Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have 29 attendees.
You can proceed as you wish.
Thank you.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's meeting.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is LeBaron Leonard Palmer from the Division of Development Services, who is our alternate board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our attorney, Ryan McSherry, is here, and also our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phillip.gov.
For our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule this morning.
Number four, MI 2023-003-683-5021 Woodland Avenue.
That case is continued at the request of the attorney and also the council person.
Number six, MI 2023-003-721-241 East R. Matt Street. That case is continued.
Number 10, MI 2023-005-926-3223 West Berg Street. That case is continued.
Number 12, MI 2024-000-260-4832-40, North 6th Street.
That case is continued, Attorney Moving Party.
And number 13, MI 2024-000-262-5142,
Y. Ellucing Avenue, that case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Okay, we're going to move on to several cases that we do not have exhibits.
Number two, MI 2023-003-649-1614 Porter Street.
This is the second listing.
No one appeared for the first time.
Stephen Jasmishiti is the listed owner.
CGI Construction Incorporated is the applicant.
Mr. Jamishti or
Carl Mattia of CGI
Construction
Good morning, Chair
I see no hands
MI2023
003649
1614 Porter Street
This is the second listing
We have no documents
No one appeared the first time
I vote to dismiss
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss
Thank you
Number three
MI 2023
003 681
147 West Luray Street
This is the second listing
The applicant was not able to meet with the RCO
Because he had an emergency
the applicant is Bromley French
bromley if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand
Bromley if you're in the audience
i see no hands so number three mi 2023 003 681 147 west luray street this case is continued mark
must be heard. Number five, MI 2023-003-719-849 North Newkirk Street. Laura Brown is the owner.
This is the second listing. No one appeared the first time. We have no exhibits. Laura Brown.
Chair, we have a hand up from a Teresa Holberg.
Let's see who it is.
Yes, I am the zoning co-chair for the Fairmount Civic Association.
I just want to let you know that she never reached out.
Okay, okay, okay.
Do me one favor.
Just state your name for the record, please.
It's Teresa Holberg, T-E-R-E-S-A, Holberg, H-O-B-E-R-G,
right zoning co-chair for fairmount civic association thank you do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do so this is the second listing
and your comments are that she never reached out for a community meeting okay thank you very much
is laura brown in the audience
good morning mr chair this is jason hand i will be the co-host for today
Do we see Laura Brown's hand?
I don't see a hand from Ms. Laura Brown, but a hand is up from Conlon Crossley. Do I have them to speak?
Good morning, Chair.
Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the course sonographer?
Conlon, C-O-N-L-A-N, Crossley, C-R-O-S-L-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Mr. Crossley, this is the second listing.
We don't have any exhibits and we have not heard from the person yet.
Do you or do you have a position on this?
The position of the council office is they never reached out to the RCO.
And we had to make sure the community was was I heard Miss Hoberg talk earlier.
I just make it sure somebody was hearing their concern.
Thank you, Mr. Crossley.
We appreciate it.
Laura Brown, we do not see Laura Brown.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, I believe there was a last-minute continuance request in this matter from Ms. Brown. Let me just pull up the email.
All right. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan.
Again, Mr. Chair, I do not see any further hands.
Yeah, so we did receive an email at 8.13 a.m. indicating that Laura Brown needs to see one of her patients for emergency dental treatment this morning and is unable to attend the meeting.
Thank you. So, thank you. So, MI 2023-003-719-849-Newkirk Street. This case is continued and is marked must be heard.
Number seven, MI 2023-003-728-1525R South 12th Street. Jonathan Holt is the listed applicant and owner. No exhibit, second listing.
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands for that matter raised in the audience.
So there are there is a letter of opposition from Council Member Skwula and a letter from Passion Square Civic Association.
So MI 2023 003 728 1525 R South 12th Street, no exhibit, second listing.
I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss
Thank you
And number 17
MI 2024
2228 South 12th Street
Catherine and Justin Bonner are the owners
no exhibits first listing
No exhibits, first listing.
Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Richard Bonner.
I have allowed them to speak at this time.
Thank you.
This is Richard Bonner.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Richard J. Bonner, R-I-C-H-E-R.
Excuse me, Chair.
Excuse me, Mr. Bonner.
You will have to mute one of the devices that's in that room because we're getting a lot of feedback.
Excuse me.
Thank you, Fatina.
Richard Bonner.
R-I-C-H-A-R-D Bonner, B-O-N-N-E-R.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
um i understand you want a continuance yes sir okay so this is the first listing
i'm sorry i'm not sure if let me pass you on to my architect real quick
no no no we it's from you do you want a continuance
he should have uh the application and everything do you have the application
Mr. Bonner, Mr. Bonner, do you want a continuance?
Okay, do you want to withdraw?
Well, tell me what you want to do, Mr. Bonner.
Can I pass you on to my architect?
Well, we need to know where you stand because we don't have any exhibits from you.
You shouldn't have all the exhibits.
We don't have your exhibits.
we'll have to ask for a continuance then uh then i'll have to ask for a continuance
okay thank you so mi 2024 000 374 2228 south 12th street
case is continued mark must be heard thank you sir yeah thank you for our add-on list
MI 2023
006844
1709 Christian Street
this is a request for
reconsideration
voting on this will be
Thomas Holliman also
Mr. Palmer
so my vote is yes
to reconsideration and rehearing. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes to reconsideration
and rehearing. LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thank you. So number one on our list, MI 2023-001-046-12066 Abbey Road. Vern Anastasio
is the attorney. There's a recommendation of opposition from the Mill Creek Civic Association.
Vote was 37 to 12, and a letter of opposition from Council Member O'Neill. Mr. Anastasio.
You'll be coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Morning, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer? Sure. Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O. I represent Evelyn Barrera,
the owner of Abbey Road. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify the, so your client is the owner of
the property? That's correct. And our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir. Thank you.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing? I have. Thank you, counsel. Please
proceed and show your screen. Thank you.
okay mr chair we're here for one 2066 abbey road uh which is um a pre-existing
two-family dwelling because the above-ground basement has been converted before my client's
purchase to a studio apartment. In this particular case, though, it's not rented. It's for their
adult child. So what we are proposing is that we have interior access.
So what we are proposing is that we have interior access for this to legalize what's there.
They have no interest in getting a rental license, no interest in making this a rental property.
They just would like to be able to legalize what's there and have internal access so that the adult child can stay in that space.
We would be happy to submit an affidavit of that to L&I as well.
But there are several other properties on the block that are operating as two-family dwellings.
Here's a 12064, for instance, converted right next door, their above-ground basement into a three-family, and there are several others.
Here's interior photos, and as you can see, there are three electric meters, there are three water heaters.
There are two furnaces, and this was done, again, prior to my client's purchase of the property.
and here's some interior shots i also want to let you know that we are submitting um 44 page
exhibit packet with the refusal the floor plan and the layout the proof of rco notification
uh we're here for the three-family dwelling and this again is a legalization it was constructed
as a two-family uh issued in 1978 there was a above ground basement studio conversion
and then purchased by my client let me pull out here
the existing mechanicals are in the rear of the basement the studio apartment is here
and what they're offering to do is to have access between this lower unit and where the family lives
so that it could be considered instead of a three-family dwelling an accessory unit
that would be used only by the family.
These are the other two units.
This is how the property was originally built
back in the late 70s.
There's the above ground rear.
There's the three mailboxes.
There's additional photos.
so it appears to be a one family dwelling just from the outside it only has one door
and all these properties were built the same and as i said a number of them were converted
at the basement level with that i'd like to have evelyn barrera please raise her virtual hand
so that we can she can have adopt my testimony
They've been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Evelyn, Evelyn Barrera.
Evelyn is E-V-E-L-I-N, Barrera, P-A-R-R-E-R-A.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Barrera, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
You adopt it as your own testimony?
And this use will be for your adult child only.
Is that correct?
Yes, correct.
Okay, thank you.
And you are willing to even have open access between where you and your husband live and this unit on the above ground basement as an accessory unit.
Is that right?
And with no interest in renting it out?
no thank you burn just for a point of information this was 80 duplexes that were built there
oh yes okay all right and again several were converted even next door right questions from
the board no chair no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney ryan mcsherry
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
sure i have this i have brian o'neill with their hand raised i haven't got them to speak at this
time good morning sir good morning mr chair members of the board could you please state your name
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Could you please state your name as spelled for the court's demographer?
Yeah. Yes. Brian O'Neill, councilman for the 10th District. I'll spell it. It's B-R-I-A-N-O apostrophe, capital N-E-I-L-L.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Okay. Could I first ask if anyone from the community is on?
We've had several continuances, and we've tried to have neighbors who can have been at meetings, and if that can be determined.
All right.
Can we see hands of neighbors?
Anyone from the Mill Creek Civic Association?
No, bro.
Mr. Chair, I have – there's a hand up from Janice Trout.
Do I not speak?
speak so so all right so we do have someone so councilman there is apparently someone could i
ask uh the board if um miss trout could speak first sure miss trout yes all right could you
please state your name it's spelled for the court stenography janice trout t-r-o-u-t
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Please proceed.
I have lived on Abbey Road for 25 years now.
And the property in question was not previously converted before it was purchased by the current owner.
at the rco meeting the owner admitted that he is the one who converted the property and was using
it for his own use allegedly as a man cave i object mr chair my my client never he called it
a man cave and okay so so what were you at the meeting yes mr okay yes sir i was proceed just
at the meeting he was represented by um a woman who called herself an expediter
i don't know i don't nikia yarborough was her name and they openly admitted that they converted
the property to use it as a man cave they had pictures of it it's a very nice man cave
um everyone has objected to it okay if it is for the adult if it is for the sole use of an adult
child and they are seeking access to their living quarters why is it necessary to have
a third mailbox they sought to have a third electrical uh facility installed okay so i
don't understand if it's just for a man cave or an adult child use why it was converted into a
full living space bathroom right all right my second a third electric meter so we questioned
all of that at the rco meeting and they said they admitted that what they did was illegal
um objection mr chair this first of all it's hearsay there's nothing illegal being done
okay um silly so miss trout i take it you're miss trout i take it you're against this project
yes sir i am all right mr chair i need to just point a clarity that whatever rco meeting that
happened you know in in the past that's that was a very long time ago and it was before i was
involved. I can tell you that the property is identical to the one next to it. By the way,
no objection. There's no councilmanic or RCO objection to the conversion next door.
Thank you. And then, Ms. Trouth, thank you for your comments. Councilman O'Neill.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Councilman? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Sure. Please proceed. This has been going on a long time. And Mr. Anastasia is right. He was not at the meeting in question. I was. There were many neighbors there who lived there.
There are several owner-occupied duplexes in the, I'd say, at least a half a dozen in the development of about 40 or more duplexes.
Very little street frontage on Woodhaven Road, private driveways, rear garages.
This is the first.
We've had people at meetings that have lived there a long time, just like this.
We've had people at meetings that have lived there a long time, just like Ms. Trout.
They know their neighbors.
They know the area.
This, from the beginning, is an illegal triplex.
I ask you not to look at the credibility issue, because we don't have to.
This is purely and simply a triplex, legal duplex.
And there is not one other identified triplex that L&I has cited.
The neighbors have said there are no other triplexes.
Whatever Mr. Anastasia says is absolutely irrelevant.
The only thing that matters is that this is an illegal triplex.
And we have over 39 or 40 more in this compact little area with very little parking, because when they were built in 1978, people didn't have two and three cars in one unit.
There is no street parking at all. These are just driveways behind these units.
And this is a terrible precedent. There's no there's absolutely no hardship involved in here.
We have heard different stories from, we've had meetings where Miss Berari, no one spoke English. They were working through a translator. I appreciate the owner testifying today.
But the one thing that has been consistent is the neighbors are absolutely against this, many of whom own duplexes and live in them.
And that I just am imploring the board.
I have about four or five throughout my district right now that are cited by L&I.
People are buying duplexes so that they can increase their rent.
above and beyond their neighbors with these conversions, and we're chasing them more than
anything else, which is what happened here. When Ms. Trout says this was done after the current
owner bought it, that they've testified that there's no reason for Ms. Trout to lie. I was
at the meeting. And that's that's not hearsay. That is something that happened before the current
attorney was involved. And this is a very important case because it sets a precedent
in this development, particularly, which is just up to, you know, up to the beyond the limit on
the amount of parking that that is available. And and there's no reason we can't get into
enforcement. And if Mr. Anastasia is correct, that the next door neighbor is a triplex,
that will get L&I enforcement just as this did. But there hasn't been one complaint about that
property. According to every neighbor, this is the first conversion. It's one thing when people
take their garage door and make an entrance there. Or if it's an owner on the first level,
they have a larger family area. Owner-occupied duplexes are the strength of my community
in my district. Wherever they are, the owner treats it like their home.
They don't rent out the bottom, even if they change the garage. And people don't park in
these garages anyway. The use is the problem with the third party. And I would like to come back
again at previous hearings. And I don't think this is intentional at all, but I've had attorneys
close by saying things that I would clearly object to and refute. So if I, if I have my,
I would just ask if I have my, my hand up, uh, when the attorney finishes that I get a chance to,
to uh uh uh to speak because uh if that happens i'll only have it up if there's something i want
to address that the attorney said this is this is a major case although it may be special are
there a special are there special rules mr chair for different witnesses what what mr council
Counselor, are you done?
Counselor, are you done?
Yes, I'm done.
Thank you, Councilman.
All right.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Amy Boyd for the Planning Commission, A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
The property is a document history of two family units.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed use variance for multiple units with provisor to dwelling units.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I appreciate everybody's comments, but there's no precedent here.
The immediate neighbor has converted their above-grade basement into a separate unit.
okay uh but you're you know the council member is right uh when they met with the community
there was a they had to go through an interpreter uh for whatever reason there are issues with that
there were there were no issues with the english-speaking neighbor though who converted
right uh the only issue that came about was this particular property was called on for some reason
So again, I don't believe that there's any precedent here because we already have one that's operating as a three family. We're not even asking for a rental sort of situation here. And that's all I have to say. Thank you.
All right. Thank you.
So MI 2023, 001-046-12066 Abbey Road. I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
So, number eight, MI 2023, 004-549-1515 West Lehigh Avenue.
Raymond Derizio is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
they will be rejoining as a panel sir okay
good morning counsel could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
yes good morning mr chairman members of the board my name is raymond dorizio r-a-y-m-o-n-d
last name d-o-r-i-z-i-o right you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth yes okay so my understanding is that uh um we had a resumptive this is a
resumptive hearing um yes my understanding that the rco um has i believe sent a letter am i correct
i didn't receive the letter i hope they did i didn't right the additional rco meeting did not
occur but rco sent a list of provisos yes right and the main proviso for them is trash stored in
yard am i correct i believe so yes that you haven't do you have any other comments i don't
have any other comments we did schedule the meeting uh beyond that we did schedule the
meeting um they sent us some provisos we we agreed to i guess like 95 percent of them if not
all of them and then we were told that we're settled or that the meeting wasn't necessary
so that's where we are all right thank you very much um questions or comments uh from the virtual
audience mr chair i have a hand up from charles richardson i have allowed them to
speech. That's right. Good morning, Mr. Richardson. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth? First of all, state your name, it's spelled. Certainly. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N,
Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bassroom, 508 City Hall. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. So my understanding is, if you remember,
we had you had requested also a resumptive hearing yes there was no meeting but um the rco has sent
provisos is that correct that is correct i have uh reviewed the um correspondence going back and
forth between the uh rco and the coordinating rco and the um applicant and uh it appears that they
They have agreed to the majority of the provisos that were offered.
provides those that were offered. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the
Councilwoman has no opposition to it.
variants. And I think that there was, that I believe Swampoodle has a different
letter that they sent in with certain requirements as well. So they'll probably
be coming on in a couple of minutes as well. Thank you very much for taking the time to
clause. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, I have a
hand up from a number ending in 3552.
Do I allow them to speak, Mr. Chair?
Please. Understood.
Adrienne?
Hello? Adrienne?
Please state your name as spelled for the court
stenographer. Okay.
Adrienne Fernandez. My last name is spelled
F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Swamp Legal Neighborhood
Process Association, RCO.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
This is a resumptive hearing.
We know where the RCO stands.
Do you have any additional information for us from the last time?
Allegheny West Civic Association is one of multiple RCOs, multiple affected RCOs for this address.
We have four provisos.
They are based on this street.
On the southern side is District 5.
On the northern side is District 8.
With other affected RCUs, we have conducted more meetings, more public meetings on the southern side of the street.
And we were asking for provisors that are consistent with what we did achieve for those properties.
Some of them, I believe, Mr. DeRizio was the applicant attorney for.
If I can just read the five provisors.
We don't have a problem with there not being another meeting unless the neighbors wanted it, because one of the ward leaders, and we're always in touch with several of the committee persons over there, and we have been for like 10 years, so they're familiar with the provisors that we all make together.
So why don't you read your provisos?
The first is a limit of two units, as we asked for, with 1514 and 1518 Wesley High Avenue.
Also, all trash and recycling to be stored indoors with no commercial trash collection, no basement living, and no rooftop deck occupancies, mechanical use only.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate it.
You're welcome.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands in the audience.
Planning Commission, do you have additional comments?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change from CMX2 commercial mixed use to R1 residential multifamily,
The absence of the ground floor commercial and CMX2 properties is characteristic of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Under the RM1 zoning, this parcel size would allow three units by right.
The appellant could use the low-income option of the mixed-income housing bonus to achieve the extra unit, which they elected not to pursue.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance for no ground floor commercial and unit count with proviso three dwelling units.
Thank you.
So number eight, MI 2023, 004-549-1515 West Lehigh Avenue, I vote yes with proviso. Trash stored in yard.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
All right, so number nine, MI 2023, 005-760, 1333 North 21st Street.
Alok Sokoloff is the attorney.
There is a letter of support from Brewery Town,
charged with Community Civic Association, WIP Provisos.
They'll be coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Mr. Sockloff.
Mr. Sockloff?
We can't hear you, sir.
We can't hear you, sir.
Mr. Sokoloff?
Maybe having audio difficulty, Mr. Chair.
He's going to call.
Are you able to hear me?
We hear you now, Mr. Sokolov.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
My apologies.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Oleg Sokolov, O-L-E-G-S-O-K-O-L-O-V, Rabinovich Sokolov Law, on behalf of Mr. Alan Perkins
for 1333 North 21st Street.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning.
Good morning, counsel.
do you agree to wave the reading of refusal or stipulate to his good morning mr shaheed yes i knew
thank you have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this hearing i have thank you council please proceed
and share your screen thank you very much
all right is everybody able to see that we can sir okay wonderful um as stated this is an
application for 1333 north 21st street this is a request to use the property for the purposes of
visitor accommodation as you'll see here that's the singular refusal that's issued it's just a
use refusal. Here's the deed to the property. This property was purchased just July of 22.
This is the property in question. It is right near Girard College. It's between North College
and Master Street, so basically a bust Girard College. The feedback has been that, you know,
this area is a difficult area to find rooms in, so when people visit family members in the
Gerrard College area, it's very nice to have places to stay for short terms.
You can see the property is very well apportioned. Let me just switch the view quickly a little bit.
this is actually all furniture that mr perkins had in storage so this is how the property is staged
mr sokoloff how many units in the building just one unit okay thank you
You can see here that it is near some commercial districts, obviously on Ridge Avenue.
And this down here is the college.
Our application for appeal, our project information form, our RCO notice letter.
The meeting was held on March 21st with the full RCO.
Certificates of mailing, zoning posters at the property for today's hearing, and then
And this is just a map showing the lack of proximity, I'll say, of hotels in the area.
Really, there's really just the Divine Lorraine here, the Conwell Inn a little further up on Broad Street,
and then further down south here, there's one more on Spring Garden and 27th Street, I believe, or 29th.
That's the Maj Hotel.
We also included, and these were some things that we included in our RCO meeting,
the proposed rules that we would have for the property. Obviously, a non-smoking property,
no noise and loud music. Maximum stay that we propose to the, or pardon me, maximum number
of occupants and minimum length of stay that we propose to the RCO. And then lastly, this is
something that people in this business have been using. It's a management system for remote
properties. So it monitors noise, smoking detection. It monitors the amount of people
It monitors noise, smoking detection, it monitors the amount of people that come in and out of the door to make sure that we prevent some of the concerns that come up with, you know, Airbnbs and some of the issues that have happened.
We were not, for some reason, able to pull the tax clearance certificate, but as you'll see, there's a zero tax balance on this property and everything is paid for.
And then this was received late, so I apologize if it wasn't part of the exhibit, but this is the RCO letter of support.
You'll see here that they support the project after both the zoning committee and the community meeting.
And here's a further letter.
With the proviso of this being a three-year grant of this variance.
Mr. Sokoloff, do you, Mr. Sokoloff, do you, your client agree to that?
Yes, he did. It was. Thank you. Yes.
Why don't you bring your client on? Yeah. Mr. Perkins, could you raise your hand, please?
I don't see him in the audience and I know he was. All right. Mr. Sokoloff, you're an officer
of the court. We gladly accept your testimony. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from? No, no, Chair. Thank you. Questions from our attorney, Ryan McSherry?
No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
There are no hands raised, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission.
Hello, Amy Board with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential multifamily zoning at this location. There are no unique physical conditions
or circumstances that would prevent this property from being used in conformance
to the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the proposed
use variance for visitor accommodation. Thank you. MI 2023-005-760-1333 North 21st Street.
I vote yes for a temporary variance that will expire by 627.
7. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you, board members. I'll see you guys this afternoon.
Number 11, MI 2024, 000258, 5434 Pine Street. Tracy Saller is the attorney.
we do not at this point have an rco letter but the notice was sent to nearby neighbors with
proof of the mailing meeting was held may 6th that we were joining as a panel thank you
good morning counsel could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
Yes, good morning.
It's Tracy Soller, T-R-A-C-Y, last name S as in Sam, A-U-L-E-R,
counsel for the applicant in this matter.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is the owner of the property.
It is a company, Chloe Univest.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did, with the exception of the letter from the community, which was emailed over to the board last night upon receipt.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Counsel, what was the position of the letter?
Non-opposition.
Thank you.
And I'll go through that letter with you as part of this presentation as well.
Can everyone see my screen?
We can.
All right.
So this is the property here on the corner of 5434 Pine Street.
This is an application for a variance to use this property as a two-family household living in an RSA 5 district.
This is a variance for a legalization of a use that was there prior to when my client purchased the property, and it was set up as a duplex.
I will go through some photographs of the property for you so you can see how it's currently laid out.
If you see here on the front of the property, there are two doors.
The one on the left goes up to the second floor unit.
The one on the right goes straight into the first floor.
The first photos that I'll show you are pictures of how the first floor unit is laid out.
The first photos that I'll show you are pictures of how the first floor unit is laid.
The first floor is vacant.
It has been vacant.
The second floor is currently rented with a rental license.
So the first floor here, living room, dining room, bedrooms, bathroom, dining room, kitchen.
This is a 698 square foot property.
So it's certainly large enough to accommodate a duplex.
Now we're going to go to the second floor property. This is the living room,
two bedrooms in each property, kitchen, bathroom.
We received the notice of refusal, which is here. We sent notices out to the community as required
and met with the community. Cobbs Creek was the community leader at that point for the meeting.
proof of notice
and then I'm going to go back up to show proof that it was posted
on the front and the side of the building.
We also have a copy of the
deed for the property as well as proof that
the taxes are paid in full. I'm just going to switch
over to the community notice that was received yesterday from the community. As I stated, we met
with Cobbs Creek community neighbors or Cobbs Creek neighbors on May 6th for a meeting. They
stated that they are not going to oppose to it because it's a legalization of an existing two
family use. There's no construction. And also they noted that the property is in good order.
It's very clean. It's kept well. And the neighbors don't object. The characteristics of this
community. A duplex is consistent. There are duplexes. There are a few duplexes on the same
block, on the same side of the street, also with the RSA 5 zoning and have variances for those.
My client was having problems getting on the Zoom for some reason. So if I can speak for her.
You can.
As an officer of the court, we'll take your testimony.
questions from the board
questions or comments
from our attorney Ryan McSherry
and counsel do we have
a copy of that letter
questions
let me just
double check to ensure we do
Thank you.
I am not seeing a copy of that letter.
So, counsel, could you make sure as soon as we get off this, you send a copy of that letter over again?
Yes, I will. Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands raised, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Hello, Amy, vote for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the RSA-5 single-family residential zoning application.
The proposed use to family residential
is consistent with documented prior use
and existing unique physical conditions of the property.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends
that the Board grant the requested variance
for two-family residential.
Thank you. MI 2024, 000258-5334 Pine Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
So number 14, MI 2024-000-316-1300-202 South 18th Street.
David Orphanides is the attorney.
There is a letter of support from Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
Vote was 14 to 3.
Mr. Orphanides.
We'll be rejoining other panelists.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
Could you please state your name and spell for the court?
Certainly. My name is David Orphanides. The last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do, sir.
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Certainly. My client is Brotherly Loaf, L-L-C. So that's B-R-O-T-H-E-R-L-Y, Loaf, L-O-A-F.
llc and they are the owner of the property our vice chair has a few questions for you certainly
good morning counsel do you agree to wait the reading of the refuse or stipulate to its accuracy
uh I do not stipulate to the accuracy of the refusal no understood I waived the reading of
it though understood uh have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing uh yes everything we uh updated with
interior photos i think it was yesterday or the day before okay thank you council please proceed
and share your screen certainly i'm actually i don't know what's going on right i have to shut
this shut down my uh adobe real quickly because it's for some reason it's it's uh doing something
Oh, let me just give me one second.
Second.
there you go all right thank you very much i wasn't sure what that is about okay um subject
property is 1300 to 02 uh south 18th street uh it is a double wide property you can see a photo
here taken from the corner of 18th and wharton uh 18th obviously running north and south and
wharton running east and west uh as you can see um from the mural on the side of the wall on the
south 18th street um the property uh it looks like a hamburger or a head coming uh there um
The property was zoned for a takeout restaurant in 2013 with the single-family dwelling apartment above.
The lot is 2,764 square feet in size.
It's very large.
It's a double-wide lot.
What's interesting is that it is similar to properties that we have on the opposite corner.
So we're here on the southwest corner.
CMX1 zone property. You have an RSA5 property directly across the street, which is a double
wide. You have a much larger former church property across South 18th on the southwest
corner, and then a large church property behind us to the west on the other side of the alley.
I actually handled variances for both the properties on the northwest corner and on the
southeast corner. On the southwest corner, similar double-wide lot, similar proximate size,
2,176 square feet. So for this property, which is 1254 to 56 south 18th, I secured a variance for
four dwelling units and commercial space on the ground floor. On the former church property here
on the southeast corner, I secured a variance for 10 dwelling units, obviously zoned RSA5.
Another attorney came back with a subsequent owner and secured a variance for 14 units.
And then again, the property, large property to the west of us is a church that has zoning
approval for a daycare. So we have examples surrounding us of variances having been granted
on the other two corners for more dwelling units than were permitted. And one of the refusals that
we have here is that we are applying for three dwelling units to take that very extremely large,
too large apartment above the takeout restaurant and to convert that into three apartments,
three dwelling units. Each one will be one bedroom. So in reality, it's fewer, the same
number of bedrooms, I should say, not fewer, same number of bedrooms are permitted as a matter of
right with the existing single family if all the occupants are unrelated. If the lot were to be
If the lot were to be subdivided into two separate lots, which would be an excessive cost, which isn't commercially feasible in this situation, you could have two units with six bedrooms.
subdivided into two separate lots, which would be an accessible.
So the density that we're proposing is reasonable and fairly low, particularly given what the surrounding properties are being utilized as and have been approved by variance for.
I may mention that I don't agree to the,
don't stipulate to the accuracy of the refusal.
There is a refusal aside from the refusal
for the number of dwelling units above,
because again, I'm gonna jump back to that.
Because under the zoning code,
and I provided all the relevant provisions
of the zoning code at tab three of my exhibit book,
CMX one I called zoning tofu.
From a residential standpoint,
it takes on the flavor
of the abutting residential properties.
And because of residential properties that have zoned properties that have but our property or RSA 5, only a single family dwelling is permitted at the property, regardless of the size of the property, which, again, here we have a very large double wide, almost 3,000 square foot lot.
But in terms of the refusal under 14305, 14305 has to do with non-conforming uses. And a non-conforming use, as I believe you were aware, is it could be a use, it could be a structure, it could be a lot, it could be parking.
But in this case, let's say we're talking about use. The use was either established before the adoption of zoning or they were legal when established, but it become non-conforming due to later zoning amendments.
I've had some interaction with this particular zoning plan examiner on this case and other ones regarding this provision of the zoning code.
And because this use of the takeout restaurant was granted by variance, and you can see here, like I mentioned back in 2013, you can see there's calendar number 17429.
2009, the data decision is 2513, that there was an approval for a takeout restaurant at
the ground floor, the code states that a nonconformity that would be permitted by the zoning
code but has been authorized through a variance or other action of the zoning board, whether
it has been authorized by court order, is not a nonconformity.
And the reason that's important is because under the zoning code, nonconformities can
be increased up to 10% of the original floor area. And we are increasing the floor area of the
takeout restaurant use. If you look back at the photo, and I'll show you other ones back here,
this area at one point was a garage and the takeout restaurant didn't extend into that area.
And you can see from our floor plans that I've provided at tab nine, that part of the arrest front will be in that area.
Now, again, that refusal would apply if this was a nonconforming use, but by the zoning code's definition, it is not a nonconforming use.
It's been granted by a variant, so it's not nonconforming.
And based upon my current conversations with this examiner and L&I, including the law department, attorneys who represent L&I, basically, if a variance is granted unless there's a restriction or a limitation on that use in either the zoning permit or the zoning board's decision, basically, that use could take place any place on the property, which I think is an interesting interpretation.
But here you can see that there's no restriction in the notice of decision from the zoning board regarding the takeout restaurant use.
With that being said, we do have the letter of support from Point Breeze Community Development Corporation.
We did send out a 14303 notice after PBCDC was designated as a coordinating RCO.
the list of addresses that we pulled from the planning commission link copy of our 14303 notice
is included here at tab 15c and we have the certificate of mailing and I was the one who
conducted the the meeting the virtual remote meeting I included a copy of the deed at tab 11
showing my my client brotherly loaf LLC is the owner of the property my clients just recently
purchased the property. So we've provided the tax center showing zero real estate taxes owed as well
as the HUD form, the closing form showing that all taxes were paid at closing. Here's the posting
photos on both facades of the property. And then again, back to the floor plans, just real quickly
to go over those um you can see the ground floor there'll be a takeout winner and account
You can see the ground floor will be a takeout winter and counter for when you first somebody first comes in take out winter window in this kind of recessed area at the ground floor level will be counter cooking hood here and then seating spread out throughout the ground floor kitchen in the bag storage bathrooms.
And then at the second floor, you can see that there'll be three units, each one being a one bedroom.
They're all just under 600 square feet.
The existing structure does extend all the way to the rear alley.
At the ground floor and the second floor, there's an open roof area here, and then there's a small court on the side.
We're not proposing any alterations or additions to the structure, so there are no dimensional issues or concerns or considerations at play here.
with that i would like to have my client um adopt my statements and it should be jeremy ash
hello they've been enough to speak okay good morning sir could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer hi my name is jeremy ash that is j-e-r-e-m-y and ash is a-s-c-h
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Jeremy, did you hear the statements that I made to the zoning board this morning?
I did.
And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
They are.
And would you adopt them as your own?
I would.
And is there anything you would like to add about you're going to be operating the takeout restaurant that is proposed at the ground floor in the cellar, correct?
Yes, I will be running the restaurant.
And you live in the neighborhood presently?
Yeah, I live two blocks north.
Okay, thank you very much.
I don't have any further questions.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Ryan McSherry?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
A new Board with the Planning Commission. The Comprehensive Plan recommends no change to the existing commercial mixed-use CMX1 zoning at this location. The proposed use is consistent with documented car use. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested variances for expansion of non-conforming uses and for multifamily household living for three units.
thank you mi2024 000 with 316 1300 202 south 18th street i vote yes thomas holloman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel thank you uh that concludes my business may be
excused thank you absolutely thank you have a great day i'll see you this afternoon
Oh, good. So, number 15, MI 2024-003-17, 2400 West Oakdale Street. Bernard Astasio is the attorney. There's no RCO letter at this point, but notice was sent to nearby neighbors with proof of mailing. Meeting was held on May 11th.
i'll be coming back in as a panel sir
good morning counsel you you've already been sworn just for the record state your name please
sure verne anastasio i'm here representing mr martin frazier the owner of the property in
question. All right. And our vice chair has a few questions. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree
to win the read another refusal or stipulate to attack proceed? I do. Have you emailed in all
the required documents and exhibit that is needed and required to perceive it to stay five days in
advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. Thanks. Mr. Chair, just a point
of clarity uh there was no meeting the coordinating rco asked for a special walkthrough uh so that
that's what we did so that was on may 11th that's correct yeah they wanted to all in the family am
i right that's correct okay we did a special walkthrough this is a historic property i'm
going to share my screen that has been a duplex since 1968. And we have a copy of the actual
zoning map from 1968 that I've submitted to board council under separate cover. And I'm moving that
under separate cover, and I'm moving that into evidence, as well as the 57-page exhibit packet
into evidence as well as the 50.
I have here before you. And it includes the zoning refusal of the floor plan,
focus of the property, D, tax clearance, and all the other. Really, what happened was
my client purchased this property, which, again, historically has been a two-family dwelling.
it still was a two-family dwelling. When he purchased it, the spaces were small.
It was a small duplex, the first floor and the second floor. It had two separate entrances,
two utilities all set up, but the space itself was small. He believed he was able at that time
to add an addition to the property, and that's what generated L&I's interest, and then it turned
out that not only do we need to get the addition approved, but the two-family dwelling classification
lapsed because it was just over time, there was no rental licenses pulled for this,
but historically and continuously, this has been a two-family dwelling.
I'm going to pull out.
This is the side.
And this is the interior, the first floor unit and the second floor unit.
Trash storage is going to be interior in each of the units.
The other corners are all multifamily.
It's directly across the street from RM1, which you'll see in a minute.
And here's the property.
By the way, the addition, it's the nicest house on the block.
I mean, it's absolutely beautiful.
It's, again, an historic property.
All of it has been maintained and upgraded by my client.
As you can see, there's an entrance here and an entrance here.
Most of the other area corners are CMX1.
And again, directly across the street is a whole block of RM1.
this beautiful space at affordable price points
in a property that since 1962 according to the map that i submitted into evidence
has been a legal duplex
of course occupancy is subject not only to this hearing today
but also having a certificate of occupancy
from the Department of License and Inspection.
Could not keep the, at least in this market,
we could not keep the historic use of the two-family
the way it was set up without that addition
because it simply wouldn't be comfortable enough.
But there were two kitchens there.
It was completely separated.
So my client merely added an addition,
thinking it was a legal two-family
because that's how it identified itself
and how it was presented.
Here's the letter that went out
letting everybody know of the zoning hearing date.
and 169 folks were mailed and with that i'd like to call my client
mr martin frazier burn did you participate in the walkthrough i did not my colleague did
attorney cook and it was and ms odessa and communicating with her at the time it seemed
as though everything was uh you know they understood why the addition was necessary to
maintain here's the property in question right across the street is this is all rm1 uh and then
the other corners are also two units it's just a matter of uh commercial mixed use okay why don't
That's on Lehigh Avenue.
Mr. Fraser?
Mr. Frazier.
Morning.
Morning, Mr. Frazier.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Martin Frazier, spelled M-A-R-T-I-N, last name F-R-A-Z-I-E-R.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Frazier, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Yes, I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, sir.
Very good.
I have nothing further, Mr. Chair.
There are other folks on the meeting, on the hearing, that I believe would like to testify.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
We did receive two emails of opposition, one from the Swamp Appeal Neighborhood Parcels Association, indicating that they are opposed to the variance, requesting the board deny this variance appeal.
We also received the email of opposition from all in the family.
Opposition from all in the family?
Correct.
okay i'm surprised mr chair i i'd like to call back my client just to put something on the record
based on the law mr fraser yes i'm here thank you please proceed counsel thank you mr fraser
just to remind you you're still under oath uh you did you uh attend the walkthrough with the rco
all in the family yes we we actually had a walk through uh so the week just a yes or no
mr fraser just a yes or no that's all you did attend is that correct yes okay were there not
were there not six community members all within a hundred feet living all within a hundred feet
who toured the property and supported the the the variants yes it was and some of them are here now
Okay. Very good. Thank you. And we'll have those immediate neighbors on in a minute. Thank you.
Questions from the board? No, I'm sorry. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a Keith Davis with their hand raised. I've allowed them to speak.
Sure. Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the course stenographer?
Yes. Good morning. Can anybody hear me?
I can. Please state your name and spell for the stenographer.
My name is Keith Harris. K-E-I-T-H-H-A-R-R-I-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Please proceed.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and the board. I'm the ward leader in the district.
We did have the walkthrough with all of the family.
They were probably impressed with the layout of the facility.
I'm shocked that they will vote against it.
I really am because they said that they just had an issue with the trash.
Also, the other RCOs, other than all the family, their distances from this location is really beyond the boundaries.
They're just crossing the boundaries, and all the family is kind of the convener of the RCOs.
But Mr. Frazier has done a remarkable job, not only to that house, but to that block.
I've been having problems as a ward leader.
And prior to being a ward leader, I was the chairman with this block forever.
And I've been a committee person since I was 22.
I'm 62 now.
And that block has been a drug-infested block ever since I became in my 30s.
It's been horrible.
And Mr. Frazier has seemed to be able to get the neighbors together, talk to the neighbors,
and quite the calm, you know, bring calm and get rid of the violence on the block.
He's not just a landlord.
He's been a community leader on that block, and I commend him for that.
And I'm hoping that we can give Mr. Frazier some leniency.
You know, you know he made a couple of mistakes in the beginning.
He's came back to correct that, to rezone it.
And just like the attorney said, and I've seen the paperwork,
this has always been a duplex
and he's made another interest
because it always wasn't one
it always wasn't two interests
it was one and he's made it convenient
for the dwellers that will be living
in that property. Thank you.
Mr. Harris, thanks for taking the time to call.
Other people in the virtual audience?
Conlon Cressley has their hand raised.
I've allowed them to speak at this time.
Right. Good morning, Chair. How are you? Good morning, Mr. Crossley. You've already been sworn. Just for the record, state your name, please. And my name is Conlon, C-O-N-L-A-N, Crossley, C-R-O-S-L-E-Y. All right, please proceed.
Right.
um i had uh spoken to um miss uh dr odessa tate from all in the family um quite a few times about
this she's she's not able to attend right now however um she is in opposition of this as the
coordinating rco additionally the swan poodle civic is also or excuse me swan poodle is also
in opposition and the reasoning for all in the family and not support I shared with board
council this morning was the spacing did not accommodate the apartment style light living.
There is an illegal rear erection that was done at the space that is not suitable for a first
floor apartment space to convert this into a one bedroom and the trash storage initially installed
initially entailed tenant storage space in the rear alleyway.
And lastly, the architectural plans presented had inaccurate room sizes
and were not done professionally.
And that's all.
I just wanted to make sure it was on the record for on the docket.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Crossley.
And Mr. Chair, just would like to touch on each of those notes.
The trash.
Vern, why don't we do this?
why don't we see who else is in the audience and then you can touch on all of it okay thank you
um anyone else in the virtual audience um yes chair adrian fernandez looks like is um in the
audience i haven't got them to speak adrian just state your name you've already been sworn
adrian yes adrian you've already been sworn just state your name for the record
okay can you hear me okay i can't i can't okay all right um uh three i think there's five rco
affected rcos on this adrian just for the record state your name please oh i'm sorry adrian
fernandez okay please for this address 2400 west oakdale street 19132 um there are five affected
RCOs, three of us, the coordinating RCO is the affected All in the Family, and then Strawberry
Mansion, Concern, and also Swampaddle RCO. Swampaddle RCO is located closest to this property
of about three blocks. We held extensive meetings with the owner. I believe he had another attorney
before so it's going on for a while and at the meeting on the family notice first that the owner
had violated the permit that was issued where it explicitly said to do not alter the structure
they replaced a window with a door and there is no evidence that this property
was ever a duplex and also Mr. Anastasio noted there's never been any rental licenses
We did have difficulties with the owner giving lots of misinformation, including giving misstatements by L&I inspectors.
He was saying that the L&I inspectors told him to violate the permit.
He named several L&I offices in North Central and North Philadelphia on C.C. Moore Avenue and also American Street.
We know these inspectors, and they do not tell permit holders to violate the permit.
When we kept asking him not to make these misstatements about them, he continued, which was pretty disturbing for us because they were not even there to defend themselves.
The property is very small.
We were all opposed, even after we had special meetings with the owner, and he refused to tell us the truth about violating his permits, even though we could see it.
I walked past it probably every month, so I knew that door was not there that he installed.
and he took out all the open space in the back of it.
These houses are very small.
They're very small.
Because the owner is showing a problem with following L&I instructions,
supplying with his permit,
and also not willing to go through the zoning process,
he altered this house and rehabbed this house before any ZBA public appeal hearing.
We're asking that he just use the house as a buy right and rent it as a single house.
Single house rentals are very successful in our area.
Many of them rented long term for over 10 years with good tenants.
with good tenants. If ZBA does not deny this variant, we were asking for four provisos,
the first one being a limit of two units, the second one being that the trash and recycling
be stored indoors, the third one is no basement living, and the fourth one is no rooftop deck
occupancies. However, a swamp of RCO is opposed to this variant. The owner does not seem to be
able to manage more than a single-family rental, and we are asking that the ZBA please vote to
deny this variant. Thank you very much. Thank you for calling us. We appreciate it. Is there
anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, Chair Strober, Managing Community
concerns with the hand raised. I've allowed them to speak at this time.
good morning good morning can you hear me i can't could you please say your name it's
spelled for the court stenographer my name is bonita cummings b-o-n-i-t-a c-u-m-m-i-n-g-s
right do you swear yep do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth. I do. Please proceed. I am an affected RCO for 2400 West Hotel Street. There was a special
meeting held. Vern Anastasio was not in attendance at that meeting. At that time, as you know,
there was a walkthrough schedule. But what was discussed with the attorney that was present for
that special meeting was very alarming because he also mentioned using adverse possession of the
alley just so that they could block off the alleyway for the use of trash. The property on the first
floor has been completely destroyed in that the extension takes up the entire open space of that
property where even a living tenant or a family living tenant would not have any use of even
their back their back area so the residents of that block are in jeopardy based on the proposed use
of trash storage to take the alleyway away um from that block so this property needs to be
uh restored to its proper use and again you've already heard evidence of uh no real evidence of
it of him getting it in a multifamily use and he placed a second door so we don't want to have our
our families locked in their houses and not having uh access uh to getting out of those alleyways
based on a tenant or landlord proposing that he can he's going to take away the alleys for storage
and mr anastasio was not present so he cannot speak for excuse me of the proper the other
attorney who spoke with us at these meetings about what they were proposing for trash use
the trash use thank you mr i'm sorry can the witness stay on for a moment mr chair sure
thank you ma'am are you there miss cummings miss cummings
please unmute
miss cummings hold on
they've still been allowed to speak but they're not unmuting
miss miss cummings mr anastasia has a question thank you miss cummings
miss cummings uh you didn't attend the walkthrough did you
i was at the special meeting i was not at the walkthrough that was that was more than a year
ago i'm asking you where the walk no that wasn't a year ago we just had we had the meeting where
we scheduled the walkthrough the walkthrough was scheduled the week after the meeting
no it wasn't a year ago did you attend the walkthrough i did not thank you mr chair
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, one minute.
So is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
There was a meeting, okay.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, I have Ronnie Wilson with their hand raised.
I'm not going to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Ronnie, R-O-N-Y-A Wilson,
and I'm a neighbor of this property.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth is nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Please proceed. Thank you. My family has been
neighbors to this property since 1952. I took over our family house in 2010. This
I took over our family house in 2010.
This property that was redone has been an eyesore and a problem for a long time before it was reconstructed.
I have talked to the owner and my only concern was trash and he guaranteed that there would be no problem with trash.
I did hear the last testimony about the alleyway and other neighbors not having access to the alleyway, but I cleaned 24th Street, and that alleyway wasn't accessible outside of three weeks ago when the city came and cleaned it out.
There was never any access to that alley anyway, and the addition to the property doesn't block the alleyway at all.
Um, I don't know all of the legal things that are going on at this point with this property, but I know that since it has been constructed and up is cleaner. We don't have any trash storage by the unit anymore. Like I'm a person who lives in this area and I know all of the people that are, are, are talking about like the legal, the legalness of what's going on with this property.
I live in this area and this is a hard area to live in and we're trying to keep it clean and
trying to take it back and we don't get much help for it so what Mr. Martin did was come along and
fix up something to show that hey this is a place that somebody cares about I don't have to clean up
as much trash as I used to have clean up there's we have bad uh dumping in this area uh even an
apartment across the street who who they they fixed up and have uh tenants in there we're having
dumping area problems next to their property he comes along he cleans off the the uh papers that
the delivery people put on there like he comes around he checks on the property he talks to
the area people um the reconstruction of this property has been good for the people who live
in this area where actually i'm actually focused on trying to get 24th street to be beautified
and 2400 block of Oakdale is the trashiest block that we have over here. So just putting that
property on the corner helps a lot for 24th Street in itself. So I don't have a problem with him
having a property there and I don't have a problem with two people living in there as long as the
trash situation is taken care of. I have no problem. And like I said, he assured that it
would not be an issue. I have no problem with it. I appreciate his help in the neighborhood.
He's not just a landlord that came and threw up something
and tried to collect some money.
He actually cares, and he's around in the area.
I know what that man looks like.
He gave me his number.
I'm able to call, and I appreciate that
because we don't have a lot of that in this area.
So that is all I wanted to say.
Thank you very much for taking the time to close.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Martin Fraser has his hand up again.
Do I allow him to speak?
That's fine.
Yeah, please.
mr frazier
hello mr frazier just state your name for the record just state your name for the record
uh this is jamar folly i'm mr frazier's next door neighbor i live at 2402 west oakdale street
could you spell your name spell your name for the court sonographer j-a-m-a-r last name folly
f-o-l-l-y right you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do are you in favor or against this project i am in favor of the project when i purchased my
property next door it was 2019 and um mr frazier's property was in poor condition
i was getting raccoons rats and everything else in my backyard and on my roof since mr frazier
rehabilitated this property. I haven't had this issue since. I do not have an issue with trash
because me and Mr. Frazier already came to agreement that they will steal the trash on
the inside if need be. Mr. Frazier done a remarkable job with this property and I was
in attendance at the walkthrough. I was under the understanding from the RCO that she was in favor
of everything because she was thoroughly impressed as well. I don't understand where the opposition
comes in that when there was trash dumping on the side of this property before Mr. Frazier
rehabbed this property. There was trash dumping candy corner to this property before they rehabbed
the property. I don't understand what the big issue is. Mr. Frazier came back and corrected
all the illegalities that was going on. He's trying to get his zoning done property,
but they're hindering him over trash and I don't I just don't get it the the property was it was a
total mess it was an issue for everyone and you know the money that he's dumped into this property
It was an issue for everyone. And, you know, the money that he's dumped into this property and hasn't been able to rent it out over simple issues is just absurd. I don't get it.
Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it. Is there anyone left in the virtual audience?
Yes, I got it. Keith Harris with the hand raised. I have allowed them to speak.
Mr. Harris, hold on, Mr. Harris, just state your name for the record.
Keith Harris.
All right.
And Mr. Harris, you've already testified.
What do you want to add?
I want to add Mr. Frazier is no stranger to the community.
His father operated a business for years, exemplary business, on Lehigh, the 2,500 block of Lehigh.
He was a beauty follower.
And so he is an institution in the community.
He's not an implant.
All the neighbors, as a ward leader, I've spoken to most of the people on the block, and all of them, they love the project.
They don't have any opposition to it, and they support Mr. Frazier 100%.
We respect the RCOs, but sometimes they just can be wrong.
And I believe this is one of those times that they're wrong,
and they don't live on the block.
When there's violence on the block, they don't come around
and try to squash the violence.
They do what they do, right, like with the zoning and stuff.
But Mr. Frazier is constantly on the block with the neighbors that speak,
and they'll call me sometime, and we'll talk to the neighbors.
We got relationships, even with the people that do violence.
We try to talk to them, but Mr. Frazier has seemed to really quiet their block down along with those neighbors, and so I'm hoping we give him some leniency and allow him to go forward. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Harris. Is that it? Any one left in the virtual audience?
Yes, one more hand. Alexis Hargrove has their hand raised. I've allowed them to speak, sir.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
yes alexis hargrove first name a-l-e-x-i-s last name hargrove h-a-r-g-r-o-v-e right you
swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor
i own a property across the street yes okay uh are you for or against this project
i'm for this project all right is there anything else you could add that hasn't already been said
uh similar to what has been said the trash in the community um was terrible prior to Mr.
Frazier coming along and improving this property um Mr. Frazier is very active and actively goes
over to the property to clean it out consistently since before the construction started I would see
him over there checking on the property um what I see is nothing but an improvement
and would strongly and strongly in support of this being zoned and allowing them to move forward.
Thank you very much for taking the time to close. Mr. Anastasia, do you want to respond quickly?
Just very quickly, Mr. Chair. Swamp Poodle testified that if the board were to, in fact, grant the variance,
They had provisos, all of which we are okay with, not to exceed two units, that trash
would be kept inside, that there would be no basement living, and that there would be
no roof deck.
All four provisos that they placed out there contingent upon the passage of this appeal,
we are in tune with and we agree with 100%.
Because this property has been a duplex since 1962, because my client is just trying to
legalize what he thought he could do, which with the expansion and, but now understands he couldn't.
Because we've had six witnesses, three of whom actually live on the block and support this 100%,
three of whom don't live anywhere near this block, and just did, and not even all of them
went to a walkthrough. There are times to support projects like this if they improve
the overall quality of life of everyone in that area and this is one of those times thank you
planning commission
amy void with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change the
existing rsa 5 single family zoning at this location there is evidence that the appellant
renovated the property from one family to two family without zoning permits and erected in
condition without proper permits as well therefore the claimed hardships are self-created the planning
commission recommends that the board denied the requested variances for multi-family household
living occupied area and rear yard depth thank you I'm curious if the planning commission
knows that the property was deemed a duplex from 1962. is that something that that they are aware of
Amy, you can answer that if you if you have that information or if you want to answer it.
Amy, you can answer that if you have information or if you want to answer.
We are aware. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Council, we've had a lot of dialogue about this. I want to hold this to our executive session.
We will do this next Wednesday and we will vote at 930 a.m. next Wednesday.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much.
Number 16, MI2024, 000354, 823 Christian Street.
There's a letter of non-opposition from the Bella Vista Neighbors Association, a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squall's office.
Sean Wellen will be coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Good morning, Council.
Could you just state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Certainly. Good morning, Chair. Sean Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes. I'm here today on behalf of VJS, all capitalized, Land LLC. That's the owner and
applicant for this.
Our Vice Chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to
a diagnosis? Yes, I do. Have you emailed then all the required documents and exhibits that
is needed to pursue this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I did. Thank
you, counsel. Please proceed and share this with me. Thank you very much. So I have, I
know we've had some difficult cases this morning. I have one that I hope is pretty easy to round
out your morning session here. Very quickly, Sean Whalen here from Vintage Law on behalf of
823 Christian Street. We are simply seeking to legalize an existing condition in place for over
130 years. So very quickly, what you see here, standard corner rectangular property, 17 feet
wide on Christian Street and 62 feet deep on South Darien. This is right off of South 9th,
about halfway between 8th and 9th Street. What you can see here, there's one existing building
that fronts onto Christian Street. There is actually a separate building. They were built
together at the same time. You can tell from nothing's been changed to the facades or anything
in history. There's actually a second building that fronts onto South Darien Street. This is a
oh here you go South Darien Street so you can see there is actually a full divide. It's a full
walkway between the two. You actually access the second building through that corridor and here is
the first building with christian street at the top and south darien street on the side
so we are seeking to i guess i'll do this now um the christian street building has three existing
units one on the first floor there is no basement in that building there is one unit on the first
floor one unit on the second floor and one unit on the third floor the darien street building i'll
call it, has one unit on the first floor with an unfinished basement, no basement living
in either, and a one unit on the second and third floor by level.
So we are seeking to legalize the existing five units at the property with no first floor
commercial.
We presented this to the Bella Vista Neighbors Association.
And as you can see down at the bottom, BVNA was not opposed to the application and had near unanimous support for the project.
This is a CMX2 block along CMX2 corridor, along Christian Street.
And we have two refusals.
One refusal is that there's no commercial which is required in CMX2 along the frontage of Christian Street, which is deemed the front street here.
The second refusal is that we have five units, and five units is too many units for the underlying square footage of the property.
So the property, as I said, is at the corner of Christian and South Darien.
It's approximately 1,050 total square feet with these two existing buildings.
We are not seeking, notably, any new construction.
There have been no violations to the property.
There have been no violations to the property.
We are not seeking any change, in fact, whatsoever to this property.
We are not seeking any change.
So you can see there's a gated alleyway between them.
You access here.
This is the South Darien Street building.
You have two units in that building, and you have three units in this third building.
Um, interestingly, as, uh, as sometimes comes out when you go to the RCO meetings, um, there were members of the RCO board who could, uh, discuss this history, the history of these buildings in detail back about 50 years and describe who was there and who lived there and what resident, you know, what residents were, weren't there.
And notably, the owner of this property, VJS Land LLC, Jim Spadafora, will be on in a minute to adopt my testimony.
But this has been in the Spadafora family since the 60s.
So we're over 60 years that this property has been in their family.
It's always been in the same condition with no changes.
The only change was that the first floor of the Christian Street building, as I'll call it, was changed in 1995 from a commercial unit to a residential unit.
The other four units have been existing at all times.
And interestingly, this actually only came up all of the uses as you see them now have been approved throughout history in the zoning archive.
interestingly though the zoning archive has never made a distinction between the two buildings
and so you keep you keep having conflating approvals uh for each of the two buildings
being shown on the same property um so again here's the existing condition along christian street
you can see the two buildings uh you know you see the separate the clear separation they're both
delineated here. Again, not a condition that my client created. Actually, these are just the two
buildings separately. If the board has any questions, we had professional floor plans done
showing the existing conditions. Again, these have all been in place. Interestingly, if you go back
to this is the 1895 Philadelphia Atlas map you can actually see right here is 823 the Christian
Street building and right here is the South Darien building so this has been in this condition since
at least 1895 when this map was done the two buildings are shown again on the 1910 Atlas map
And so what I would suggest here is simply, this is deserving of a variance because we have a clear hardship. That hardship is an existing building, or I should say existing two buildings that are in their current condition.
it would be an extreme hardship to either demolish, essentially to come into compliance,
we'd have to fully demolish the rear building in order to be in code compliance. And we would
have to demolish all improvements in the first floor unit on the existing Christian Street
building to turn that back into a commercial use. So there's an extreme hardship given the
existing use that's been in place, again, approximately 140 years that these buildings
have been in this general condition. So a clear hardship there. There is no detriment to the
public health, safety, or welfare. Again, these are five residential units that have been in place
for decades upon decades. And this is the least minimum variance in that we're only seeking to
legalize what's already there and what's already built out. We are not looking to ask for any
addition, any height, or any change whatsoever to the properties. So with that, I'm happy to
answer any questions the board may have. So hold on, and Sean, I understand everything you just
said, but Ryan, just for our records, this is one property? Yes, it is. Okay. Thank you very much.
Mr. Whelan, do you want to bring your client on?
Yes. And just to be clear, I apologize if I went too quickly. This is the Christian Street frontage.
This is all one property and it goes back to this party wall right here.
So this is approximately 62 feet of frontage along South Darien.
And then we have 17 feet of frontage to this party wall along Christian Street.
So with that, Jim Spadafora, please.
So with that, we'll call Jim Spadafora, please.
Good morning, sir.
Please pardon me, Mr. Chair, Mr. Whelan, but I do not see that individual in the virtual audience this morning.
Okay, he just texted me to confirm that he is on and was listening.
it's just about a four
all right hold on hold on i think i found him now sorry
okay they've been allowed to speak good morning sir could you please state your
name is spelled for the court stenographer
good morning sir
vadafore please unmute
he just texted me that he's having trouble unmuting okay all right so so mr whalen you're
an officer of the court we we accept your testimony questions from the board no mr
chair no chair questions or comments from our attorney ryan mcsherry no mr chair questions
or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Ward with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing CMX2 commercial mixed-use zoning
at this location.
CMX2 properties with no ground floor commercial
is characteristic of this area.
Further, the proposed uses for no ground floor commercial
and five-dwelling units are consistent with prior documented uses.
The Planning Commission therefore recommends that the Board grant the requested variances
for no ground floor commercial and five-dwelling units.
Thank you.
MI 2024-000-354-823 Christian Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Counsel.
Russell. Thank you very much, chairman and board members. Have a great day.
Okay. Is there anyone in the 930 a.m. group whose case has not been called?
Again, sir, I do not see any hands raised.
Thank you, everyone. See you at 2 p.m. And Ryan, thank you very much for this morning.
Absolutely. All right. Appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
do we have to change his name
will we have to change as his name no he's um fine oh good okay
are we ready to go yes and you can start as you wish chair good afternoon everyone my name is
bill bergman and i will be chairing this afternoon's hearings with me is our vice chair
Ismail Shahid. Present, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman. We also have LeBaron Leonard Palmer from the Division of Development
Service, who will be serving as our alternate board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. And Emily
Persico from the Division of Development Service, who will be casting a vote on one matter.
Present, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Present also is our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
and Ryan McSherry will also act as attorney on one of the cases
and also our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phil.gov.
For our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses
to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating via phone, press 9 to raise your hand and 6 to unmute.
To enter and appear on the statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Suckett.
Let's look at this afternoon's schedule.
Number four.
One minute.
Get through our add-ons.
Number four.
MI 2023-006-953-2122 West Estos Street.
That case is continued.
That case is continued.
Number seven.
Number seven, MI2024, 000790, 324 South 17th Street.
That case is continued.
Attorney moving party.
Number 9, MI 2024-000-901-2337 South 13th Street.
That case is continued.
Number 10, MI 2024-001-510-7929 Ronelk Street.
Case is continued.
Number 11, hold on one minute here.
I lost my, get right with you.
Number 11, MI 2024-001-511-1601 North 27th Street.
That case is continued.
And number 16, MI 2024-002-531-1600-16 North 9th Street, that case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hand.
I will be your co-host for this session.
I do not see any hands raised at this time.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
So number one, MI 2024, 000104, 4230 Howell Street, number T-2-123607.
Voting on this will be myself, Ishmael, and Emily Persico.
I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Emily Briscoe, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Emily.
Number two is a re-vote.
So MI 2023-006-569-1300 South 6th Street.
Voting on this will be myself, Ishmael, and Thomas Holloman.
I vote yes.
with proviso, revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA on June 5th, 2024, and two, no accessory
parking on property. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes
with proviso. Number three is also a re-vote. MI 2023-005-992-1600 to 18 West Hunting Park Avenue.
I vote yes with proviso. Use limited to unit number, unit 102. Two, temporary variance to
expire, 6-5-29, and three, hours of operation, Monday through Friday, 12-P to 12-A, and Saturday
and Sunday, 10-A to 12-A. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Number four, voting on this will be myself, Thomas Holloman, and Ishmael. Thomas Holloman
and Ishmael were both certified that they've reviewed the videos of the April 10th and May
21st hearings for Ishmael and the May 21st hearing for Thomas Holloman. So MI 2023-007-020-508-14
Moore Street, I vote no. Thomas Holloman, I certified that I reviewed the video of the May
21st 2024 hearing
in this matter
and my vote is no
Ishmael Shahid
I certified that I have watched
the May 21st hearing
recording and my
vote is no
Thank you
And Mr. Shahid just to clarify you also watched
the April 10th hearing correct
Yes I watched that one earlier on
Alright thank you
Number five, MI 2023, 003-142-3111 West Montgomery Avenue.
142-3111 West Montgomery Avenue.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number six, MI 2023-006-343-9901, Frankfurt Avenue.
Voting on this will be myself, Ishmael, and Mr. Palmer.
I vote no.
ishmael shaheed my vote is no lebaron leonard palmer my vote is no
number seven i'm voting on this will be myself ishmael and and lebaron leonard palmer
mi 2024 001 645 35 15 to 21 welsh road i vote yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes.
Number eight, Ishmael and Mr. Palmer will also be voting on this.
MI 2024-001-650-3509 Baring Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Proposed additions shall not exceed one story.
no roof deck above proposed additions.
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
And number nine, MI 2024-000-798-11 Schur's Lane.
Right with you.
I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plans, three pages, stamped by ZBA on June 5th, 2024.
Voting on that will be Thomas Holliman and also Ishmael.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with proviso.
Okay, we're going to go to our regular election.
We're going to start with number two.
Ryan McSherry will be the attorney on this.
Hillary Emerson has recused herself.
So MI 2023-006-173-6812, Ogons Avenue.
Joseph Vaccaro is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from the 10th Ward Democratic Committee.
The RCO vote was 11-7, and a letter of opposition from Council Member Phillips' office.
The applicant also provided a petition of support from 20 residences and businesses.
Mr. Vaccaro.
They will be coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon. Can you hear me?
I can, Mr. Vaccaro.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Certainly. Good afternoon. May it please the board.
My name is Joseph Vaccaro, attorney for Shafwan Rothman, who's also on the Zoom link.
We represent the applicant.
Mr. Vaccaro, just for the record, could you please spell your name?
V as in victory, A-C-C-A-R-O.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Sure. Gladly. My name, my client is Shafwan, S-H-A-F-W-A-N, Rahman, R-A-H-M-A-N. He is the tenant of the property.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the read and other refusal or stipulate to attack this name?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. Let me share my screen.
By way of background, this application is for a used car lot.
Can you see my screen?
um we we see the uh the refusal yes we see we've received we see the refusal yep okay so
by way of history there was already since since at least 2003 the zoning board has granted approval
for a an auto sales lot at this location back in 2003
an auto sales lot at this location back in 2003, as well as in 2022, prior to my client's
involvement with the property. And my client will gladly agree to the provisos that were
stipulated to during those past proceedings. What happened was whoever had the property back in 2022,
two, they must have never concluded with the process. And the past variance that was granted
is no longer applicable. So here we are. We had to start the process all over again.
And so if I could share the, I could close out the refusal.
and i could go to the photographs this is what
my client was able to obtain a photograph of the property conditions before he took over the spot
and yes there were cars on the sidewalk which was a problem which was a problem that was
addressed during our RCO meeting. And my client certainly told the RCO that he would not be
parking any cars on the sidewalk, that he would keep the property clear of any obstructions,
and that the sidewalk would not be obstructed. And he's certainly taking care of that.
And here's a photograph of the property conditions after
he's taking the steps to remove those vehicles from the sidewalk those vehicles were not his
there happens to be a mechanic shop next door to my client's property and and it was the neighbor
that was putting those vehicles both on the sidewalk as well as inside the lot in question
And again here, if we were able to obtain this variance, we would certainly keep to these conditions of not having any vehicles on the sidewalk and any vehicles blocking the sidewalk.
Now, I have photographs of the inside office, as well as photographs of the outside lot.
I put up the poster, notifying the neighbors of the hearing today.
Again, it's been cleared off.
My client would be operating the property from Mondays through Saturdays.
Another concern that was raised was security and lighting.
He would certainly put up some lighting to keep the neighborhood safe and to keep the intersection very well lit.
And obviously the merchandise, the vehicles, would be better protected by a much higher fence.
These are all items that were raised in the letter of opposition by the RCO.
and my client, he certainly addressed those issues that were raised, and he would certainly
comply with them. So we can have no explanation for the ongoing letter of opposition
by the community. Anything that they asked for, we were willing to provide to them.
I'm showing you that letter of opposition, and my client had sent a proposal to put up a fence around the perimeter, as well as a letter to the RCO regarding the community outreach.
This property, it's zoned as a residential single-family house.
You've seen what the property, what the structure looks like.
It's not conducive to a house.
Nobody can live there.
So we do need to have this variance so that we can proceed with operating this spot for auto sales.
I can bring in my client
Shafran Roffman
why don't you bring your client
Mr. Roffman
can you raise your hand so that they can bring you in
they've been allowed to speak sir could you please state your name and spell for the court
they've been allowed to speak
sir could
stenographer good afternoon mr chairman my name is shafwan rahman s-h-a-f-w-a-n rahman r-a-h-m-a-n
right you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes sir i swear please proceed counsel thank you mr rahman uh have you heard my presentation to
the board? Yes, I have. Do you agree with it? Yes, I do. Would you adopt it as your own testimony
if you were testifying? Yes, sir. What days of the week would you be operating? This would be
Monday to Saturday, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., and Sunday would be closed. And would you be having any
employees over there? Yes, we plan on having employees once the business is established and
opened up. How many? We plan to have three to four employees. From the neighborhood? From the
neighborhood, yes. Understood. And could you briefly tell the board what kind of experience
you have in the auto sales business? Yes, so I'm a used auto wholesaler all over the country of
the United States, based out of Atlanta, Georgia. I live in Philadelphia, so I like to do my business
into a retail business for car sales,
and particularly in this location, 6812 Ogons Avenue.
Understood.
Now, we've had our meeting with the RCO.
They've raised the issues of community involvement
as well as the lighting and security.
You're willing to put up the fence.
You're willing to provide the appropriate lighting
to safeguard the neighborhood, the block, and your merchandise,
the cars. And you certainly want to be involved in the community. Is there anything else that was
raised at the meeting that you're willing to address? I believe the pedestrian walkway was
one of the main concerns, which we took care of immediately. There's a lot of elderly people in
the area that had a very hard time getting to the bus stop. We made sure that sidewalk is
completely clear at all times. And those vehicles, they were not yours, correct?
They were not mine.
They were your neighbors?
They were neighbors and other people on the block.
There's a multiple, you know, it's a lot of auto industry involved in that area.
And in fact, the whole block is zoned as residential, but yet nobody lives on that block.
Yeah, that entire, according to Philadelphia Atlas, that entire section is zoned as residential, but it's all commercial.
And more specifically, commercial as it relates to automotive, right?
Yes. Any other questions for Mr. Rockman of the board?
Mr. Vaccaro, did you attend the RCO meeting?
Yes, personally. We did it by Zoom.
And Mr. Vaccaro, after you made those promises to do what the community asked, they still voted against your proposal?
Yes. In fact, we made those promises during the meeting, and then Mr. Rockman backed it up with the proposal for the fence and the letter. That was after the meeting.
okay thank you questions from the board thank you no mr chairman
ish no chair questions or comments from our attorney um ryan mcsherry no mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes mr chair i have a natalie ramos with their hand raised i've allowed them to speak
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, hello, my name is Natalie Ramos, N-A-T-A-L-Y, Ramos, R-A-M-O-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
No, sorry. I was raising my hand on behalf of another case.
Okay. All right. All right. So we're going to handle this case and your other case we'll get to shortly.
Is there any other hands in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. Alan Ockamson with their hand raised. I've allowed them to speak.
Mr. Ockamson?
I believe he's the landlord.
Alan Nockamson. I am the actual attorney for the property owner core states group.
We have an interest in this. Mr. Nockamson, could you, just for the record, spell your name?
Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What do you have your client with you or are you going to do the testimony, Mr.
Nockmson?
So I have my client's property manager, Adam Rocco.
So he should be in the virtual audience.
OK, Mr. Rocco.
And while he's he's getting promoted as a panelist, Mr.
Chair, I would say that, you know, and again, I guess I can't share my screen, but if you
If you look at the letter that I have from the community group, there were 21 people in favor of this proposal from the community itself.
The vote was 7 to 11 against the project by the executive committee, but 21 people were actually in support of this project, all 21.
And my understanding is Mr. Baccaro also provided the board a petition of surrounding property owners who are supportive of this project.
But is Mr. Rocco, is he in the virtual audience?
I'm here. Can you hear me?
And Mr. Rocco, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Adam Rocco, A-D-A-N-R-O-C-C-O.
um do you swear or affirm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
i do mr knockamson please proceed oh yes uh mr rocco what's your affiliation to this property
i'm the property manager okay um and and can you describe the building structure that's situated
on the property? Sure. It's about a 500 square foot office that's on a lot, you know, a big
parking lot of approximately 4,700 square feet. Is there a kitchen in this building structure?
There is not. Is it suitable to be habitable as a residential property? No.
all right thank you no problem sad your testimony mr knockamson yes so our testimony is the fact
that given its large size of the lot of over 4 700 square feet it's a regular shaped lot
it's property history as well as as an automobile dealership as well as the fact that there's no
functioning kitchen in this 500 square foot building structure we believe there are grounds
for the variants. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon. This is Meg Kavanaugh for Planning Commission staff.
My name is spelled M-E-G-C-A-V-A-N-A-G-H. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed. The comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning at this location. However,
this building was constructed as a gas station or repair facility and has a long-standing use
for personal vehicle sales. As such, the applicant has a demonstrated hardship and the proposal is
the minimum necessary variance. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Zoning Board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2023-006-173-6812 Oconeys Avenue. I vote yes with proviso.
Temporary variance to expire 5-6-27. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. What was that date again, Mr. Chairman?
5-6-27
Thank you
We're going to go to number 6
MI-2023
007-282
67 West Queen Lane
Rachel Pritzker
Is the attorney
Let's see here
It's a letter of
non-opposition from Solo Germantown
and there's a letter of support
from Faith CDC.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Would you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L
Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R.
Swear affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client
and relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is
prince without a crown llc um and i have the owner mitchell ellman here as well as the tenant
uh calvin harris and our vice chair has a few questions for you
ish yeah if i had to reset um good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the read another
refusal or stipulate to its accuracy um no just because there's a slight uh issue on the refusal
just clerical um the property zone rsa3 however when uh the use refusal is mentioned it states
are say five just in the descriptor so it's almost accurate but i just want to make sure i put that
on the record understood um have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is
needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes thank you council
please proceed and share your screen thank you okay
can the board see my screen we can okay so this is 69 67-69 west queen lane
it is a large existing warehouse as you can see on the corner of west queen lane and green street
i'm just going to bring up the refusal as mentioned the property is zoned rsa3
This project generated one refusal for use for wholesale sales and distribution and limited industrial in an existing structure.
As you can note from the bottom of the refusal, a variance was granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment back in September 10th of 1980 for wholesale and retail sales, floor coverings, drapes, and other decorative items.
I just want to also show the CO that the property has had since 1981 for this specific use.
I'm going to go through just the hardship in a minute.
As you can see, this property is a longstanding existing warehouse, although the base zoning has changed to RSA 3.
It has been a warehouse and use for retail sales, wholesale and floor coverings and drapes since 1980.
And basically, we're proposing the same use, but just updating the zoning and use classification to wholesale sales and distribution and limited industrial as the prior variance was too specific, stating retail sales of floor coverings and drapes.
This is obviously the least modification of the code possible, and this is going to support a
well-known Black-owned business in the neighborhood for the packaging, fulfillment, and distribution
of cosmetic products. So basically the same or similar use has been there since the 80s, but
we're not doing drapes and floor coverings. So we are just doing the updated code version of
wholesale sales and distribution and limited industrial. As far as our hardship is concerned,
although the property zoned RSA3, it's been an existing warehouse since at least the 1980s.
In order to comply with the code, we would have to demolish the structure, subdivide the lots and
build single family homes here or have one single family home in this warehouse that has existed as
a warehouse with warehouse uses, so really unsuitable for RSA 3. As mentioned by the
chairman, we met with Faith Community RCO several times, both on March 5th and also on, I believe,
May 15th. We did receive a letter from them, which the board received with a letter of
support from them. I believe that it was seven votes in support, three in opposition, and they
issued us a letter of support. And as mentioned, I believe the other RCO that participated solo
at Germantown sent a letter of non-opposition. Just so the board has it, I wanted to just show
a quick version of sort of the floor plans, but mostly the interior of this so that the board
can see, it is just an empty warehouse. Sorry, we're upside down here. It's just an empty warehouse.
And again, just looking to wholesale sales distribution and limited industrial.
I wanted to get my client on if possible.
Is there a Mitchell Ellman in the virtual audience?
Yes, they have been allowed to speak.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Just please confirm if you can hear me.
So state your name and spell it for the court stenographer, sir.
State your name and spell it for the court stenographer, sir.
Mitchell Ellman, M-I-T-C-H-E-L-L-E-L-M-A-N-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
We affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Mitchell, have you heard my testimony today? Do you believe it to be true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
yes thank you um chairman i'm happy to answer a question i do want to allow for calvin harris who
is the tenant um an opportunity to speak if he would like to um let's bring him on now great
they've been about to speak why could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer
good afternoon guys this is calvin harris uh c-a-l-v-i-n last name harris h-a-r-r-i-s
you swear or affirm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please please proceed counsel calvin i just wanted to give you an opportunity to speak
if you wanted to um i just want the board to be aware that you know this is really what the city
is all about and supporting the expansion of a Black-owned business in a neighborhood.
And I just want to give you an opportunity to speak if you'd like to.
Yes, absolutely.
And I appreciate that opportunity and a good afternoon to all.
So Yudane Cultural Solutions, this is a company that was established 22 years ago in the heart
of Germantown Avenue.
Our first location in Germantown was 23 years ago on 5532 Green Street.
We were there for 11 years, and then we were right on the corner of Shelton Avenue for the remaining 12 years.
So we've been a staple in the community for quite some time.
Our mission isn't just doing business.
We have worked with many reputable state reps and city councils such as Sidney Bass.
We've worked with Fox News.
We've worked with Germantown Friends School where we've always offered the opportunity to give out free cosmetics that were chemical free, helping to promote health and awareness in our community, especially Germantown, giving so much support to the company and to the brand.
We also give the opportunity for a lot of the minorities in that area to have jobs and employment.
For those who were not able to find employment, we've always offered that opportunity of employment.
We've also worked with the Covenant House over there in Germantown, and we've always given them opportunities for the children that come there in the Covenant House in Germantown to have an opportunity to work with our company.
We always extend ourselves with employment to them. So it's really good networking with the people in that community.
We are also known for the distribution of natural hair and skin care. Just want to make sure that I put that out there.
We're a chemical free company. We do not condone the use of chemicals, which is hazardous to the community or to the residents in that area.
We're fairly known for that. And our mission is greater than just a financial mission. It's more so of a mission to ignite awareness in natural hair and skincare usage because we've had family members within our families that were affected by different things like cancer, breast cancer, because of the use of chemical-based cosmetics that was being used under their arms for women.
so we fight against those things and we really try to create awareness in our community so
we love being in germantown we love working with the community we've always been community
activists we've always been people who dedicate ourselves to being a humanitarian a company that
practices humanitarianism more than just you know making sales you know from a local retail store
it's more than that for us and in regards of like this warehouse the warehouse use is
definitely just for the packaging and the supplies as well as letting people come in and take tours
and see what type of cosmetics we have we um give out free cosmetics from the warehouse is is our
is our mission to give out free cosmetics from the warehouse uh every quarter of the year this
is something that we do and we also stage events in philadelphia as well to give out free cosmetics
to the community of philadelphia as well thank you calvin chairman i'm happy to take any questions
that the board may have so uh council before i go to the board um are you comfortable with the solo
german towns provisos i don't know what the solo german towns provisos are chairman to be honest
so it said yeah it says interior trash storage hours of operation monday through friday 9a to 6p
We never discussed hours of operation, so no.
we never discussed hours of operation so no okay close
Closed Saturday and Sunday.
We didn't discuss any of that either.
And temporary variance.
Three to five years.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
lebaron are you on
i am yes no questions questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um just uh two quick things um miss pritzker mitchell ellman was a representative of the
owning entity is that correct correct yes owner okay thank you and then um you noted that the
refusal incorrectly states the zoning district as rsa5 instead of rsa3 just in just in the um
in where they talk about the the use refusal not on the top of the document the top of the
document is correct yes no i just wanted to note that because it is known to rsa3 there they
probably missed your refusal for parking um but that is included if the board grants today so i
I just wanted to put that out there for the record.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I believe the council office is also in the audience.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Charles Richardson, as the hand raised, I'll allow them to speak, sir.
Sir Richardson, I think I swore you earlier this morning, if I remember, am I correct?
You did, Mr. Chick.
Just state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Certainly.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, room 508 City Hall.
Please proceed.
The Councilwoman has no objection to granting this variance.
Jardine is a longstanding and much respected business within the Germantown community.
And we support, we do not support any of the provisos that have been offered up by Solo, unless you want to do something with regard to interior trash storage. But other than that, the rest of them really are erroneous.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson, as usual. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Deneen Brockington with their hand raised. I've allowed them to speak, sir.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Deneen Brockington. It's D as in David, E-N-E-E-N-E, Brockington, B as in boy, R-O-C-K-I-N-G-T-O-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am a neighbor.
Please proceed.
But I'm also the chair of the Penn Knox Neighborhood Association, which is the RCO in which this business is in the boundaries of.
And while we weren't coordinating RCO and we did not send an official letter,
I did want to go on record in saying that, yes, we agree that Yadin is a very responsible business to the community and asset.
However, based on the provisos that were submitted by Faith Community Development from the community meetings that happened, I do want to say that we are in support of this with the provisos that were submitted in that letter.
We agree with what was submitted by Faith Community CDC.
Okay. Thank you for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the first audience?
Yes. Joseph Bray, I have allowed them to speak.
Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Joseph.
Please proceed with your name and spell it for the stenographer.
Sure. My name is Joseph Bray. Last name is B as in boy, R as in Robert, A-Y. First name Joseph, J-O-S-E-P-H.
I'm an adjacent neighbor at 58 West Queen Lane.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, yes.
Please proceed, Mr. Bray.
I'm speaking today because there was no mention in the provisos that were discussed in the multiple RCO meetings.
In the letter that was referenced from Faith-Based Community RCO, it was mentioned on this call that the Faith-Based RCO, Faith Community RCO meeting noted that there were seven individuals.
in favor. However, having participated in this call and as the PennNOx RCO met
However, having participated in this call, and as the Penn Knox RCO Met referenced, there were, of those seven that were in favor, approximately five of those people had provisions, and those provisions were put forward by SOLO.
However, it appears, for what was just described there, that the faith-based community RCO letter was put forward, not mentioning those provisions.
So the community is in favor, albeit there are some who are not, with provisions.
And it's worrisome that the faith-based community RCO put forward a letter of recommendation, not mentioning the provisions, and SOLO had to submit that on our behalf.
So let me interject here. Sorry, this is Hillary, our board counsel. Faith CDC did send some provisos in their letter. However, they were not enforceable provisos. That's why they were not listed.
The provisos that were listed from Solo Germantown's letter, there was a number of them listed there.
Only the ones that were enforceable were mentioned by the chair.
So if the CDC did send a letter with provisos, it's just that they were not enforceable.
Is it enforceable to when a landlord is completely operating in a manner in which it does not consider the community or take into consideration code?
If there are code violations, those are enforced by the appropriate agency, not the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Okay, so there were no – the provisions that were put forth by SOLO were the same – should have been the same provisions that were put forth by the faith-based community RCO.
The lists were similar, but there were more for SOLO Germantown.
okay would it be appropriate that they were mentioned or who were no because it was presented
here is that there that there were none put forward and that there was a resounding seven
approvals which was not what occurred on the call and there are other individuals who are adjacent
neighbors on this call that can agree with that statement i'll be we agree that yadane is a good
member of the community and having them in that space is good for the community. However,
provisions and considerations of the community is what the neighbors are looking for,
given the significant investment in this residential community in the last number of
years, including real estate transactions in excess of $4 million adjacent to this property.
So it is a very much a live and well residential community.
Mr. Bray, there are not many streets in this block.
Mr. Bray, Mr. Bray, we understand your comments.
We do not believe what faith CDC put forward was enforceable.
And we're going to move on to see if there's anyone else in the audience has comments.
But thank you for taking the time to call us.
Other comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Pamela, Bracey, I have allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Pamela Bracey, P-A-M-E-L-A, Bracey, B as in boy, R-A-C-E-Y.
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I'm not a near neighbor, but I am a neighbor.
Can you please put your address on the record, ma'am?
My address?
Yeah, I'm in 5,000 block of Green Street.
Okay, Ms. Bracey, are you in favor of this project or against the project?
I'm a member of SOLO, so I stand with what SOLO had to say.
But I do recall at the two meetings that were held, hours were discussed.
And Mr. Harris also mentioned that his employees had been threatened somehow.
Now, I don't know what that was about, but he did mention that and we were concerned that everything we may discuss this on the RCO hearing.
I did not interrupt you, Ms. Pritzer. I did not interrupt.
Listen, listen to me. Listen to me. So we understand what you're saying.
And I hear Ms. Pritzker say that that was discussed, but we appreciate the information and we're going to move on to the next person.
okay? Thank you. Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience again?
Yes, I have Allison Weiss with the hand raised. I have allowed them to wait there. I'll put their
hand in. I'm Ms. Weiss. Could you please state your name? No, sorry. They must put their hand up
by mistake there. I'll just put it down. Allison, okay, thank you. Anyone else? How many hands do
have jason i've raised five yes okay calvin calvin who's my uh who's the tenant i don't need
Okay. Thank you. Calvin, Calvin, who's my, uh, who's the tenant. I don't need, he does. Calvin, you don't need to respond to this. Let the board handle. It's okay.
Give me the next, next person, Jason.
Tanya Mack has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello, my name is Tanya Mack. That's T-O-N-Y-A-M-A-C-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes. I come from the area of 65 Maplewood Mall, Philadelphia, PA. I have been-
Hold on one minute. Are you in favor of this project or against the project?
Against.
Okay. Thank you. Is there anything that you could offer other than what's already been said?
um i just want to say yadane has been amazing for years i'm a long lasting i'm sorry i meant
to say in favor i am in favor okay all right thank you i'm sorry about that no that's okay
i just want to say um i have supported them for years they have also supported the community
um as well it's been nothing but positivity with dealing with them and working with them
hand in hand um they've always any issues we've had they have always contributed to our local
fundraisers community as well all right thank you very much for taking the time to call in we
we will keep your comments and note next hand yes mr chair a regina holloway i have allowed
them to speak hi could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
Sure. Regina, R-E-G-I-N-A, last name Holloway, H-O-L-L-O-W-A-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
I am. 56 West Queen Lane, right across the street.
Okay. Are you in favor of this project or against?
I'm against.
Okay. Is there anything that you could offer that's not already been said?
I think there's a question that maybe doesn't need to be answered, but I actually think it needs to be said. We're talking a lot about Yadin. I don't think there's a question here that they are a great member of the community. What I haven't heard, and I'm curious about, is the owner. Does the owner live in Germantown? Does the owner live in the city of Philadelphia? Is the owner a part of this community?
Okay, so listen, listen to me, listen to me. I don't think that there are appropriate zoning questions. We will take note that you are against the project. Next hand, please.
Excuse me, Chair. I don't mean to interrupt, but I just want the public audience to be mindful that you're here for testimony, not to ask questions.
I got it. I got it. Thank you. Thank you, Fatina. Next hand, please.
um allison weiss has their hand up i haven't got them to speak
hi miss weiss please state your name and spell for the court sonographer
allison a double l i s o n weiss w e i s s solo germantown civic association
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes miss weiss we have a letter that you reported you're in non-opposition to this project and you
listed some provisors. Am I correct? That's correct. Hold on. Is there anything else you
could add? Yes. I wanted to add that while this business is a very good business, a neighborhood
business, which we appreciate and support, the concern is and was at the meeting expressed
that the category was very broad and once this lease is expired there could be another
business or even this could be divided into other
businesses in this very large warehouse that the use be limited
And that is the concern. The concern is not this business, it's future businesses, and how this category could be used without community input in the future.
So we would like the description to be limited to packaging and repackaging of cosmetics, and we would like it to run for the term of the lease.
thank you very much
thank you very much
Mrs. Weiss
is there anyone else
no further hands Mr. Chair
Chairman if I can just
provide a
point of information
it's a 10 year lease
which is why we don't want a temporary proviso
which is why we don't want a temporary proviso and if you review the definition of uh wholesale
and if you review
the definition
sales and distribution it and limited industrial it's pretty defined in the code um so that's why
we were not agreeing to further specification thank you thank you uh uh planning commission
hi meg cavanaugh for planning commission staff the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the existing residential single-family zoning.
However, the proposed use of wholesale sales
and distribution and limited industrial
is consistent with documented prior use of this property.
The City Planning Commission recommends
that the zoning board grant the use variance.
Thank you.
MI 2023-007-282-67 West Queen Lane.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
Okay, let's go. So let's go to number one. MI 2023-006-111-2100 South 61st Street. Joseph Consul is the attorney.
there's a letter of opposition
from a neighbor along with a petition
in opposition signed by 31
neighbors
no RCO letter that we have as of yet
but there was a meeting
May 24th, 2024
Mr. Consul and also I see there
you have agreed with the RCA
to hold the vote
on this am I correct?
Okay. All right. Mr. Consul, could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
Yeah, it's Joseph Consul. That's J-O-S-E-P-H-C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Yeah, my client is John Lynn, who should be on the call. The owner of the property is Z's
Investments, LLC. He is John Lynn of JB Auto Works, and he's the tenant that is seeking to
occupy the property. Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Do you agree to waive the written of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Accepting the RCO letter, which I'll touch on in a second. Yes.
understood please proceed in shins okay
all right that should be my appeals packet
yep okay joe consul here 2100 south 61st street uh we're here today seeking approval to use
a property that's owned ICMX as commercial vehicle sales and rental, personal vehicle sales and
rental, personal vehicle repair and maintenance, and commercial vehicle repair and maintenance,
and vehicle paint finishing shop. Some of our requests are refusals, and some of our requests
are special exceptions as laid out on the refusal that is in front of you, refusal and refusal.
What is germane about this property, between the 1930s and 1981, it was a variety of different
uses, machine shop, parts, storage, all kinds of sort of disparate uses. However, starting in 1981,
and continuing through the present, the only use that it's ever had approved,
and it's been approved at least five times, is for auto repair, painting, and body works.
So it's a very deep history, history as old as I am, of using this particular space as an auto spot
in every possible kind of configuration,
repair, paint, sales, storage.
And so it's all available in the archive.
Just scroll through it now quickly.
But again, starting in 81, we're going through 91 now.
Here's a spray booth approval.
and two. So over and over again, this property was approved for what we are seeking approval
for today. And in fact, the property was
And in fact, the property was even approved in 2022 for the uses that we're seeking today.
However, there were some issues between the then tenant and the owner and the RCO and the council people, which resulted in litigation that did not ever go anywhere, but eventually ended up with this being dismissed as a zoning permit.
But it was, in fact, issued at one point.
Now, fast forward to today, my client is John Lynn from JB Auto Works. He has one location at 5929 Woodland Avenue called JB Motor Works. He's got 246 positive reviews, and he's seeking to open a space at 2100 South 61st Street.
Now, we spoke about the RCO situation. We met with the RCO on the 20th of May.
We dealt with several RCOs, including Craig Meldosian. And at that time, there were different groups with kind of different ideas.
And we've been, since we actually applied, trying to please as many people as we could, because as we understand it, there was some neglect on this property during the period that it was not operating as anything.
And so my client, at great expense to himself, has invested time and money to rehabilitate the property and clean the space up.
And so where we came to, and I'll get there in a second with the RCO is we have made a series of promises, some that we've already completed and some that we're going to complete that will make us the best neighbors possible in this space.
There doesn't seem to be any desire for an industrial use by anyone here, but we understand that there is some bad blood with using this property or attempting to use this property as an auto repair shop.
I couldn't exactly figure out what it was, what the opposition really is, or what that was about.
But we are trying, and my client is desperately trying, to get everything in line in terms of pleasing everyone here.
So that being said, we believe that a hear and hold makes sense because we, and I'll show you in a second,
have an agreement that we are circulating with the RCOs that will kind of lay out what we're
willing to do here in order to hopefully appease them. So, you know, to that end, here's some
photos just to show you what the property looks like. I mean, it's a garage. There's really
no other way to describe it. We submitted plans showing the layout of the property.
I'll show you the interior photos in a second, but the plans of the layout of the property just kind of indicate that there is a big backyard, and that backyard was full of junk at one point, and we understand that that was problematic for the community, and we agree that was problematic for the community.
And part of what my client has done, again, to great expense, is to clean that up. We'll show you how that's looking now. Again, here's the exterior on the front.
exterior in the front. Now we're moving into the backyard. You can see that they've
cleared a lot of it. I mean, he's probably at 85% of the junk that was there. Again,
nothing to do with him prior to his tenancy, but part of his agreement with the RCO is to clean
this yard up. You can see that he's basically cleared the yard up. He's got some stuff that,
by the building itself that he's in the process of getting rid of, but it's a very expensive
project. Here's the interior. These are the paint spray booths. One of the things we've agreed to
is to, of course, get these certified prior to my client being allowed to actually use them.
There's a process that the city has in order to certify that they're safe and operating correctly
and not omitting anything that would be harmful to anyone in the shop or outside of the shop in
the neighborhood. And then there's another photo of the interior. You can see the spray
booth. We also included other required forms. We have a lease. My client signed a 10-year
lease. Perhaps that was a little bit of jumping the gun. We understand that. But he really
he really wants to operate in this space and we're hopeful that based on the history of it
wants to operate in this space. And we're hopeful that based on the history of it and
and working with the rcos we can we can get there uh the agreement that we're coming to
worked.
and again this is nothing uh official yet but it just kind of lays out the issues that the rco was
having uh spray booth needs to be approved um we're willing to limit the size of the vehicles
that get worked on in in the property removing the jolt from the yard removing uh there was a
neighbor that was storing his dogs in the yard. So it was kind of like junkyard dogs. Those have
been removed. Again, not my client. That was a neighbor that my client had to sort of facilitate
having that happen. Hours of operation were agreeing to what we believe is a reasonable
set of hours of operation. And again, I'm sure Craig will come on in a second, Craig Moldozian,
But we're hoping that some of these can be made for visors and the rest we can come up with, you know, deal with the neighborhood with, enter the safe camp program, get rid of the junkyard license, which my client has already done.
We've there was a junkyard license on the property, which, you know, there was a lot of junk, but it's cleared out.
We surrendered the license on behalf of everyone, so there's no longer the ability to store junk cars there, and the client's agreeing to not pull a junkyard license if he's allowed to operate there.
Complied with the Planning Commission, the layout that we showed you, the plans are for landscaping.
The RCO and the neighbors really want adequate landscaping that will create physical barriers to, you know, the neighbors that are adjacent to it to see any kind of, you know, things going on in the yard.
And that's sort of it from those items.
i don't know if it makes sense to call my client or uh or craig first or or what if he can adopt
my testimony but you know i'm anticipating having to hold this for you know three weeks uh in order
to come to some kind of uh final agreement with everyone here hillary do we want to bring his
client on to adopt what he said now do we want to wait until changes are made i would have the
client come on now and adopt what the remarks you've made so far thank you what's your client's
name uh that should be john lynn okay mr lynn they've been allowed to speak good afternoon sir
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
mr lynn
Mr. John Lynn, please unmute yourself.
You just muted yourself.
Mr. Lynn.
Okay, so at this point, Mr. Consul, we're apparently having a hard time getting him on.
We'll accept your testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Just briefly regarding having a resumption hearing in this matter, I understand that
it's about three to four weeks requested.
I would suggest that the parties reach out to the ZBA staff to let them know once you've reached an agreement, and then they can reschedule you for a resumption hearing at that time.
Based on the negotiations, I'm hesitant to suggest a date at this point, you know, given that there's still ongoing discussions.
I understand.
Hillary, do we want to open this up to the virtual audience, or do we just want to bring Craig on?
We can open it up to the virtual audience in case someone is not able to attend.
Attending today was not able to attend the resumption hearing.
But we will take, you know, additional, any additional public comments at the resumption hearing,
just along with updates from the applicant and the RCO.
Why should there be comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have a handout from Craig Megadosian.
I've allowed them to speak.
Craig, just state your name and spell for the court sonographer, please.
Craig, C-R-A-I-G, last name Melidosian, M-E-L-I-D-O-S-I-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair Bergman.
I do, Chair Bergman.
Please proceed.
What I wanted to indicate was this has been a long contentious matter here dating back to 2016 with multiple episodes before the board and in and out of common police court.
with the property being vacant during that period of time.
We'd like to try to create a positive structured relationship
between the owner, the lessor, the lessee, and the community.
We did not reach a decision at our community meeting.
There was a split with the RCOs
because we do take into consideration
what we would consider real concerns of the community.
That's one reason why there's no letter here at that time.
We did receive from Mr. Counsel material for us to consider,
which we've distributed to the RCOs and to the council president's office,
as well as to several of the people that we believed were in opposition
and leading the opposition so that we could get broad-based input.
it. The other concern that we have is so that we don't have a repeat of the prior Queen Lane issue
where people thought that they had an agreement. We're looking to clearly define what issues that
have been raised in the document will be proviso issues, and then the other issues we'll work to
move aside to a separate memorandum of agreement that would obviously not be part of this.
That's why we're asking for the resumption hearing to give everyone in the community an opportunity to read the document, put in, weigh their input, and then come before you.
And maybe I shouldn't say this. We also consider the position of the council president. This is unique, and we'd rather not have two contentious groups of individuals petitioning the council president for support one way or another.
We'd like to come to an amicable conclusion for this project if it's reachable.
I will point out that we've had a junkyard operating there, clearly not in compliance with the applicable code for multiple reasons.
And both the owner and the tenant agreed to surrender it, evidenced us with proof of it, which enabled us to move on with the landscaping plan.
And this does butt up immediately adjacent to a block of RSA 5 houses.
So we're also seeking relief for them by cleaning up this operation rather than having it linger as it currently is.
Therefore, we're asking for the resumption, your consideration in the resumption hearing.
And I appreciate it.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Craig.
We appreciate it.
Mr. Chair, can I just interject, well, Mr. Melodosian, Mr. Consul here.
I know you wanted clarification on what could be considered provisos and what was not enforceable as provisos.
When you have a pretty close draft of your agreement, just send it to me and I will take a look and give you feedback.
on that so that you're clear you know what what the board can enforce and what they cannot so
thank you i believe you're confident on that already and in my opinion that's pretty close
i don't know if craig agrees with me or not again okay well what craig why don't um after you've
taken a look at it if you don't have any significant changes let me know and i just
want to review as close
as possible to the final
one so that my information to you
is accurate. Thank you.
That's fine. We agree.
I just want to make sure that the near
neighbors who are in opposition
fully have an opportunity to review
the material and also felt it was important
Mr. Counsel have an opportunity
to see the material that was
submitted that's in opposition.
I don't think that's happened.
I just want everyone to feel that they've been
treated fairly, regardless of the final outcome of this project. Thank you. Thank you, Craig.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair. Meg, does Planning Commission want to take a
position now or wait to see what the final agreement is? I think our preference is to
wait until the final agreement. Okay. All right. So we'll wait to hear how they, how it went.
We will then let the RCO and council respond, take it back to the public audience and then
And then have planning and then we'll vote. Other than that, it's closed. How's that sound, Ellery?
have planning and then we'll vote. Other than that, it's closed. How's that sound, Ellery?
Yeah, that's fine. And we can leave the record open, Mr. Chair, for any additional letters.
But yes, we'll just have kind of follow up updates from the applicant, the RCO, City Council, and Public and Planning Commission. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Council.
Thank you.
Okay. Number three, MI 2023, 006951, 3521 North 21st Street.
Ron Anastasio is the attorney. No RCO letter or summary, but notice was given to nearby neighbors and proof of a mailing attached.
There was a meeting held March 19th.
I'll be coming back in as a panelist.
mr anastasio you've been sworn you've yes a few cases today could you just state your
name for the record yes good afternoon mr chair verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o
on behalf of bk partners the owners of the property in question and our vice chair has
a few questions thank you
good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards
accuracy i do have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that is needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes sir thank you counsel please
for seeing and share your screen. Thank you. I first wanted to share the Allegheny West Civic
Association and RCO letter that came over just recently. It is, in fact, Allegheny West Civic
Association of Philadelphia stands in support of this variance. This is the last paragraph of the
letter to you and encourages you to support the wishes of our community and our RCO process.
So just make sure you send a copy over to Hillary.
I have, and I will make sure that it was received.
But I want to move this into evidence.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
And it's outside the exhibit binder because it came late.
So I just.
okay this is the property in question right here that's in the highlight as you can see large
vacant lot across the street and of course immediately next door but this property is
was has been um a multi-family dwelling for many years
my clients purchased this property less than a year ago
and this was this is the mls listing here
3521 five unit apartment building as my cursor is right on there and here was a
Page 39 of the exhibit binder.
By the way, it's an 86-page exhibit binder.
Also, this five-unit apartment building.
As you can see, two studio apartments, three spacious one-bedroom apartments.
And that's what my client saw.
My client put money down on the property.
He went to closing only to find out.
Oh boy. Let me stop sharing for a moment. I just went blank for some reason.
Only to find out that the property was zoned for single family residential.
So blank. Yeah. The images are not coming up now for some reason.
I ask you to just bear with me for a moment, please.
I'm sorry.
Okay, sure.
and why don't we do this why don't we come back let me take another case or so and then i'll call
you as soon as i'm done okay i think i'm okay now honestly okay all right let's see if not then i
if not then i agree no no no no i agree we're fine okay there you go all right cool
agree. No, no, no, no. I agree. We're fine.
technology is great until it doesn't work right uh anyway so they're i'm submitting the refusal
and the photos of the property as well as the uh proof of mailing it's zoned rsa5 it's we put in
to legalize the existing, pre-existing five-family household living.
I've shown you the ML listing, two of them.
And I also want to show you, which I think is important,
I'll keep and see.
At one point, this property was part of a larger set of properties
for a total of 106 apartments for seniors.
So there's a very long history.
of multifamily dwelling, not only in this particular structure as a five-family dwelling,
but also as part of this property and others attached to it for a larger 106 apartments
on that block. And I'm submitting all of that into evidence. As I said, I have an 86-page
exhibit packet. I think that's probably why it went blank for a little bit.
I'm going to briefly show you the plans.
Obviously, to reconvert this or reconfigure this to a single family dwelling would lay waste to the property.
But here's the foundation unit right here.
The first floor unit.
As you can see, they're very ample in size.
It's a very large property.
second floor studio front and rear
the third floor unit
this is the elevation
this is the letter that was mailed these are all the addresses that
the letter was mailed to and here's the certified proof of
100, over 100 households, 106 households were mailed the letter. We have the proof of posting
as well. As I've already shared with you, the Allegheny West Civic Association and RCO met
with us. They're in full support to legalize what's there. And here's the deed as well that
I submit to show that they literally 11 months ago, or less actually, purchased the property.
here's some shots of the block so as you can see there's a little bit too many vacancy
vacant lots on the block
this is the property itself
here's some rear rear inside
is the adjacent property also multiple family um hold on for one second i have that
it is thank you yep don't know if it was legalized or if it's up it's as many as ours
but it is uh and uh there is proof of uh six electric meters that again preceded my client's
ownership of the property this is interior photos
and as you can see at some point it was in fact even you know occupied so um my client had every
reason to believe and reasonably rely on the ml listing and the presentation uh by those who sold
it. So with that, I'm going to ask Mr. Kyle Easley to raise his virtual hand.
I have a hand up by Ibrahim Murray.
Ibrahim will do just fine. Thank you.
Sir, could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
Yes, Kyle Easley. K-Y-L-E, last name E-A-S-L-E-Y.
Swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth
Yes, sir
Proceed, counsel
Thank you
Sir, can you, did you hear my presentation to the board this afternoon?
Yes, I did
Okay, and is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you, I have nothing further
he's the owner of the yes he's one of yeah there's a it's a it's a partnership
He's the owner of the
Yes, he's one of, yeah, it's a partnership
both kyle easily and brahim murray are bk partners all right thank you all right
questions from the board no mr chairman
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes i have a hand up from charles richardson he has been about to speak
mr richardson you've we've had you several times they just state your name please
certainly charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall
the councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance thank you very much uh anyone else
in the first audience yes i have a hand up from adrian fernandez i will allow them to speak okay
hi adrian you've already been sworn just state your name please for the record
uh yes adrian fernandez right please proceed okay um i sent a letter in for
to support the provisos um if i can just put the provisos on the record
The first is requesting a limit of three units, one because of our overlay, which focuses on preservation, and also we have tremendous problems with litter, trash, and pet waste from multifamily variances, multifamily properties.
um the remaining four provisos are trash and recycling to be stored indoors no commercial
trash pickup no basement living and no rooftop deck occupancies just mechanical use only
thank you anyone else in the anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning planning commission
hello meg kavanoff for planning commission staff the comprehensive plan recommends no change the
existing residential single family zoning at this location structural elements claims as hardship
appear to be recently constructed and self-created and there is not clear evidence of long-standing
multi-family use at this location however there is evidence of multi-family use in the vicinity
but not up to five units the city planning commission recommends the zoning board grant
the variance with proviso, limit number of units to three. Excuse me, Chair. I don't mean to
interrupt, but I see Ron Bednar's hand up. I'm not sure if he wanted to testify or he has something
to do with the property or if it was an error. Sure not. It's okay, Ron.
Ron. This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
do you want to testify on this one ron um no i'm gonna pass okay thank you very much ron we
appreciate it okay all right so number three mi 2023 006 951 3521 north 21st street i vote yes
proviso trash stored inside thomas holloman my vote is yes with proviso
So, Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with ProValue Zone.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
All right.
So, number five, MI 2023-007-096, 743 North Capitol Street.
Alan Nockmson is the attorney.
there's a recommendation of support
from the United Francisville
Civic Association
23 to 8
Nockamson
Good afternoon Mr. Chair, members of the board
Alan Nockamson
Mr. Nockamson I always swore you in
could you identify your client, the relationship to this property, please? Yes, Deco Collective
is the equitable owner of the property by way of an agreement of sale, and in the virtual audience
is one of its members, Jonathan Silva. And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Counsel, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
i do have you email required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing oh yes we have thank you council please proceed and share
all right so um
All right. So we're here to present 743 Capitol Street. This property is in the Francisville
section of Philadelphia, actually not too far away from where I live in Fairmont. It's between
20th and Corinthian, just north of Fairmont Avenue. So what we'll look at first is the
original refusal so we had a decent amount of refusals most of them technical in nature but
through a dialogue uh that was created by way of these community meetings um we we eliminated
almost all of the refusals other than the ones that are most necessary uh to the feasibility of
this project and which are not out of character to the neighborhood and the surrounding properties
And we'll review the revised refusal in that respect. Then we'll review the letter of support we received from the United Francisville Civic Association, which memorializes the approval that we received from the community.
and what we're asking for for the remaining refusals not of character to the neighborhood
and you'll see a nearby recently granted variance with regards to lot size which is comparable to
the refusal that we're seeking today then we'll review maps of the area photographs of the property
in the surrounding area we do have the original architectural plans and drawings but then we also
of the revised ones. Our RCO meeting notice for the last community meeting we had along with proof
of mailing of that notice. Our application for appeal that we filed. The deeds of the property
as well as the agreement of sale showing that DECO Collective is the equitable owner of this
property by way of the agreement of sale that's been introduced into the record. And then the
certificates of tax clearance for these two properties at 743 and 747 Capitol Street.
And at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Silva virtually raise his hand,
be sworn in, and I have a few questions for him. So we're taking two lots at one at 743 and one
at 747 North Capitol Street. We're consolidating them and we're reconfiguring it to four single
family homes. And we had several refusals in the beginning. First of which is we have front-loading
garages, which, you know, which would, you know, generate a refusal. It's not of character to have
front-loading garages and off-street parking here. There's actually off-street parking on the
single-family, on these single-family lots. And there was no parking allowed on this street at
all on capital so we're not taking any way away any um on-street parking and someone who lives
nearby you know i i'm appreciative of the fact that we're taking cars um off of the street by
way of this front-loading garages um so that's going to help the parking situation which is in
you know a situation throughout the city of philadelphia including francisville and the
amount areas. The other refusals has to do with the lot size. Oh, by the way, there is an error
in the refusal. The minimum lot size required is not 960 degrees. That was an error. It should be
1,440. There's an exception to the zoning code, which does not apply under these circumstances,
so I just want to note that in the record. But we're proposing 907 square feet of lot size
essentially per lot. Not out of character, the property next door to us was equally subdivided
in a similar fashion. So it's not out of character to have lots of this size in the neighborhood,
and which have been recently approved by the ZBA. The second refusal had to do with the rear yard
setback. Under the code, we were required to provide nine feet where three feet were proposed.
really wasn't it was more of a technical refusal we had a second floor uh we had the deck coming
out of the second floor which was 12 feet uh long we have a really a 15 foot um rear yard setback
from the actual back of the building structure um but because of the deck um that was you know
on the second floor that was considered as a part of the occupied area and not part of this setback
as well but we got we we kind of swapped it out we made the rear yard deck a lot shorter and you'll
see that in our updated drawings but because of how we shortened the rear deck um we had to create
steps which created another technical refusal regarding rear yard setback building height
we were at 41 feet six inches and uh we you know the code requires 38 feet
We were at 41 feet, 6 inches, and, you know, the code requires 38 feet.
We eliminated that refusal.
We reduced the height of the building to 38 feet.
And the roof deck sat back on the front.
We had it 4 feet, 4 inches, where 5 feet was required.
We also got rid of that refusal.
So these are the only – this is the new updated notice of refusal.
We have still the front-loading garages.
Again, not out of character for the neighborhood. There's no parking allowed on that street. And there's parking right off street parking right now for this property. Second refusal has to do with the deck while we shortened the size of the deck from essentially 12 feet to I think it was like three feet.
Because of how the steps are configured and hugs the back of the lot, we have a refusal for those steps.
And then the third refusal still has to do with the lot size.
Again, not out of character based on something the board has reviewed in the past and approved.
And this is our letter.
We will receive authorization to get this updated refusal and thereby amend this zoning appeal.
And that was the authorization letter we received from this board.
And then we had, you know, again, a very good meeting, multiple meetings with the community.
And at the last meeting where a vote was taken, there was overwhelming support for this project.
And then to kind of show this comparison, at 739 North Capitol Street, which is literally next door to us,
you can see that the lot size is 900 square feet, and that was approved by the ZBA by way of this zoning permit here,
where there was two lots that were created, but one existing one with two single families.
so the area again this is fairmont avenue here we're not trying to increase density in the
sense of multi-family we're trying to create single family houses that where people can stay
in the neighborhood have enough you know rooms you know to raise their families like again
i raised my family in fairmont um you know and i think there's an opportunity uh for this type
of housing to encourage more people to stay in in the francisville fairmont area as well as
to move into the francisville fairmont avenue as well
and then photographs of the property as you can see there's off-street parking that's already
allowed for this property so what again not out of character to have continued off-street parking
by way of each of these single family structures these are proof of posting for the two properties
of today's hearing. And then as you can see, this is actually that back of the houses on
Corinthian Street, but essentially all the houses on Corinthian Street use Capitol Street as their
rear access for their garages. And then there's multiple forms of parking here as well on North
Capitol Street on our side, but there's no parking allowed at all on the street here.
So, and then this is the, this is the structure that was approved by the ZBA, where this was
originally one property that was subdivided into two. Allen, they're both single homes too?
Yeah, they're both single homes too. That's right. Exactly the same. We're mimicking
completely the same. I think our architecture is a little bit nicer, but yeah.
So the revised plans are this, right? So in terms of the height, right, we wanted to go higher,
but what we did was a staggered approach this is a little over 30 feet high the the the front
cornice line and then it goes a little bit further back you know where there's a front deck
and that's at this at the roof line is 38 feet we wanted to do 41 feet but the community was
against that and you know we we said fine we're not going to do that um but you can see here it's
a very interesting architectural design staggered to you know most of the people are walking by
they're going to look at this as the front corners line they're probably not even going to see this
area here and again we try to make it well lit we try to activate it as much as possible
in terms of lighting and color palettes the type of bricks we're going to use are like brick screen
for where it is above the actual entryway to provide some light in there. Red brick, just in
general, the traditional Philadelphia red brick. The first floor will be slate tile. And again,
just nice lighting and landscaping as much as possible. And then this is just the example to
And then this is just the example to the interiors that this developer has used in the past.
the interiors that this developer has used in the...
He developed something on Uber Street, which is not far from here, in a similar fashion and turned out very nice as well.
And then you can see here just again the changes to our plans.
Again, we did this by way of, oops, we did this by way of authorization.
So there's no reason to do any provisos.
but the height was changed to 38 feet for the roof line.
The front decks, the setback on the front decks
were changed to five feet, which is as of right.
You can see here too, indication that we changed
the height of the property from 41 feet,
six inches to 38 feet front and back.
you can see also here the front setback we changed from four feet four inches to five feet in the
front you can also see the changes we made in the rear so instead of having a rear deck on the
second floor of 12 feet from the back of the building structure going towards the back of
our property it's more like a three feet a little more than three maybe it's five feet but like it's
enough to put a grill up there and you know we have steps leading down there and this is where
our technical refusal is is our steps how they are you know the turn um technically hugs back
for our property that's where we're dealing with issues with the rear yard setback but that's more
technical alan do you have a rendering of the rear i i do not okay all right i do not okay
so how far does that go back down uh i think it's like five feet if that is everything as
rights like you know and by the way we're the the so our property the rear of our building structure
to the rear to the rear property line is 15 feet so our deck is saying five feet even so that's 10
foot setback okay then the next building structure behind us is eight 18 feet setback so you know so
So we met with the RCO on April 10th and the community on April 10th, 114 addresses were notified of our meeting.
These are the list of the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, our application for appeal.
And then finally, the deed showing that Mr. Weinhart is the owner.
and then our agreement of sale
as well.
And then finally,
our tax clearance certificate for both properties.
So with that being said,
I would ask that Mr. Silva virtually raise his hand.
They've been allowed to speak.
Mr. Silva, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, Jonathan Silva, J-O-N-A-T-H-A-N-S-I-L-V-A.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Silva, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I have a Carolyn Steinberg with their hand raised.
I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
my name is carolyn steinberg c-a-r-o-l-y-n steinberg s-t-e-i-n-b-e-r-g you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor i am yes please
proceed this is 718 north 20th street okay block but my backyard shares a backyard with the block
they are building on okay thank you please proceed um yeah so i have i guess a few points
i'll try to be as concise as possible um as ellen mentioned he did come to our neighborhood at two
meetings the first meeting was in february we were able to do a lot of outreach prior to that
meeting there were 38 attendees and they voted overwhelmingly against the project only found out
Only found out later that it was an unofficial vote, that there had been some miscommunication between the ZBA and the developer.
later that it was an unofficial vote, that there had been some miscommunication between
And so when they sent their second letter, it was identical, as you saw, very small print.
And a lot of people that attended that first meeting as concerned neighbors didn't show up to the second meeting because they thought it was a duplicate notice that they had already voted on.
so they didn't realize that they had to show up a second time to do it on the project.
Also, as a neighbor, I watched this happen directly across the street from me.
I moved in in 2015, and both sides of my block and Capitol Street were all the 1980 workforce
housing homes that are essentially one floor from street level, if you're looking at it from the
outside. And I watched as developers pushed out the existing long-term neighbors on the other
side of my street to build very large condo buildings. And so this attempt to do two single
family homes on a single lot is an end run around the zoning overlay that was put in place
to directly combat this type of development and sort of ignores the fact that continuing to allow
these larger homes to be built directly next to these smaller existing homes severely reduces
the livability of the existing home for the existing occupants while also increasing the
incentive for developers to continue trying to get current residents to leave their homes for
these payouts and then build homes that current residents could not afford. The price point set
is closer to a million dollars, whereas you could buy the existing homes for $4.50.
That is, of course, an inflated COVID price.
And then the other point that I felt important to bring up was the project that got approved
in 2021 was in the height of COVID where we only had virtual online meetings, and it was
a lot more difficult to get neighbors to show up.
It was harder for older neighbors that weren't as good as with technology to join those
meetings.
so that project did pass but it had less involvement from the neighbors um i think
those are my main points i don't want to take too much no no no thank you thank you for your call we
we understand your point of view is there anyone else in the room yeah
why don't we see if there's anyone else okay uh is there anyone else in the virtual audience
no further hands mr chair please proceed alan all right um so my understanding there was no
vote taken at the first meeting instead we asked you know for an opportunity to make additional
changes based on comments from that first meeting and there were i think 36 individuals that
attended the second meeting so it was a well-attended meeting in terms of the effect on
properties on 20th Street, the rear of our building structure, the distance between the
rear of our building structure and the rear of the building structure on 20th Street that's behind
us is 30 feet. We're not trying to push anyone out. And in terms of that project to the right
of us that was approved by the CBA, I believe, because I did look at the letter, I believe there
were like anywhere from I think 15 to 20 people that attended that meeting which was approved by
the community and there were discussions just like ours where you know you you make proposals
you make concessions and you make compromises that the community feels comfortable with and
just like that process we had the same process where we and then we ultimately received
overwhelming support. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you. In 2018, the zoning map was amended from RM1 residential multifamily to RSA5
residential single family with the support of the community. There is no unique physical
circumstance or condition that prevents the property from being used as zoned. The planning
Commission recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variances. Okay. MI 2023-007-096-743
North Capitol Street. I vote yes with proviso per amended refusals dated 5-14-24.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
So, my vote is yes with proviso.
Mr. Nockamson, could you please stay on the air as we say?
on the air, as we say. So, number eight, MI 2024-000806-439-45 West Burke Street.
So, number eight, MI 2024.
Letter of support from NAR Square Community Alliance. Letter of non-opposition from
Council Member Lozada. Applicant also provided, submitted proviso form for MIN overlay,
check procedure with planning.
Form says four affordable units
while plans say five.
We need to hold this for an amended refusal.
It proposes in reductions of affordable units.
So let me address that first.
Well, why don't we do this first?
Why don't we say what your name is first,
just for the record.
Yes, Alan Nockmson.
Right, and then
who's your client in the relationship to the property? ACC Builders LLC. And our vice chair
has a few questions. Thank you. Counselor, do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Oh, well, no, actually I don't. I'm sorry. I don't actually.
One of the refusals is incorrect. So we're in the minimum income neighborhood overlay.
And one of the refusals talks about occupied area where 75% is required.
We're actually, we're allowed to have 85% under that overlay.
So we object to that refusal.
Understood.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, other than this, we do have an email from City Planning regarding this proviso request for the amount of affordable units.
I did not include that in my packet, but I would like to include that as part of my presentation.
And, of course, I'll email it to the board administrator after this hearing.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
And I just wanted to jump in.
And Mr. Johnson, as you probably know, Mr. Goldberg and I were communicating earlier regarding this case.
And so we may need to go about things a little bit differently paperwork-wise and how they were submitted.
But I will work that out with Mr. Goldberg.
No, I appreciate it.
And that's why I didn't include that email because I want to address that because we try to be careful about things and not, you know, especially something, a unique issue like this.
we wanted to make sure that we had all of our ducks in order so hopefully we can have a vote
today obviously i defer to the board and council so yeah i don't yeah i was gonna say i don't i
don't think we can just because i'm not we may need revised plans instead of the form because
we can't stamp them in overlay form that is that is not something the zba does so and that was what
was submitted as the revised plan so we have to you know work we have we have to just figure out
what all can be done with that so we're gonna have to hold the vote today but we'll get it
sorted out quickly okay i i appreciate that all right may i share my screen
all right all right so this this is one of these projects you like you know you would be proud of
Like, you know, this is a really, really, really pretty design, you know, with mass architects.
And it's always this has been a challenge in this neighborhood and in this overlay.
Just as a matter of background, this overlay was created a few years ago where when you have more than 10 units as part of a project,
In fact, 20% of those units have to be affordable and affordable at 40% AMI. So it's always a challenge. But, you know, part of that overlay, they do give you incentives, such as, you know, for density, height, and even lot coverage.
But even with those incentives, it's still almost impossible to develop within this overlay.
So we're asking for a few reasonable variances, and we hope the board will allow that to make this an economically feasible project.
So first, we'll review the notice of refusal.
And then we did get a letter of support from the community group through the Norris Square Community Alliance, as well as a letter of non-opposition from the district council member.
Again, we reached out to city planning, and you'll see what the issue is, but we're asking for 18 units.
You know, we're asking for 18 units. So 20% of 18 is 3.6. You round up to four. None of us are good mathematicians. And so for whatever reason, our architect or the architecture team put down five units by accident. Only four is required in terms of affordable units.
So 20% of 18 is 3.6.
So when we noticed that slight error, we tried to address it, and we want to address it through these proceedings as well, where we're only seeking to provide for affordable units, what's allowed or required of us as a right.
So we did that by way of revised plans, you know, through consultation with the representative from city planning.
But if, you know, the board feels so inclined to hold the vote to make sure all of our eyes are dotted and teaser costs, of course, we'll do that.
And then, you know, what we're asking for in terms of density, because we're asking for two additional units, only 16 units are allowed as a variety.
We're asking for 18 units. That density has been approved of similar type nearby, and you'll see that in our presentation.
You'll see an aerial view of the property, maps of the area, photographs of the property that surround the area, our plans and drawings,
our RCO meeting notice for a well-attended meeting in front of the Norris Square Community Alliance,
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of ACC Builders, LLC, our deeds of property showing that my client owns a property and the Certificate of Tax Clearance. In the virtual audience is Sharif Mustafa, one of its representatives.
And again, this is CMX2 property. Based on the overlay, we're allowed to build 45 feet high. There's a technical refusal because of the pilot house of the size of the pilot house.
where they're counting the actual height of the pilot house as part of the height limitation.
So technically, we're at 55 feet and 55 and a half feet.
Really, we're at 46 and a half feet.
The pilot houses have been combined to a larger pilot house.
And that was a design choice by us by putting the pilot houses combined
because we need uh you know two pilot houses but we put them into one larger one and putting in the
middle of the roof um where it actually is more helpful in terms of light and air surrounding
properties uh and then again we're asking for 18 units where 16 units is allowed efforts as a right
um they the units fit well within the building it's economically it makes the project economically
feasible, and it's not out of character to the neighborhood in that this board has granted
similar variances in the past for density. And it's going to help support the commercial component
on the ground floor, where we have a commercial component of over 2,000 square feet.
So we did meet with the community earlier last month, and we received overwhelming support from
them. And then by way of that, we received a letter of non-opposition from Council Member
Lazada. And then this is our attempt to correct the issue with the amount of affordable units.
We signed, you know, my clients unintentionally signed an acknowledgement form for five affordable
units, where only four is required as of right. But we'll defer to the board of how to correct
that error. And then the nearby density, 1827 North 5th Street, as you can see, this board
granted 32 units nearby. And then 1906-12 North 6th Street, recently the board granted 26 units
nearby uh for density purposes and then the area view of the property so this is fifth street this
is berks and this is houston we're just one off the corner here this is germantown avenue by the
way which is a commercial corridor so that will help that can decrease density will help support
that commercial corridor and as you can see here uh here is a shopping center here as well to help
support that commercial corridor and then you can see here again there's a mix of zoning here
cmx2 rm1 um so again we're not and there is also more say five um but you know to help support the
commercial corridor here on germantown this is i believe cousins supermarket here so this is a
shopping center here trying to you know increase that density and more most importantly we're
Trying to, you know, increase that density.
And most importantly, we're putting a 2,000 square foot commercial unit on the ground floor.
putting a 2,000 square.
So that extra density above is definitely going to help, you know, hopefully that commercial unit.
And then photographs of the property.
This property has been a vacant lot for the longest period of time.
It remains as such.
this is our property from the rear of the property from west houston street here's the
notice posters showing how we posted the property this is westberg street to the right of the
property to the left of the property west houston street to the right of the property until after
the property and then our plans and drawings again four-story structure we just want an extra that we
need the extra foot and a half we're just trying to make it a more pronounced commercial unit with
that extra height here um hopefully that's going to make not only the building pop well and and
attractive to a commercial tenant but also help us support that you know commercial quarter with
with this extra use above as well.
And then in terms of functionality of the building,
we have a trash room in the building
that's accessed to all of the unit owners or occupants.
We met with the community on May 15th at 6 p.m.
110 addresses were notified of the meeting,
proof of mailing to those addresses,
or application for appeal
that we filed on behalf of ACC Builders,
and most importantly,
the deed showing that they own the property
and their certificate of tax clearance.
I'm going to un-share my screen temporarily
so my client can be sworn in.
Client's name?
I believe it's Mustafa.
Yep, Mustafa.
please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in
good afternoon sir
i'm sorry but i'm in the uh virtual wait a minute wait a minute okay okay my bad they have been
my apologies here we are we can't please sir could you please state your name
and spell it for the court stenographer.
Sharif Mustafa, S-H-E-R-I-F-M-U-S-T-A-F-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, Mr. Nockamson.
Yeah, Mr. Mustafa,
you heard everything I had to say today
about your zoning matter.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
So, Alan, before I give it to the board, so it's commercial on the first floor, 18 units, four of which would be affordable.
Yes, that's correct, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
None at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Washington, comments from the Planning Commission.
I thought if this is to be held that you'd prefer a testimony later, but would you prefer it now?
Whatever you're comfortable with.
Well, let me jump in.
So we're not holding for a resumption hearing.
We're only holding just to clarify some paperwork.
So if you could give your testimony now, that would be great.
I can give it.
Thank you.
uh the comprehensive plan oh sorry met cavanaugh for planning commission um the comprehensive plan
recommends no change the existing commercial mixed use zoning at this location the proposed
variance for occupied area is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the
zoning code however however the appellant had the ability to receive the desired number of dwelling
units by providing an additional affordable unit and completing the mixed income housing bonus
process the city planning commission recommends the zoning board grant the variance for occupied
area, but deny the variances for height and unit count. Thank you. We will, Alan, we're going to
take the advice of our attorney and we'll hold this. Hillary, how long do you think we hold this?
We don't need to put a date on it, but I anticipate this will be resolved by next
week. I just need additional information from the Planning Commission. All right, great, great. All
right, Mr. Nockmson? That's great. I would just say hold the record open temporarily just in case
we have to make any supplemental submissions based on recommendations by council sure that's that's
based on recommendations by counsel? Sure. That's, that's fine. Yes. We'll just leave it
open. Anything related to the, the min overlay, there's any additional submissions, but otherwise
the record is closed. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Number 12, MI 2024-001-646-832 North
Broad Street. Olok Sokoloff is the attorney. There's a recommendation of support from the
The United Francisville Civic Association, 18 to 1, applicant also provided 31 form letters of support from residents, several from the eight and nine hundred blocks of Northbrook.
Mr. Sokolov, I swore you in once. Could you just state your name for the record?
Sure. Oleg Sokolov on behalf of the applicant and tenant Final Touch Barber Academy.
OK. And our vice chair has a few questions for you.
good afternoon council do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy
good afternoon mr shaheed and yes i do thank you have you have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits that is needed uh to proceed with this case five days in advance of
this hearing i have thank you thank you council please proceed and share your screen
all right is everybody able to see that we do wonderful well good afternoon chair bergman
members of the board um as stated my name is oleg sokolov i'm here on 832 north broad street on
behalf of the tenant final touch barber academy um i will run through the our exhibit packet
quickly and go over exactly what final touch barber academy is and what they do and why that
has generated the issuance of this refusal. So, the refusal generated is due to one of the uses,
that being the personal services use, which is prohibited in the Center City Overlay District.
The reason that this sort of use is even necessary at this location is because Final
Touch Barber Academy is a barbershop academy school training barbers. However, they do offer
haircuts. However, they do not do so for any kind of fee. So there's no payment exchange for the
personal services aspect here. The students of the Barbershop Academy are training to become
barbers and therefore the Final Touch Barber Academy offers free haircuts to people in the
neighborhood, anyone that may want to come in to the homeless, to lower income, to basically anyone
that would want a free haircut. But the way that works out is that a lot of lower income residents
of the neighborhood or even homeless residents of the neighborhood are able to use these services.
uh they also often give out and i'll have mr curtis speak a little bit about at the end of
this they also often give out um grooming supplies as you'll see from some pictures that i have but
just just so the board understands it is a primarily an educational facility however
because there is the personal service of cutting hair being done there despite the fact that it is
not for any kind of fee. It is still generating this kind of refusal. So this is the property
itself. It's on the corner of Broad and Parrish. Many of you might be familiar with it. It's the
old Uhuru furniture store. You can see that it is obviously very much situated in a commercial
district, as all of Broad Street, you know, in this area is lined with restaurants, shops,
shops of all different kinds of businesses.
This is the interior of the space that we're discussing.
And then this is, you know, we wanted you guys to see really that this is a school.
This isn't a barbershop. So these are some pictures of graduates and employment placement
that they've done. And this is their previous facility located on, I believe, 8th and Spring
Garden or 9th and Spring Garden. So just some pictures of graduates. And you can see what a
benefit this is to have to the community. You can see how many people are getting trained in a
vocation that they can go out and start their own businesses or work in existing barbershops. But
and start their own businesses or work in existing barbershops. But it's certainly
But it's certainly something.
something that people are very proud of being a part of, get great training to move on and be
barbers. The zoning map here, as I stated before, you can see that this is Broad Street here. Here
the property in question and this is almost entirely a commercial corridor um you know
as everyone's very well familiar with broad street our application for appeal here our
project information form there's obviously no construction or no work being done here this is
simply a use request we did meet with the rco on may 9th this is the notice letter
And as you can imagine, we also, these are the certificates of mailing to, I believe, 55 nearby residents.
And then, as Chair Bergman stated, I thought it was 33, Chair, but I guess you guys counted better than I do, so it was 31 letters of support from neighbors and people in the area, so, you know, overwhelming support.
and then formal support from the RCO was overwhelming as well.
Why don't you bring your client on?
That'd be great.
Mr. Curtis, if you're here, if you could just raise your virtual hand, please.
And just while I'm here still and he's coming on, you know,
out of 19 votes, it was one in opposition and 18 in support.
I'm here.
Sir, could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
Ron Curtis, R-O-N-C-U-R-T-I-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
And just before I start with Mr. Curtis, let me just quickly show the board the tax clearance,
showing no balance, copy of the zoning posters here.
here they are at the property okay mr curtis um you you heard my testimony here today
yes and do you agree with my testimony and adopt it as your own yes i do okay is there anything
you'd like to add for the board's consideration um just want to add that um i graduated over 60
students um i do a lot for the community down here at 925 spring garden street um basically
job placing all my students um they have become licensed barbers they're professional um no crime
has been committed um basically we are doing great things and we continue to want to do great
things on broad street at a bigger um facility um my school is um accredited right now we're
waiting for financial aid um again we give back to the to the community with free haircuts to
those in need not only just that we close them we feed them we um do outreach i also have a
non-profit called clippers of barber choice of weapons where you know monetary gifts are giving
and donating to my um my non-profit where i'm able to do um more than just be a barber school
And my students are trained also to continue to do that in their communities.
So if you could follow Instagram or my social media, Fox 29 and things like that, my students are continuing to go down Kensington and free haircuts and also in their communities and give back.
And that's what my 30 years of being in business have done.
And it comes from a lot of mistakes I've made in life. But today, God has blessed me to be open four years and graduate over 60 students that are doing great things.
And I expect to do way more things for Philadelphia. And with God's help and the game plan that I got put together, it's definitely going to be a blessing when I get to 832 North Broad Street.
and you will hear about it and i promise you to do the right thing continue success that you will
see for the near future thank you mr curtis uh questions from the board no mr chairman
no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
Comments from the virtual audience?
comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair okay planning commission
sorry about that uh meg cavanaugh planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
no change the existing commercial mixed-use zoning or overlay at this location although
the city planning commission has no objection to the use variance for personal services
Thank you. MI 2024-001-646-832 North Broad Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Mr. Sokoloff, could you please stay on?
So, number 13, MI 2024-002-065-4829 Longshore Avenue.
um there's a letter of unanimous non-opposition received the taconi civic association mr sokoloff
just for the record state your name sure oleg sokol right could you also identify your client
relationship to this property yeah my client um that will be here today is mr ray nazir he is
once again the tenant of the the uh property in question here that's robert nacella
I'm sorry?
The owner is Robert Nocella?
That's correct.
All right, okay.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Do you agree to wave the read and other refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
I do, Mr. Shahiden.
Good afternoon, young.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
please proceed and share the screen.
All right. Is everybody able to see that?
Okay. So as I stated, I represent the tenants of this property,
them, that being Mr. Ray Nazir and Mr. Patrick Hopkins.
They are in business together.
They operate the facility together that I'll discuss in a moment,
But I have Mr. Ray Nazir on the line here at the end to testify.
So this is, once again, a use variance request for personal vehicle repair and maintenance.
This is in a CMX2, so specifically this type of use is prohibited.
What I would like to explain about this particular type of use is that it is a very specialized type of maintenance that is done.
And I can have Mr. Nazir kind of elaborate on that a little bit, but the only type of service and repairs that are done at this facility are electrical repair. It's mostly to radios to navigation systems. So there is no storage of any oil. There's no body work being done. There's no paint work.
There is no mechanical work being done. All of the work at this facility, once again, is solely on electrical systems, and that's the way the application was presented, and that was what was put forward to the RCO as well.
A little bit more context on this. This was actually an application that was put in, I believe, even in 2022 and was before the board a number of times, however, due to some, I'll call it not wonderful representation that the applicants had hired at that time.
no one had managed to show up or send exhibits to the board for consideration and for the
hearing. So this matter was dismissed. It was brought to our office and we undertook
it as a brand new use application and subsequently appeal application.
So as this is the deed package,
This is the property in question here. This garage, it's a single-story garage, you know,
with certainly other commercial and construction type uses or vehicle services are on that block.
the interior of the facility. You'll see that there are no lifts or anything within the facility.
Here's an aerial shot. This property is located between Edmond and Tulip Street. It's about
two blocks from the river, so certainly in a mixed area of commercial and residential.
in a mixed area of commercial and residential uses, as you'll see here,
along with some higher density or even industrial uses as you get closer to the river this way.
Our application for appeal, our project information form, once again, no construction or any change to the edifice itself,
just a use request to use it for this purpose.
Our RCO notice letter, we met with the RCO on May 8th.
This was actually, I believe, and Mr. Nazir can elaborate a little more, but I believe
the third meeting with the RCO, the only one under this application number, but as I described
with previous attempts to move this forward, they had met with and received either support
or non-opposition of the RCO in the past.
Certificates of mailing to 73 nearby neighbors.
Zoning posters at the property.
Proof of tax clearance.
And then, as Chair Bergman stated, the letter of non-opposition here.
and at this time if i may bring on mr ray nazir just to adopt my testimony please okay
they've been allowed to speak sir could you please state your name as spelled for the
court stenographer raymond neiser r-a-y-m-o-n-d-n-e-i-s-s-e-r you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed counsel thank you very much
mr neither um you've you've heard my whole testimony here today yes and do would you adopt
it as your own yes okay could you um just further elaborate on the kind of work that's done here
was i correct in stating that it's just electrical work and no other kind of work it's all electrical
work uh you know changing headlights for people swapping a battery for somebody you know for
people and that's pretty much it addressing any kind of finicky turn signals you know anything
within the electrical system of the vehicle we don't do no body work no oil changes no body panel
swaps nothing to that nature as it's seen as it was seen in the packet and also to store our
our personal belongings.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just a quick clarification.
The individual who adopted your testimony, what was his relationship to the property?
I'm sorry, Mr. Nader, you're a partner in the business that operates out of there.
is that correct yes we're running we're running the property sorry okay that's okay um mr sakalav
are you representing both the owner and the tenant in this case just the tenant okay so we will need
a copy of a lease um on this i'm sorry was the lease not included in the i don't believe so i
just have a note that the proper about the property owner my my apologies i have it here
it can share it but we'll certainly um have it sent over to okay yeah just send it over for our
records thank you thank you my apologies emerson it's all right questions or comments from the
virtual audience i do not see any further hands planning commission hi meg kavanaugh for planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning a zoning map change to rm1 residential
multifamily at this location under which this use would still be prohibited. This property has been
used for a variety of conforming commercial uses in the past, and the appellant has not shown that
the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code and that a variance
is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property. The City Planning
Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the use variance. Thank you. MI 2024-002-065-4829
Longshore Avenue. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes.
Mr. Sokoloff, why don't you stay there? I have one more here with you.
Mr. Sokoloff, why don't you stay there? I have one more here with you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Berman.
Number 15, MI 2024-002-080, 2652-54 Bridge Street, letter of unanimous support from Bridesburg Community Action Alliance.
Mr. Sokoloff, just state your name for the record.
Sure. Oleg Sokolov on behalf of the owners, Keith Flair Property Management.
And our Vice Chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to either read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
I do, Mr. Chair.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with
this case five days in advance of this hearing?
They were emailed by the applicant directly.
Thank you, Counselor. You can already share your screen, please.
Thank you very much.
All right. Once again, this is a use refusal that was generated on this property. I'll take you
through. This is, it's actually 2652 and 54. It is two lots. This is a legalization of an existing
use. And previously, the board had approved a three-unit dwelling at this property in 2018.
We're currently seeking just to legalize the existing use of this property as a two-family dwelling.
This is the property in question.
Once again, here's the refusal, just the one single-use refusal for a two-family dwelling in an RSA 5.
Tax clearance for Key Flair Property Group, the most recent owner of the property.
Application for appeal. Project information form. Here's the deed. As I stated, you'll see this
property was just recently purchased. As many properties in the city when this was purchased,
you know, it was not very well or not at all disclosed that this was not a legalized use in
this property. So, hence the situation we're in today and hence the attempt to legalize the use
of what the owners believed they were buying. As stated by Mr. Bergman, there is a letter
of support from Bridenford Community Action Alliance. The meeting was held on May 15th.
Once again, here's further clarification in that letter.
You can see here the property does even have two separate entrances.
It seems that it was always used as at least a two-family.
As I stated, here's the use permit from August of 2018, granting three-family dwelling in this structure.
However, none of this work was ever undertaken, so this permit had expired.
just some interior photos of the property notice of today's meeting posters at the property
now something that we wanted you guys to see there is like a side yard here that would allow
for for trash cans um so you know they're not having to be put out front um or in any way
impact the neighborhood. Here's a little description of the units themselves. They're
each approximately 1,000 square feet, one bedroom, a living room, and a kitchen.
And here you can see some floor plans of the property.
This is a neighboring property that was also issued a multi-family dwelling use
in 2018. Another property that was a five unit building, so the block is certainly full of
multifamily units, and ones that are not even as big as this one, which takes up two lots.
At this time, if I could bring on my client, Jenning Tang, to testify.
Ms. Tanger, are you here?
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name? It's spelled for the stenographer.
Could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
Yes, hi. Chairman, my name is Janine Tang. It's spelled J-I-A-N-I-N-G-T-A-N-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Ms. Tang, you're a principal in key player property management, is that correct?
Okay, and you guys recently purchased a property in March of 2024?
yes and you've you've listened to my testimony here today before the board
yes and you would adopt it as your own yes and is there anything you'd like to add for
the board's consideration no thank you question questions from the board no mr chairman
no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair thank you planning commission
hi meg cavanaugh for planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
existing residential single family zoning at this location however the proposed use of the duplex is
consistent with documented prior use of this property and the long-standing building configuration
the city planning commission recommends the zoning board grant this use variance
Thank you. MI 2024-002-080-2652-54 Bridge Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Mr. Schmiel Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Chairman Bergman. If I may, I have a small administrative matter from the 330 list.
uh i guess what is what what is that tell me what it is we submitted a a written continuance
request but i i wanted to potentially make the request in person but i guess you guys haven't
called the 330 list at all yet we're not we're not we're not we got one more case then we're
going to take about a five minute break okay i'll do that okay i appreciate it thank you
Sure. Number 14, MI 2024-002-078-1514 Wadsworth Avenue. Joseph Consul is the attorney. There's a letter of unanimous opposition from the 50th Ward RCO and a letter of opposition received from council member Phil.
Good afternoon.
Mr. Consul, just state your name for the record. You've already been sworn.
It's Joseph Consul.
Right. Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Deluxe Event Hall LLC. The tenant and the representative on the call is
Mekhi Green. That's M-E-K-H-I Green.
Right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
The referral and yes.
Have you e-mailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. My screen should be up with my zoning appeal hearing packet on the tail end today. I'll try to make this brief. My client is Deluxe Event Hall, LLC.
These folks have a location at 1834 West Cheltenham Avenue that is very highly regarded.
They are seeking to open this smaller location on Wadsworth Avenue.
Now, as was mentioned previously, we are here because we have a referral for assembly and entertainment.
The board has granted this special exception to three other spaces for the same use within the last three years.
And so we're hopeful that this referral will be acceptable to be granted a special exception as well.
As mentioned, we met with the RCO and there was five votes against us.
Just as conjecture, we believe, and I've dealt with this before with tattoo variances, that there was just the other folks that were approved were not in favor because they did not want my clients to come to the neighborhood.
We understand that. However, we believe in light of their approvals, which we'll get to in a second, that my clients satisfy all the needed requirements for a special exception in the zoning district.
And as a result of the RCO being against it, we have a generic letter.
And as a result of the RCO being against it, we have a generic letter from the council person against it as well, providing no specific reasoning, just supporting the RCO.
So we're hopeful that that is something that we can overcome.
The RCO's letter is that, you know, basically they talk about the meeting and they say that the sentiment is that the applicants did or I guess they meant did not do their due diligence in seeking the proper process for this event, landlord did not inform them, blah, blah, blah.
and so basically they say they don't want to add another event hall to the neighborhood
and they suggest some other potential uses for the property some of which also would require
special exceptions but as I said my clients run a successful event hall and we don't believe that
the RCO's opposition meets the standard of an opposition that would allow the board to deny
special exception. Here's some photos of the interior of the space. Again, it is not a very
elaborate area. It's a space that would hold roughly 50 people. My client's goals, as they'll
testify to in a moment, is to have event spaces here. And in fact, they'll testify to the fact
that they do work with other event halls for overflow and referrals and things like that.
and they've been very successful. So what is being sort of couched by the RCO is being an
oversaturation in the neighborhood, we believe actually going to be a positive for the other
businesses that we believe one of which came out to get this letter generated against my client.
Again, my client's been very successful. Previous uses of this property, you could see in the
zoning archive, grocery store, pharmacy, a pizza shop, and a couple of other retail uses.
So we don't believe what we're doing is going to be generating any more traffic than the uses that
have been approved in this space, both by way of being by right approvals and approvals by variants
for the history of 1514 Wadsworth Avenue.
Here's our proof of mailing.
Photos and plans.
Here's the exterior of the property.
The lease, my clients signed a three-year lease.
They paid all the taxes that were due on the property
and they are seeking this approval.
Again, the RCO seems to dock us for that in the letter,
But, again, it seems like my clients are very serious about this location, and that's it.
So we included at the end of our packet the three previous special exceptions that this board granted.
Here's one, again, the same exact CMX2.
It's a block over, same special exception, exact same thing, granted in 2022.
Here's another one, also granted in 2022.
and a third one granted in 2019.
And this one is the next block over.
So we've got 14, 15 and the 1600 block of Wadsworth.
So as you can see, we've got three that have been granted
for the same exact thing, similar sized buildings.
And so we're hopeful that my clients can see a similar approval.
And finally, just to put it on the record, because this is a special exception, the applicant really only needs to prove a couple of things.
One, the burden of proof is on us that we are not going to be more detrimental of a use, meaning our use as an event space will be no more detrimental than any other event space would be in this area.
And we believe we've proven that my clients have been successfully running a business in the city doing the exact same thing.
This is going to be an extension of that business. There's no complaints. No one had any specific complaints about their business.
So we believe we satisfy that criteria.
The second criteria is detrimental impacts on the neighborhood, impairing the supply of light and air, burdening water, sewer and other public facilities,
These congestion in the streets, overcrowding the land,
endangering public health, the RCO makes no suggestion
that we're going to be doing any of those things.
They just simply say, we don't want to approve another event hall.
And again, we believe that was because we had someone
Someone who mistakenly considers himself a competitor come out to do it. And again, it was only five folks that showed up. The general consensus was it was a pretty not well attended meeting.
who mistakenly considers himself a competitor come out to.
Okay. And then finally, the RCO would have to prove to overcome us being approved today, they'd have to approve that this specific use as an event hall is more detrimental than another event hall would be in this space.
And the RCO's letter just does not prove that. And so we believe that the board should grant this special exception. With that, I'll call my clients to testify. It should be Makai Green.
they've been allowed to speak
how could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
hello my name is makai green it's spelled m-e-k-h-i
last name is green g-r-e-e-n
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel
uh mr green did you hear my testimony today regarding
your uh leased property at 1514 ladsworth
yes do you agree with what I said and do you adopt it as your own yes I confirm okay would
you give the board just a quick background on your business and what you anticipate bringing
to the neighborhood yeah so we've been open for going on four years now and our goal is to have
a venue for more intimate venues our building now holds for more about 100 people and currently we
do a lot of things for like schools and daycares and things in the neighborhood we have a lot of
kiddie proms and stuff like that. So now we just want a smaller venue to just for a less capacity
because some people don't need venues that big. And a lot of our customers ask for recommendations
for smaller venues. So that's just was one of our goals to just, you know, get something a little
smaller that we can hold less people. Now, finally, do you anticipate being a competitor
or collaborator with the with the other businesses in the in the neighborhood? I would definitely say
a collaborator. Most of the venues in the area are familiar with us. And we we help each other
out. So I can only hold but so many dates is only 365 days in a year. So when those days come up
that we are booked or overly booked, and we have too many people calling about the same dates,
we definitely reach out to our friends in the community and other neighbors and let them know
that we have of customers
that are interested in that date,
and they do the same for us.
Okay, nothing for the board.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments
from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
None at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Any commission?
Hi, Meg Cavanaugh for Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the special exception.
MI 2024-002-078, 1514 Wadsworth Avenue, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
my vote is no thank you counsel is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 330 case has not
been called i do not see any hands mr chair we're going to take a five minute break and
we'll come back and finish the list up thank you everyone
good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this afternoon's 330
zba hearing with me is our board member thomas holliman present mr chairman and also present is
lebaron leonard palmer from the division of development services who will be serving as
our alternate board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. Also, present is Hilary Emerson,
our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunken. Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting Tanya Sunken at phil.gov. For our court sonography,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying. If you're
participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute. To enter an
appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email address and the address of the property
in the question. And finally, the question box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
The question box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Suffer.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number six.
Number six, MI 2024, 000429, 1932, Manton Street.
That case has been continued.
Mr. Sokolov, are you in the audience? Do you want, do you have a comment about this? You mentioned this before.
He's been allowed to speak.
Mr. Sokolov, your case is continued.
Thank you. I just wanted to make sure that it was so, so I figured I would ask in person if need be, but thank you very much, everyone. Have a great rest of your week.
You too. Are there any other requests for continuances?
good afternoon sir this is jason hand i will be your calls for the session
i have a hand up from bart levy i have allowed him to speak okay
i'm mr levy
i can't could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
I'm Bart Levy, the attorney for 010453-2003.
It's B-A-R-T-L-E-V-1, ID number 204800.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
And we do not have exhibits for this case, 2549 North 19th.
Do you want to attend the UNs for this case?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, if you would so allow.
The RCO wants one more exploratory meeting, and we decide to accommodate for this best we could.
All right. Thank you very much. So MI 2024, 000-427-2549 North 19th Street. That case has been continued. Thank you.
We're most grateful. Thank you.
Number one, MI 2023-003-755-474 Harlan Street, this case has been withdrawn.
And number two, MI 2023-003-791-722 Shedwick Street, Serge Fajo is the listed applicant, and SK Property Solutions are the listed owner.
Are the representatives of that property present?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands raised for that matter.
This is the second listing of this.
We have an indication that it's going to be withdrawn.
We do not have any documents yet.
Am I correct, Hillary?
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
We were advised on May 9th that they no longer wanted to continue.
staff advised on the 14th of May that a letter needed to be submitted. To my knowledge,
there has not been a letter submitted. Thank you. Thank you. So this is the second listing. We do
not have any documents. So MI 2023-003-791-722 North Shedwick Street, I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
the Baron Leonard Palmer my vote is to dismiss thank you so we're going to go to um number three
first MI 2023 003 792 7320 Montour Street uh Yosef and Samala Sama Algal are the applicants
pro se. This application is for the erection of a second story addition to an existing accessory
structure in the rear of the property as shown on plans. The maximum height of a private resident
garage is 10 or 15 feet, depending on the roof type, whereas a height of 24 feet is proposed.
They've been promoted to panelist, sir.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Hello?
Yousef, last name ending in A, could you please speak to the chair?
Speak to the chair.
You just muted yourself, sir.
Can everyone hear me?
Yeah, I can.
Yusuf, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Yusuf Al-Ghali, spelled Y-O-U-S-U-F.
Last name is spelled A-L-G-H-A-L-I.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you please turn to your video one?
Thank you.
Mr. Holloman, our board member, has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, sir.
Good afternoon.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
So this is an application to elect a left or second story to our existing data.
sir sir sir hold on you have not shared your screen yet we don't see your screen
we see you but we don't see your here you go it's coming on now thank you okay thank you very much
so there's an application um there's an application to erect a second story or
loft to an existing detached garage um we have emailed all of the exhibits
um for this in advance we met with the rcu earlier so i'm just um sharing the exhibits from
that i've um already emailed okay
so why don't you start sharing your documents go ahead
so this first is the um refusal
and it basically was refused because the private residence garages and carports
with flatter shed roofs are subject to a maximum height of 10
and gable or e-proof uh subject to a maximum height of 15 feet
and we are proposing 24 feet
So, sir, let me ask you this.
Is this garage already built?
The garage is your proposition.
The first floor of the garage is already built.
It already exists.
We are proposing to add a second floor to it.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
Let's see your photos.
So this is an aerial photo of the property.
This is the house.
It's a twin.
The garage is here at the back.
This is the zoning map of the property. It is zoned as an RSC3.
And just quickly show you the view from the street. So this is the house in the front.
This is the garage in the back. And then this is the view from the driveway, the gate at the house.
This is the garage right here at the back.
So you have a small part here, you have a grass area, you have all of these and the garage is at the back.
This is the plan that we submitted to L&I.
That shows the property, so the sidewalk, there's a first story, covered porch.
this is the single-family home, this is the patio at the back, and then this is the grassy area,
and then the garage is all the way at the backyard. So we have about 42 feet between
where the house is and where the garage is, and we're just basically asking to increase
the height of the garage so this is examples of within the neighborhood
that's as similar to story garages this one is on Claridge basically this
house there's a two-story garage in the back this one is on Codman Avenue the
house in the front there's a two-story garage in the back and basically some blare there's
a house in the front and there's a two-story garage in the back so we're not asking to do
So we're not asking to do something that has not been done before.
something that has not been done before
And this is basically the photos of my property in the front and this one in poster that was taken.
Yes, sir.
So what happened when you went to the RCO meeting?
We went to the RCO meeting and we got a support of, there was a vote taken.
There was an 11 to 4 in support of it.
And we had that meeting on February 8th.
And you have a copy of that letter?
I do not have a copy of the letter.
They never sent you a letter with the 11 to 4 vote?
No, they never sent me a letter with the 11 to 4 vote.
But it was also recorded in the neighborhood newspaper that we had the meeting.
The address is still, it's there, and that it was an 11 to 4 vote.
And do you have a copy of that news article?
I do have a copy of it.
So let me ask you this question while we're here.
What's the purpose of putting the second floor on?
It's just to serve us.
So my wife works most times.
She works late between 6 and 9 o'clock where the work she does, she does adoption consultations for a lot of people.
And over recent years, we've had run into problems because that's also usually conflicts with like dinner time around the house, bath time around the house.
We have two young kids.
And so it's kind of...
You're looking to create an office on top of the garage?
Yes, I'm looking to create an office space on top of the garage.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No questions, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
None at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission sir ron bednar city planning
first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-o right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed ron uh the property is indicated for
residential use on the city plan the adopted district plan comprehensive plan recommends
no change in existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported
with evidence of unique physical circumstances
or condition of the property
that would prevent it from being used
in conformity with the code.
Representing an overuse,
therefore we recommend the request
for variance not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023-003-792-7320 Montour Street,
I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is no.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Number four, MI 2023-004-268-6600 Lansdale Avenue.
Murr the Fairlegger is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from the Neighbors of Overbrook Association Zoning Committee.
Seven opposed, three support.
Applicant provided a letter of support from LA-21 CDC,
along with a petition of support signed by 31 neighbors.
They will be rejoining as a panelist shortly.
Chairman.
Good afternoon, Council.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Sure thing. My client is right on Time LLC, which is the tenant of the property, represented today by Nicole Richardson.
And Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do agree to waive the reading.
I do not stipulate to the accuracy.
I will address that the use category listed is incorrect.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, I did. Thank you. Please proceed. You're sharing your screen now.
Great. Good almost evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. As I mentioned,
my name is Meredith Ferliger with Delworth Paxson. I have the pleasure of representing
Right on Time LLC, which is a tenant of the property represented by Nicole Richardson.
We're here today with a request for a special exception to expand an already permitted use of
the property at 6600 Lansdowne Avenue. As the Board will quickly gather, this request is
coincidentally somewhat similar in use to a case that you heard at the end of the 2PM list,
but yet substantially different as it pertains to critical pieces of evidence this applicant
will produce to establish entitlement to a special exception. This particular request,
as it relates to this property, stems from the often challenging task of identifying one specific
use category that fits a unique commercial use, such as the one that will be presented before
the board today. The proposed use is for a combined community center and event assembly
facility. The community center is by right and already in operation at this location,
while the event assembly facility use requires a special exception. Importantly, unlike the case
you heard on the 2 p.m. list, this case is a slight expansion of an already existing use
versus an entirely new use of the space. Exhibit 4 shows that Ms. Richardson's lease
at 6600 Lansdowne Avenue covers unit one which is the first floor space which is right at the
corner of Lansdowne Avenue and North 66th Street. The space in question is roughly 1200 square feet.
To first orient you to the property the board may refer to the aerials included at Exhibit 10.
As noted this new construction building sits at the corner of Lansdowne Avenue
and North 66th Street. Lansdowne Avenue is to the north, and North 66 is the cross street.
This is a commercial mixed-use building with three residential units above the ground floor
commercial space. Attached to the corner property are three other new construction projects with
multifamily dwellings. On the zoning map at Exhibit 9, the board will notice that this area
is predominantly multifamily in nature
with corner CMX2 commercial zoning designations.
The property in question is zone CMX2,
which requires a commercial use along the ground floor.
Moving to the photographs at exhibit 15,
the first photograph is a view
from the Lansdowne Avenue frontage.
And again, it looks like it's one combined building,
but this is actually four separate buildings.
The next view shows the then-unfinished condition of the building, which shows a view from the corner of Lansdowne and North 66.
The board will take note of the accessible ramp leading to both front entrances of the building.
The separate entrance to the commercial space is shown here on the left-hand side of the photograph.
A second entrance and exit to this space is also available in the rear of the commercial space along a rear 15-foot wide shared driveway, which you can slightly see in the aerials in the back here.
There may be another view. Yeah, you can see it here. So this is 15-foot shared driveway that runs along the back.
Where this photo shows the wooden boards are now completed windows along the North 66th Street frontage.
We've included additional photographs showing views west along Lansdowne Avenue,
as well as the opposite direction showing the eastern view and the intersection.
The corner opposite this property contains a takeout deli of sorts.
On the opposing corner from Lansdowne Avenue, in this photograph here, there is a bar and a restaurant at 6601 Lansdowne Avenue.
And just for context, that bar is across the street from the property here.
and again directly across the property from 66th street you see the deli on the right
and on the left hand side there is a family medical office
This view is taken directly diagonal from the property in question.
this view is taken directly diagonal from the property in question
We've also included interior photographs showing the small, roughly 1,200 square foot, bright first floor space.
These photographs reflect the entire space, with all of these doors shown leading to utility spaces.
The spaces already fit out with a bathroom.
We did also include floor plans at Exhibit 7, showing the layout that is consistent with the layout that's shown in the photographs.
So again, it's just one big open space.
Currently, the space is approved for use as a community center, which is shown in the zoning permit that I've included at Exhibit 6.
A community center is defined at Section 146014P of the Zoning Code as a space used for cultural, educational, recreational, or civic engagement purposes, owned and operated by a public agency or a not-for-profit, like right on time, and open to the general public.
Nicole is seeking to expand the permitted use further to permit use of the building for an event assembly facility.
As the board may know, the event assembly facility category was just added to the zoning code in December of 2023.
Prior to this addition, all assembly type uses were either categorized as nightclubs and private clubs or more general assembly and entertainment.
This was particularly problematic for uses such as the one today, where the nature of the use is not even remotely akin to a nightclub or anything remotely similar.
Here, the original referral in this matter was issued in July of 2023 prior to the code being updated.
As a result, L&I issued the referral for a nightclub and private club, but specified that it would be a banquet hall.
As the Board will glean from our description of the use, even a banquet hall is a significant overstatement of the intended use.
Conversely, the new event assembly facility use is defined at Section 146017C.4 as an establishment that accommodates private functions and that may or may not include kitchen facilities.
The principal purpose of an event assembly facilities is to serve food and beverages to groups that have reserved the space in advance for civic, educational, political, religious, or social activities that may include banquets, meetings, weddings, and other similar functions for the individual or group and any guests to which the general public is not admitted.
With the definitional context in mind, allow me to explain what Right on Time actually plans for this space.
At Exhibit 8, we have included detailed information about the intended use, which I will summarize.
On the second page, let me zoom out so you can see all of this, Nicole has provided a list of the proposed services.
Many, if not most, of these aspects fit within the community center definition that is already
permitted by right and operating in the property, such as food drives, voting booths, career
development and entrepreneurship classes, job fairs, and networking.
However, towards the end of the list are components of these, such as birthday celebrations,
baby showers, art shows, bridal showers, and dinner parties. These facets of the proposed
use fit squarely in line with the definition I provided earlier of the event assembly facility
use, which is specifically intended for these types of smaller gatherings. This space will
be open from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. Monday through Sunday. At all times, approximately two employees
will be on site to staff each and every event. In the packet and shown up on the screen,
we've included the event space staff policy, noting that staff are responsible to ensure that
all events run smoothly and are safe, including managing guests and visitors to ensure there are
no crowds and certainly no gathering or loitering outside the premises. No food is permitted to be
cooked on site. Right on time also has a policy, which is included in the packet, and I'll bring
that up for you, that strictly prohibits all alcohol from the premises. This applies to any
event, activity, or function being held in this space, whether indoors or outdoors. Event staff
is responsible for strictly enforcing this policy. Right on time does not anticipate permitting more
than 50 occupants at any one time on site, despite the building code lawful occupancy
Despite the building code lawful occupancy limitations, that would be much higher.
limitations that would be much higher.
Trash is stored inside, and this property does have commercial pickup.
Before I conclude with my argument, I'd like to bring Nicole up just to briefly share with the board her background and mission for this space.
So if the administrator could look for Nicole Richardson.
They've been allowed to speak.
counsel counsel before she speaks did you go to the rco meeting did i were you part of the rco
meeting i had not yet been retained mr chairman okay thank you
hello uh mr chairman did you need to swear in a colon i do yeah please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer yes nicole richardson n-i-c-o-l-e-r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n
Do you need me to turn my computer up?
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Nicole, I've already given the board some basic facts about your use, but if you could just supplement that a little bit with your background and your mission for this particular space.
Yeah, so currently I am a business, current business owner of a child care facility, and I consult with a nonprofit.
So I'm just looking to get a space that will provide as a resource hub and community hub for the neighborhood and allow families to come together with events, provide a space for the neighborhood to have voting booths there or food drives, back to school drives, all gearing towards the community.
When I first applied for the zoning, it only allowed me to apply for the nightclub, private club, slash banquet hall.
So it kind of deterred the neighborhood away from what I was actually trying to do.
But once I was able to knock on each of the doors that was provided in the address list, I was able to explain exactly what I was trying to do.
And that's how I obtained the 31 guesses in the signature.
Thank you, Nicole. Stick around just in case I need you again.
Okay. With respect to the application, as the board knows, the application received one referral
for the proposed use. As noted, we are requesting the board issue a proviso clarifying the use as
an event assembly facility. As is required by Section 303.7E.1 through .3 of the zoning code,
the proposed event assembly use meets the definition of a use permitted by special exception
in the CMX2 zoning district. Furthermore, the proposed use will not cause specific detrimental
impacts to the neighborhood beyond that which might normally be expected from the proposed use,
and this is especially true for this case where this is just an expansion of an already permitted
use of the space. The proposed use will not cause congestion in the public streets or overcrowding
of the site. This is a very small space that will accommodate small-scale events that do not pose a
risk of creating congestion, either within the space or within the surrounding community,
particularly in light of the much more impactful uses on some of the adjacent corners,
including the bar, deli, and family medical practice. As noted, Right on Time has strict
written use policies and on-site employees to manage the use of this space and to ensure that
guests are complying with all use policies for the space. The event assembly facility use will
not add any significant congestion beyond what would normally be expected from a community center
type of use or an expansion thereof that accommodates small-scale gatherings such as
baby showers. This proposed use is a natural expansion of the existing use and will not
create impact that is beyond what would be expected for this type of use. The use will
not impair light and air to adjacent properties, as no physical changes are proposed to the new
construction building. The uses will not burden any public facilities, nor will it injure the
use of adjacent properties. The property is owned CMX2 and is specifically contemplated
for mixed commercial residential use. The property is further surrounded by predominantly
multifamily residential uses, which will significantly benefit from this type of
community-serving use. The new construction building and space have been built with all
appropriate utility connections and capacity to accommodate a commercial use, and this particular
use poses extremely limited utility demands. The proposed use will not endanger public health or
safety, nor is the use inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. This area is zone CMX2 and
This area is zoned CMX-2 and is specifically contemplated for commercial and assembly use.
is specifically contemplated for commercial and assembly.
The proposed use is in keeping with the impacts that are normally expected from the proposed use
and is specifically contemplated as an allowed use in the CMX-2 zoning district.
As the board has heard, Right on Time is a community-oriented organization
that would like to continue serving its community by providing a safe event space
and will have a positive impact to the neighborhood and the surrounding community.
Regarding the community, as you know, Nicole met with NOAA back in September.
Seemingly, there was a significant misunderstanding amongst community members as to the intent for this space.
Let me just bring up the letter to reference.
The vote was ultimately seven opposed, three support, and four non-opposition. So essentially
a washout in terms of vote balance. Following that meeting, as Nicole testified, Nicole was
in contact with both NOAA and the councilman's office on at least three different occasions,
seeking a follow-up meeting to clarify some of the clear misunderstandings that were stated in
the RCO letter. Neither our office, Nicole, nor the councilman's office, to our understanding,
were successful in receiving any response. We do understand that NOAA may have just undergone
a leadership shift and that that may have led to some trouble in receiving a response.
Regardless, to address some of the community's points specifically,
The letter notes that the corner of 66 and Lansdowne Avenue has, quote, repeated nuisance activity and references a shooting at the bar across the street.
As the board knows, this type of generalized speculative concern that actually concerns an entirely different property and bar restaurant use does not rise to the standard necessary to warrant a denial of this special exception.
Furthermore, the community expressed concern over parking, which is a perfectly valid concern.
However, the zoning code does not require parking for this use, and given the community-centric
nature of this use, the community has not established that this particular use will
substantially increase the parking burden already created by other commercial uses in the neighborhood.
The next two points are simply factually incorrect. As we noted, alcohol is strictly prohibited. So we're unclear where the community believes that alcohol will be permitted, given there is a written policy that alcohol is prohibited.
Furthermore, contrary to what is indicated in this letter, there will not be any armed guards on site. This type of use certainly does not justify that type of measure.
Aside from Noah's letter, the exhibits include a letter of support from the Lancaster Avenue 21st
Century Business Association, try and get, there we go, noting the minority-led collaborative
effort driving this project. Additionally, Nicole went door to door and was able to secure
signatures of support from 31 of the immediate neighbors that were within the 250-foot radius
that is provided by code. This is a clear representation of the broad community support
in the immediate community for this use. Once the applicant has met its burden of establishing
entitlement to a special exception, only then would the burden shift to an objector to establish
that the use is substantially likely to cause a detrimental impact on the health, safety,
and welfare of the neighborhood, exceeding that which normally might be expected from the proposed
use. This burden is squarely on an objector, and the presentation today clearly establishes
that the community has not met that burden. We therefore assert we have met the requirements
of Section 3037E.1 through .3 of the Code concerning entitlement to a special exception,
and we therefore ask the board to grant our application.
Nicole, if you could unmute yourself again.
Yes, I'm here.
Nicole, have you heard all the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today?
Would you agree that testimony was true and accurate, and would you adopt it as if it were your own?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
before i give it to the board was your client involved in a conversation about securities
with the armed guards so yeah um i can speak there i'm sorry um because um that
So, yeah, I can speak there. I'm sorry, because that means she's going to answer that.
Yeah. Mr. Chairman, she's more than welcome to answer that. She was present during that meeting.
I was not. OK, good. Thank you. Yeah. So, yeah. So when we were talking, when I first met with the neighborhood committee,
they were saying that they were having concerns about the shootings across the street from the at the bar.
So I had made a suggestion, like, you know, if you guys want, I can have armed security at the door to protect your neighborhood if you feel like the security of gun violence from the bar is an issue.
They said they didn't want armed security.
So I said, okay, no problem at all.
That was just a suggestion.
We can just have employees on site.
All right.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No questions, Chair.
questions or comments for our attorney hillary emberson um just two quick things one um i
noticed that the ownership of the property changed since the refusal was issued i assume that the
tenant um is continuing under the the current owner that's correct hillary yes okay thank you
And then the other thing, the other thing is, sorry, the request for proviso to specify the event assembly facility, we actually, we can't do that.
I've had this conversation with L and I. They have to look at the code at the time that the
application was filed. And at the time this application was filed, the use that would fit
would be nightclubs and private clubs. So unfortunately, we can't do a proviso to change
that because it would be inconsistent with the timing of when it was filed with what was in the
code at the time. So Hillary, if you recall, we had actually reached out to L and I requesting
an amended refusal they they declined to do that and they had asked mr reuter for his opinion and
if you recall he had responded uh in a way that is contrary to what you're saying right now
okay i i do i do not recall that um i do not recall that i can take a look at that but that
I have when I've discussed the issue with L&I that's what they have told me so yeah I mean we
specifically asked L&I about two months ago to issue an amended refusal to avoid this issue and
they basically told us we can't do that we had then spoken with Len and he said if the use is
an event assembly use then you can just issue it via proviso so um okay yeah that's not that's not
my understanding because they're still
looking at the
code at the time the application
was issued. That's why they can't issue an
amended refusal. So I don't
know how we could do
something different with a proviso. We're
looking at the code at the same time as
when the application was issued.
So, I mean, I can
take, I'm happy if you want to hold it, I can take a
look at that, but that's just not my
understanding.
Okay, so questions
or comments from the virtual audience?
yes mr chair i have a hand up from a pete felder i've allowed them to speak
hi sir could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer
yes my name is gregory felder and i'm known as p um okay unity yes could you spell your name
please yes my first name is g-r-e-g-o-r-y my last name is f as in friday e-l-d-e-r
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do swear.
Are you a neighbor, sir?
Please proceed.
I want to get right down to Ms. Richardson saying that she stated that if we wanted armed guards, no, we asked her would there be guards, and she stated that there would be guards.
I asked her if they would be armed, and she stated they would be armed.
so i don't know why that was said that she asked if we wanted we we didn't say that that question
was never presented to us we presented her with a question secondly as far as the the bar and
restaurant across the street we understand that the there have been murders at that bar shootings
within 10 25 feet of that bar and that's the bar there is the restaurant call it what you will is
a takeout beer i'm not even gonna call it a deli because that's not the official name that's not a
delicate test it it is a nuisance in our neighborhood and many young men have lost their lives there
It is a nuisance in our neighborhood, and many young men have lost their lives there.
The event space across the street would be an assembly.
As far as a community center, I personally have not seen anything community-wise going on there of the things that she listed.
I am familiar with event spaces.
Personally, I do not attend them in the city.
Most calls assembly, as far as the driveway in the back, you could best believe that parking would take place there.
It is not an issue so much of the parking, but the assembly that will take place with what she stated out of her words of armed guards at the facility.
So this neighborhood, someone had the, I'm sorry, Miss Meredith had mentioned of it being multifamily.
That is a residential neighborhood with corner properties being commercial.
And most are homeowners.
If you look to each street in each direction, north, south, east, and west, and just went two blocks, you would probably have about a few hundred houses. So 31 neighbors to say yes is a very small amount of whom's going to be affected.
businesses that come into our neighborhood bring something or take something away
i think that i personally feel that the using the word community center is is a smoke screen
it's my honest opinion because it is these so-called event spaces that are popping up
along uh philadelphia neighborhoods some and residential others and commercial so if they're
on a commercial corridor, it doesn't affect the neighbors as much. This is strictly residential
with a few commercial businesses that are on the corner. So I live here and I truthfully know that
bringing another assembly spot to that place as an event space and not being straight up about
telling the truth of how the armed guard story came along, I'm sorry. I think one thing false,
all things false. Mr. Chairman, may I ask him a question, please? Sure. Mr. Felder, what is your
specific address? 924 North 67th Street. Okay. And Mr. Felder, how far away is that from this
property? It is one block north, which lands down Lebanon, and one block to the west. Okay. Would
Would would would you would you agree if I stated that your property is about 900 feet away from the property and question?
I don't know the actual footage, but I could tell you this.
When a young man was murdered at that corner, I heard the gunshots.
So I hear the gunshots from 66th Street. I pass by there every day.
My wife catches the bus there. We walk by day and night.
That is our community. You call it what you want. It's our community and we are affected by what happens by that many feet away. So that's, I am voicing my, my opinion to that.
Are you done, Meredith?
For now.
Okay, thank you. Other questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, I have Pauline Rosenberg on the line. I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, Ms. Rosenberg. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. They put their hand down.
Is there anyone else?
Yeah, there's a Justin Green.
I'll allow them to speak.
Justin, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Justin Green, J-U-S-T-I-N-G-R-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
are you a neighbor yes please proceed sir the question in regards to the the armed guard um
at the meeting when you presented that particular issue of the armed guard why would there need to
be an armed guard at the event space if it's more about educational activities and things of that
nature why would there need to be an armed guard that's you where you're not asking the question
you're making a statement right well no i'm i'm no no no i'm i'm really asking why was there an
idea of the i don't i don't i don't want you to you know you you make statements you don't ask
questions please so your question is your question is you're curious why there would need need for
an armed guard am i right correct yes thank you is there anything else you want to add
so i do want to add that we we did we definitely do not need an event space in this neighborhood
in this community at all we just do not need it as the gentleman mentioned earlier this is a
residential neighborhood uh with facilities uh churches uh schools
neighborhood, uh, with facilities, uh, churches, uh, schools, and we do not need any more assemblies
that will impact the neighborhood in a negative way in this neighborhood. We do, we definitely
do not need it. Um, I know that this young lady, I don't know, but this young lady is a business
woman. So I appreciate her wanting to do business. Um, but this is not something that we want in our
neighborhood and in our community as far as event space. Thank you. Myrna, do you have a comment?
For him, no.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, sir, for your comments.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
It's Ryan Bednar, City Planning.
Properties indicated for commercial mixed use.
Our adopted comprehensive plan recommends no change to the zoning at this location.
applicant has shown that the expanded private club use should have no detrimental impact to
the neighborhood beyond what might be expected. Therefore, the City Planning Commission has
no objection to the granting of the special exception. Mr. Chairman, if I might, just a few
quick points. First and foremost, just on the law, the law about special exception could not be more
clear that any objector has to present clear, documented, specific evidence that cannot be
speculative. And what was said at an RCO meeting relative to armed guards, this applicant has been
extraordinarily clear to this board that there are no armed guards proposed for this use. And that
that was a discussion based on concerns the community had, believe it or not, for other
uses that are in this particular community that are not in any way, shape or form related to this
proposed use. And that is the exact kind of speculative testimony that many, many courts
have said does not rise to the level sufficient to essentially overturn the applicant's burden
that it has already met today. Whether the community needs something or not, with no
disrespect to members of this community, that is also not relevant. The comprehensive plan
specifically allows for this type of use. And in fact, given the fact that this is a brand new use
in the code, that's even more evidence of the appropriateness of this use in CMX2 zoning.
What we would suggest to the board as a compromise to the community, certainly understanding their concerns, Ms. Richardson's lease, I'll bring it up here, her lease is for three years.
And we would suggest to the board, if the board would feel most comfortable, to impose a temporary approval that is consistent specifically with the timeframe of her lease.
The community center use is certainly already permitted and already in operation for a couple months now. And this is just looking to ensure that that use can see its highest and best value in this particular space.
So, again, the lease is for three years. So we would we would suggest that that would be a reasonable compromise, particularly in light of the challenge relative to the specific use.
okay um so hillary i mean i'm going to hold this and we're going to take this to executive session
next wednesday we'll vote it on at two o'clock and then hillary you can answer the question that
was raised before that meredith mentioned but we're going to look at look at all sides of this
and we'll vote on this next week at 2 p.m thank you very much sounds good and the record is closed
okay all right thank you all right um is there anyone else in the virtual audience whose 330
case has not been called chair i have a hand up by an ef i can have them to speak sure
hi could you please state your name uh eric spencer sir okay could um could you spell
for the court stenographer b-r-i-c-s-p-e-n-c-e-r right do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do sir what case were you here for sir uh the one you
were just talking about sir 66 in lansdowne are you a neighbor you want to testify to it yes sir
okay so i i can't allow that because the attorney's already gone that's fine sir but my only real
question was you said you were going to postpone this no i said no i didn't postpone i said we'll
vote on it next week after we have a
discussion. Will the public be
Will the public be privy to the Zoom?
privy to the
The public can get on next
The public can get on next, get on the,
if I'm not correct, Tanya,
they can get on and listen next week.
Am I correct?
Yes, most definitely.
They can get on.
The vote will take place next Wednesday at 2 p.m.
But sir, there's no more public comment.
That's fine, man.
I'm not, I'm not, I'm not here for public comment.
I just wanted to ask the question about,
yep you can get on you can listen yeah excuse me chair just for the public audience if you have
any questions or concerns please call our office i'll put it in the chat or you can visit our
website at www.philodot.gov forward slash zba we'll be gladly we'll be glad to assist you with
any of your concerns thank you miss thank you very much thank you thank you both uh is there
anyone else in the virtual audience questions only related to cases that we have today thank you
3 30 do not see any further all right okay thanks thanks everyone we're good thank you
wonderful as always have a good night thank you all thank you
good night everyone great job bye-bye good night