ZBA Hearing - June 5, 2024

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

2003.

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is no longer applicable.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

to

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?

I do.

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?

I do.

I do.

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

Okay

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?

Yes.

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

is

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