provide revised plans we made two changes from a proviso standpoint we removed the fourth floor
balcony and we added the basement egress stairs to the rear of the building it was important to
the community uh that the lower level unit which occupies the first floor in the lower level
um had direct exterior access and which they do now so that's if you know the board uh does grant
this variance we would ask they grant it with this you know revised plan which is right here
And then one of our variance requests has to do with occupied area.
and then one of our variance requests has to do with occupied area
First of all, this is from the city's website.
This is the building structure that used to be there.
The city hasn't updated their record.
So if you look at that building structure, we clearly don't meet the occupied area threshold under the Philadelphia zoning codes.
But neither does our property next to us or many of the properties in close proximity to us as well.
So it's not out of character to what we're offering, you know, to to not meet that occupied area requirements.
And then we met with not just the community at the community meeting, but also to our neighbors.
And, you know, we received people who signed our letter or a petition of support.
And then separately, people signed a letter of support as well.
And you can see all these people are in our block. So we're really focused on the people
who would be most directly impacted as well to this proposed use.
And then again, we're not trying to seek a variance for density. These are just dimensional
variances that, again, are not out of character to what you see in a neighborhood. So this is
So RM1 property, and we're allowed to have three units as of right.
And then you can see here, this is what the current condition of our property is.
The property to the left of us, again, caused some foundational issues, and we had to demolish our property.
And this is the current state of our property.
Another point of emphasis is that while we're seeking a height variance, the cornice line in the front is 36 feet.
Then we have a mansurred roof, which is pitched 11 degrees. So that was another point of emphasis for SOSNA is the fact that our cornice line is actually 36 feet, while we exceed the height limit of 38 feet.
Because of the pitch of the roof, it doesn't seem as high. And plus, we also mimic the property to the left of us. And then this is our poster showing proof of posting for today's hearing.
this is our property uh can't really see here but either to the left or right of us same here
on bainbridge and our plans and drawings again as you can see we have a mansard roof
um it's 36 feet high this the height of our property mimics the property to the left of us
And then, again, the only
The only
refusal we have to do with occupied area is because the second
story side yard. If we did not
have the second story side yard, we would fulfill our requirements for
occupied area under the Philadelphia Zoning Code.
And then just our floor plans, you know, simply, we have a three-bedroom, three-bath on the first floor and lower level.
We have a two-bedroom, two-bath on the second floor, and we have a three-bedroom, three-bath on the third floors and fourth floors.
And every single unit has outdoor living availability.
The first floor, lower level, unit number one has a backyard. The second floor has that side deck area. And then the third floor, fourth floor unit has the roof deck.
We met on June 21st at 7 p.m.
176 addresses were notified of this community meeting,
lists of those addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses,
our applications for appeal that we filed on behalf of Ryan and Patty,
our notice of refusal, our project information form,
our deed to the property showing that they've owned it and for some time.
And finally, our Certificate of Tax Clearance, showing they're in good standing with the city for real estate taxes. With that being said, I would ask that Patty virtually raise her hand.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
my name is patricia sanchez p-a-t-r-i-c-i-a-s-a-n-c-h-e-z do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i swear was she counsel yes uh patty you heard
everything i had to state today about gerazonia matter yes and everything i stated was that true
Yes. And everything I stated, was that true and correct? Yes, that was true and correct.
Cracked
Yeah. And do you adopt that presentation as your own testimony? Yes, I do.
Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Hi, Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing RM1 multifamily zoning at this location.
We feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate any hardship
that would justify the additional height or occupied area.
The nearby non-conforming property does not establish a hardship
for the property owner under review,
and there is no hardship for vacant land.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends
the Board deny the variance.
MI 2023 002 426 1916 Bainbridge Street I vote yes proviso revised plans one page
stamped by ZBA on September 13th 2023. Thomas Holliman my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank counsel, please. You have one more here. Okay.
I-2023-002-373-1237 West Tioga Street.
Letter of support from Nicetown Tioga Improvement Team.
And also a petition of support signed by approximately 13 neighbors.
Yes. Again, good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Alan Nockamson for the applicant HHS Realty OLC and in the virtual audience is its member Hussain
Hussain. Our vice chair has a few questions. Do you agree to waive the reading and the
refusal to relate to his accuracy? I do. And have you emailed all the required documents that are
needed to proceed with this case uh yes we have please proceed thank you
hi um it's pretty straightforward matter uh we're a couple blocks away uh from
Broad Street at 1237 West
Diogo Street. We're looking to
put a multifamily
structure on this rather large lot of
1,603 square feet. So during
our presentation, we're going to first review
the news or refusal, then
review the letter of support from the coordinating RCO,
which expressed the, or confirmed the
support in the neighborhood. We also met
with members of the community outside the community meeting.
We have a petition.
We reviewed the Philadelphia 2035 plan.
So this proposed multifamily use goes in line
with the aspirations of the 2035 plan.
And I would believe that's another reason
why this CBA should support this variance request.
Then we'll review maps of the area,
photographs of the property, our plans and drawings,
our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal, then our deed, and then our certificate of tax
clearance. Again, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Hussain
virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and I'll have a few questions for him about my presentation.
So notice of refusal, this is an RSA-5 property. It's a rather large law of 1,603 square feet,
And we're trying to put four dwelling units in here.
We have two refusals.
First, this is our RSA-5 property and having four dwelling units technically under the Philadelphia Zoning Code is not allowed as of right.
Again, it's a big lot.
And if you look at the 2035 plan, it talks about increasing density specifically around the Allegheny Station, which we are adjacent to.
So what we're asking for falls in line with the aspirations of the 2035 plan.
The second refusal has to do with rear yard depth, where nine feet is required.
Well, technically, under the Philadelphia Zoning Code and the examination, excuse me, the interpretation of it, were seven feet, a little more than eight inches of that.
A little more than eight inches of that. And the only thing I would say to that is that we're really 42 feet. It's just an irregular shaped lot, and we'll show you that. So due to something we can't control, you know, we would ask that the zoning board allow that variance request as well.
and the only thing I would say
And then the letter of support, again, we met with the community.
They unanimously supported our project.
They did have some provisos.
I don't believe any of them are enforceable, but, of course, my client is going to comply with them, but they're not enforceable from a zoning perspective.
Petition, we met, again, with people outside of the community meeting that live close by, and they expressed their support as well of this project.
And then the 2035 plan, if you look at item number nine, it states concentrate new housing development adjacent to existing transit resources.
Specifically in the bullet point, it says increase the allowable density near major transit stations such as Allegheny Station by changing base zoning and or adding a TOD overlay.
Well, we are adjacent to the Allegheny Station. So having this increased use of the property by way of four units only supports the aspirations of the 2035 plan.
And then if you look at the map itself, it's I've never seen anything like this.
We're orange all around us or red or pink, except this one little block, which really doesn't make sense.
So, you know, especially when you consider the 2035 plan.
And then photographs of the property were a vacant lot.
Here's proof of posting of that lot for today's hearing.
This is our, you know, Tioga from both the left and the right.
And then you'll see that we mimic the architectural design of the property.
So a cornice, we have a cornice line that mimics the property to the left of us.
We have a porch just like the property to the left of us as well.
And then if you see
under the examiner's interpretation of Philadelphia zoning codes,
This is our rear yard setback of seven feet, almost eight feet, but we're really on the long side of it, 42 and a half feet long.
So again, within this, we meet the requirements within the spirit of the code.
And then just our floor plans are pretty basic.
The first floor, the lower level is a two bedroom, one and a half bath.
you go up a flight of steps to the right to the left of us is unit two which is a studio to the
right of us is unit three which is also a studio and then unit number four is on the third floor
which is a two-bedroom one bath we met with the community on may 16th at 6 pm 142 addresses were
notified in the meeting these are the addresses which were notified proof of mailing to those
addresses, our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of HHS Realty LLC, along
with the notice of refusal, the project information form, the deeds of property showing that HHS
Realty LLC is the owner of the property, and the Certificate of Tax Clearance showing that
my client's in good standing with respect to real estate taxes.
I would ask that Mr. Hussain virtually raise his hand now.
Counsel, could you first show us what the rest of the area looks like?
relative oh yeah yeah everything okay well that's what i'm sorry sorry i i don't mean to be
dismissive no so this is this is the whole neighborhood except our block we're the only
thing that's yellow in the entire neighborhood and we took as wide an angle as you can imagine
And then the block you're on, Alan, is that also multiple family units?
There are sprinkling of multifamily units here.
Again, this is also a big property.
It's over 1,600 square foot lot.
And is four units the minimum, you think, Alan?
I think, you know, unfortunately, and you've heard me say this over and over again,
And from a financial standpoint, it's just it's just so expensive to build, you know, nowadays.
You know, nowadays, and my client couldn't justify the expense to build anything less than that.
And my client couldn't justify the.
Okay. All right. Bring your client on, please.
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, sir. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Hussain, Hussain, first name H-U-S-S-E-I-N, last name H-U-S-S-E-I-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Hussain, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Yes, I have.
Yes, and including the economic feasibility of not being able to build this unless it's
four units yes right yes all right and did everything i state is every did everything i
say today um has it is it true and correct it is yes okay and do you adopt as your own testimony
yes all right thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no chair
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair leaning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5 single family residential
zoning at this location there is no hardship for vacant land and this property is outside
the established tod boundaries we feel the level of variance would be better addressed through
rezoning accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance
in my 2023 002 373 1237 west tayoga street i vote yes with proviso maximum three units
thomas holliman my vote is yes proviso james snell my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shahid my vote is yes with proviso thank you thank you
number 11 mi 2022 006 210 46 19 to 21 lancaster avenue
Cheryl Gaston is the attorney.
Chair, I have a Roberto Espeno with a hand raised.
A letter of support from Mill Creek Advisory Council, and also Councilperson Gauthier has taken a position of support.
Proceed, Jason Mopset.
Please excuse me, sir.
I have a Roberto Espeno with a hand raised.
Do I allow him to speak?
you can okay see let's see what he has to say we're looking for cheryl gaston
mr chair mr espinal is the tenant in this matter right um yes so i don't i don't know if
Gaston would be under him
oh I do see