
left uh it is it's not a uh maintained uh sidewalk and there are other instances of that as you move
along uh it's simply not it's not walkable we would absolutely concede and i'm going to move
back a photo or two uh here we go we would concede that if you go from this site all the way along
ground avenue towards roosevelt boulevard that there are food service options within a drive of
the site but not safely on foot the proposed building bear with me also while i come back
here we go on this photo the proposed building is also immediately adjacent to a stormwater easement
and the wooden bridge run creek you can see it in the photograph that restricts the use of the area
for larger, more characteristically industrial permitted uses.
Beginning in early September, I attempted to schedule a meeting with the coordinating RCO,
Walton Park Civic Association.
I've described the unfortunate nature of where we are in that matter.
And unfortunately, it appears that there is opposition.
I don't know the extent of it since we weren't able to have any discussions,
but there is opposition to this 1,720-square-foot supportive use,
which might be seen by some as a threat to the industrial park.
Let me underscore that Poverni Chic is in the business of self-storage, which is industrial.
They are expanding, which is a permitted use, the use that's welcomed in the industrial park.
They are expanding that current self-storage with a new building.
There is no intention to encroach on the industrial nature of the site.
Rather, there is a desire to support it.
Would it be different, members of the board, if within the structure there was a small commissary?
This is needed on the site.
A notice of refusal was issued for two reasons.
One, because eating and drinking establishments are not permitted in the I-2 industrial district.
and, two, the proposed drive-through lane must be set back at least 20 feet from the property line,
something which really contemplates more of a residential surrounding area, which is not here.
But most importantly for the board's consideration,
the plans have been revised following extensive discussions with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Let me move to those plans.
And on the left hand side, and I'm going to zoom in in a moment, but on the left hand side, you see the entire site again at the back here at the top of the page is the existing CubeSmart connected to it is the existing daycare nonconforming, which has been there, was approved by the zoning board over 30 years ago.
i looked at the l and i records below it in the large gray box is the site under construction
right now of the additional self-storage and then just off of grant avenue is the proposed
food service a a takeout uh with drive-through and you'll see in the right corner and i'm going to
blow this up a little bit for the board and move it over maybe even a touch more there we go
Let me go through the provisions, which incorporated feedback from the Planning Commission.
We met with Paula Brumbelow-Burns and Sarah Chu of the Planning Commission on virtual meetings at least two times and had additional discussions and emails to discuss this.
We met with Paula Brumbalo-Burns and Sarah Chu of the Planning Commission.
Number one, we're providing a larger stacking lane.
This is something that the City Planning Commission has realized is ever more important, particularly in the pandemic when so many people are going to drive-throughs and they think it's good practice for the future.
So we added that. We added the bypass lane, which you see on the upper right.
We removed parking, which had previously been on the left side here and would have required those with vehicles to cross over the sole curb cut in and out, the sole aisle in and out of this center.
so we've moved that away we've added parking on the northern side of the
building with a safe crosswalk to get to this proposed food establishment and we
have reconfigured the main drive aisle itself for better circulation additional
notes that aren't specifically zoning but there's outdoor seating that's been
added as a suggestion and landscaping between the property line and the stacking lane
these improvements address public safety concerns that were legitimately raised by
the planning commission and i'm pleased that we were able to work with the planning commission
in that regard the proposed food establishment would provide an essential service to employees
in the industrial park and in the surrounding area serving people working on site as well as
the parents dropping off their children at the daycare center i'm going to move now to
here is a expression of support from cube smart noting that a drive-through restaurant retailer
on the front parcel at 2901 grand avenue would be a benefit to the center we strongly believe
as a tenant at the location that such a retailer would be very supportive of our business the just
children child care center also noted this would be an asset to the complex uh the revised plans
themselves have been designed in such a way that they would only allow a right turn only out of
the park so that I-95 is close by and some might say that this could attract people outside of the
industrial park who might be heading out of the city to work but with the right turn only out
It would really focus on those on site or close by and those headed towards Philadelphia, not away.
So benefiting workers in the city of Philadelphia.
The proposed restaurant would complement the industrial uses.
And it would do so in an area where very little can be done due to the creek that I had shared with you in the photographs.
and I'll just bring that up again
so you can look at that as I'm speaking.
Okay, Mr. Laver, with all due respect,
if you can summarize, we'd appreciate that.
In summary, Mr. Chairman,
you have a non-conforming use,
you have industrial,
you have a owner who has a history
and a current track record of supporting industrial.
The variance requested is the minimum necessary
to support relief at this site.
we have the full team here with any questions that might come up. Thank you.
Want to bring your client on to adopt your testimony? Yes, please. Mr. Cantor, Shimon
Cantor, would you please raise your virtual hand so that you can be sworn in? And sir,
when you get on, would you please identify yourself, spell your first and last name,
and then I'll swear you in. Sure. My virtual hand is raised. First name is Shimon, S-H-I-M-O-N.
last name is Cantor, K-A-N-T-E-R. Can you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. Cantor. Have you been present for the entirety of this
case before the zoning board? I have. Would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered
as your own? I do. Is there anything additional that you'd like to share with the zoning board
noting the late uh hour that's upon us uh no thank you thank you for that thank you um
questions from the board no no anyone would like to testify in this case
no no anyone would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands mr chair thank you planning commission
sir ron bednar city planning property is indicated for industrial use on the city plan
the applicant has not demonstrated necessary hardship regarding use requirements of the code
Despite technical details reviewed by our staff, the plan and the primary driveway will still be shared between both the daycare and industrial use.
We believe the application represents an incompatible use that's not consistent with our adopted district plan.
We believe that the proposed use would be more appropriately located in nearby commercially zoned areas at Roosevelt Boulevard, Bluegrass Road, or Academy Road,
which each are less than one-half mile away from this subjected property.
Therefore, we recommend that the request for various not be granted.
i thought there was an agreement or maybe i misunderstood you mr labor between you and
the planning commission i was i was not told that there was an agreement i we i did not meet with
mr bednar although i shared the plans with him i'm not faulting ron by the way i met with his
colleagues and the revised proviso plans incorporate the safety concerns of uh the
planning commission officials with whom I met. On the issue of the retail commercial that's
further away, I would state once again it is not within walking distance. The primary intent is
to be supportive of the on-site and nearby industrial. Thank you. And you said you have
revised plans yes sir how many pages uh it is um one one page okay thank you
zero zero one two eight nine two nine oh one grant avenue my vote is yes with the proviso
revised plan one page approved today my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with
members of the board thank you good luck tonight thank you thank you send dinner in
calendar number zero zero one nine 2100 south opal street
Is there anyone here for South Opal Street, 2100 South Opal?
One more time. Is anyone here for 2100 South Opal?
Thank you, Jason. Tanya, has this case been continued before?
um quite a few times since november 2019 so we can do a must be heard if you wish
yep that's why i'm asking thank you and excuse me this is sharon selena we also have no exhibits on
this one okay zero one nine 2100 south opals continued must be heard and if i could just
mention this is the one from the transition to the new database so we would put on record that
the zoning board will have jason reach out directly to the applicant not noted thank you
thank you calendar number zero two six seven twenty one hundred mcgee avenue the attorney is engine
jen has been promoted to a panelist sir good evening mr jen please identify yourself with
record good evening and uh you've already you're still under oath from this more earlier today
you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of
ownership tax compliance refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all welcome thank you good evening
I'm going to share with the board the information we provided.
This is, what we provided is a copy of the refusal, the community letter from
So what we provided is a copy of the refusal, the community letter from Take Back Your Neighborhood, photos, plans, tax compliance.
This is a commercial lease, so the tenant will be the one operating the actual business, deed, application, project information sheet, and the hearing notice.
This application is refused because this property is a RSA-5 property.
However, I want to point out that historically, this property has always had a commercial-type use for many years in the unit that we're seeking the current use, which is a proposed nail and beauty salon.
The basement has also two families above that is also existing for many years.
as the even the refusal indicates there were prior uses accessories such as a real estate
office as well as a retail sale business cards that was at this exact location so the unit
in question has already been set up in a way to essentially be a commercial use unit I'm going to
go ahead and show where the access of the unit is this is obviously going to require additional
repairs but as you can see this was at one point some kind of commercial use as well even prior to
this particular application the property of course would be further repaired and all building codes
met should the zoning board permit the use itself as you can see this is a corner property and it
has again existing multi-family above the building sits on a block that has residential but also
similar corner commercial in some parts of the street. So it's not totally out of character
with the entire neighborhood. When we met with Take Back Your Neighborhood, we did not get a
formal letter, but an email was sent that indicates that they are not in opposition
to the required variance. And again, this is predominantly because of the history of the
property. And to now demand that it has a substantial change would be a difficult task
for the owner as well as the proposed tenant. The property itself will be used as a, again,
a nail salon and beauty salon with a limited number of pedicure, manicure areas and a facial
wax room. As you can see, there are access from the street for every, all rooms, as well as a
bathroom that's handicap accessible available to all so with the community support and the history
of the property we would ask the board's consideration in approving this variance request
i'm certainly happy to answer any questions from the board regarding this application
do you have your client available to adopt your testimony yes i believe my client should be here
either Karen Tu or Ann should be present. Ann Lee might be present.
Ann or Karen, can you raise your hand on the Zoom if you're here?
Hi, this is Ann, Ann Lee, A-N-N-L-I. Thank you, ma'am. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. Chen. Thank you. And you have
heard my testimony and representation to the zoning board, including the plans and other
evidence. Can you verify that everything we presented is true and correct and adopt my
testimony as your own? Yes, I do. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the board? No.
No. No. Would anyone like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
no chair thank you planning commission I'm Ben our city planning while this
property is currently indicated for a single-family residential use on a city
plan property has been granted a variance previously for professional
office use in the basement level there's no unique physical circumstances
particularly to this property however we do believe that the parents is
necessary to enable a viable economic use of the property accordingly we recommend the quets
for variance be granted thank you zero two six seven two one zero zero mcgee avenue my vote is
yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you mr jen you have the next
case i believe i do if it's uh yes calendar number zero no strike that calendar number one
two eight seven fifteen twenty four south 10th street yes that is my case do you agree to waive
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do
Oh, and do you swear to tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth, even though we've already asked you that?
Have you submitted everything in the packet?
Yes, five days in advance, along with the letter from the community.
Thank you. You may proceed.
I will share now with the board the documentation relating to this case.
In this case, we also have a refusal based on the CMX district. My client is proposing
a restaurant at this location. The community has issued a non-opposition. All votes including
committee and community members were in non-opposition. Partly because my client is a very skilled
Mexican chef who has finally decided to take on his own restaurant attempt at his own property
property, which was primarily a CMX property before. So the first floor would be used as his
kind of a boutique restaurant. I want to point out that he is part of the Zavino wine bar
pizzeria before. He's a very skilled chef. And this will be a authentic Mexican style cuisine
from his homeland. And he's going to be introducing that at this location, which will also be
directly running, managing, and because of his history of working with food is part of the reason
why the community welcomes his restaurants in addition to the neighborhood. I want to show that
this is not a large space having very little major impact on any aspect of this corner because it is
again a small restaurant with limited seating and given the current circumstance of course we would
expect that it will be takeout only until such time that the pandemic has passed us and we can
once again eat safely within the restaurants. In addition, the location is again commercial in
nature before and has been and my client will be renovating it and adjusting it based on the plan
that I have attached with my exhibits. So here again is the plan for the board's review. The
entrance will be in the front, there's seating, there'll be open kitchen so that the clientele
customers can see what is being prepared. 88 bathroom with rear storage and prep area. Trash
storage will be managed and the exhaust will be also managed to be put to the roof. This will not
be a large operation. We don't expect a large number of workers at this location. It's primarily
going to be the chef his assistants and perhaps a waiter once the sitting portion is fully open
so with that i would ask the board's consideration in granting this uh variance and i'm open to any
questions is that the intersection of the tenth and cross uh this is a cross and tenth yes tenth
and cross okay i'm just trying to acclimate myself with the property all right uh do you have your
client you want to yes um it's uh mr juan um carlos torres should be here with us good evening
sir please identify yourself with the net for the record please spell your first last name
and i'll swear you in hello my name is juan carlos aparicio torres uh
Juan, C-A-R-L-O-S, Aparicio, A-P-A-R-I-C-A-O, yes.
Hold on one minute.
Did the court reporter, were you able to get that?
I'm sorry, what was that again?
I'm speaking to the court reporter.
Yes, I did, thank you.
Okay, okay, thank you, sir.
You're swearing to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you.
Mr. Torres, you've heard my testimony and representation to the zoning board, including the exhibits that were presented on Zoom.
Can you verify that they're all true and correct and adopt my testimony as your own?
That is all correct. I do.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Anyone like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
no one thank you planning committee property is indicated ron bednar city planning property is
indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan given the site's history we have
no objection to granting it thank you ron one two eight seven one five two four south 10th street
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes best of luck and if
best of luck and if it's as good as you say it is i'll be walking there many nights
it's as good as you say it is i'll be walking there many nights
thank you thank you good luck evening calendar number 0741 500 south 42nd street
um this is sharon sletta though this case says that it is also mr jinn's i believe that it is not
um and i also have no exhibits for this case or the next mr jinn you're still on is that correct
this is not your case yes that's correct it's not my case i don't know how it ended up with
my appearance but we do not have a file on this matter i think the applicant was listed as zen
and it is an unusual name and they assumed it was you very popular right okay is anyone here
for 500 South 42nd Street.
No hands, but Chair.
Okay, Tanya.
I must be heard, Chair.
You muted yourself.
Calendar number 074.
741, 500 South 42nd Street is continued.
must be heard again jason will reach out directly to the applicant you um before we move on to the
next case i do have a request um if we could go back to mr labor's case uh number three grant
avenue if you could re-vote that the revised plans are actually two pages not one
okay one one two eight nine two nine oh one grant avenue my vote is yes
with the proviso revised plan two pages approved tonight today yes with proviso yes with proviso
yes with proviso yes with proviso got seven minutes before i get out of here seven o'clock
i'm leaving calendar number 0709 5830 art street philadelphia pennsylvania drag it out philadelphia
pennsylvania and this is sharon celeta again i have no record of having received exhibits
is there anyone here for 5830 art street
it appears not thank you tanya has this pace the case already been continued
quite a few times this could be a must be heard well i wish the old days were back dismissed all
right uh well that'll be january all right thank you 709 5830 arch street is continued must be heard
thank you all so much
oh thank you all so much
that's it