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.