It was a Zoom and a lot of people didn't make Zoom.
We have a lot of senior citizens
who are not even participating in Zoom.
Believe me, there will be more people on this call today
if a lot of our seniors understood
and would follow these hearings on Zoom.
But they don't.
all right so thank you mr sharp thank you for calling we understand where you are
thank you thank you very much is there anybody else in the virtual audience
that wants to have a comment this hillary emerson has her hand raised do i allow her to speak sir
good afternoon mr chair members of the board hillary emerson emerson on behalf of councilwoman
sherelle parker do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you proceed thank you um i just first want to note that um as mr whalen stated our
office served as the coordinating rco in this matter and we did have a meeting over zoom from
over the summer um two neighbors were in attendance um we did not hold a vote at that time i attended
to follow up with both neighbors to get further feedback after the meeting. One I was not able to
reach, and one was Ms. Tucker, the neighbor immediately adjacent, the other half of the twin,
and she expressed her opposition. In the meantime, a third neighbor, Mr. Sharp, contacted me
closer to the zoning hearing, asking how he could express his opposition.
um and the right prior to the last zoning hearing um i sent emails both to sharon and to
mr whalen indicating that the neighbors and the councilwoman were in opposition to four units at
this property um so because i had sent those letters before and or those emails before and
nothing had changed i did not send um additional correspondence regarding this um mr whalen
approached me a few weeks ago to ask if there was any way there could be further conversation
about this, potentially for three units instead of four. I reached out to both Ms. Tucker and
Mr. Sharp to ask them if they would be interested in speaking further about this. Both of them
unequivocally told me no and reiterated their concerns, which Mr. Sharp just discussed about
not wanting more rentals on the block that this property hasn't been kept up well um and it's it
it's they do not they they're fine with the two units that are currently in the front and that
have been there for some time but they're not supportive of the commercial being turned into
additional units so that that is the summary of the community's position um i want to give briefly
the summary of the councilman's position um councilman parker is also um opposed to more
than two units at this property. I just want to briefly discuss the history. Ms. Charles purchased
this property in July of 2014. She got a permit to use it as a duplex that November and a rental
license the following year for two units, a license that she kept active until last year.
She previously applied for a triplex at this property in August of 2015 prior to Councilwoman
Parker being the district councilwoman for this area. That was denied. It was opposed by the
community, presumably opposed by the councilwoman's office at the time, and again denied. She applied
in early 2021 for four units at the property. She was also cited in early 2021 by L&I for having a
new use at the property, presumably the additional units plus other property maintenance code and
fire code violations, most of which have been resolved except for the zoning related violations
because that is the subject of the hearing. We find, the councilman rather, finds that there's
no hardship in this case. This property has been used as a duplex since Ms. Charles purchased it
in 2014. While there is a history of some commercial space, a small office and storage
for a prior paint business and then be one other business in its history there is no reason that
this has to be used as residential space or even it continued to be continued to be used as
continue to be used as commercial space, but there's no, there is no hardship. We believe
commercial space but there's no there is no no hardship
also any hardship that Ms. Charles is citing has been created because she clearly has done
renovations to the property and there's no history that the commercial was used as residential
previously. So there was some sort of illegal conversion done at some point for the commercial
to become residential. As we've already stated, the community does not want additional rental
units on this block. This block is comprised of approximately 40 properties. I counted of the 40
properties, four duplexes, one triplex, which was a three-story home. Mr. Whelan showed that picture.
There was one child care center on the corner and one mixed-use property, one apartment and
one commercial on the corner. So probably about three quarters of the properties on the block
are single family homes based on property records by the city. I also, lastly, just wanted to note
some of the neighbors' concerns about additional units may have to do with there being a large
apartment complex at 13th and Nidro, a half a block away that was vacant for some time. It's
now been renovated and additional units as well as an additional building have been added, creating
already an influx of rental units in the area. So that, I believe, is also feeding to the
residents' concerns as well. That is all I have. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Emerson. Thank you. Sean, before I give this to the Planning Commission,
do you have any comments? Yes, thank you very much, Chairman. With regard to a number of the
the issues raised, any decision today by this board would certainly not be presidential in
any kind of way. This is the only building that I'm aware of on the block that is built out like
this. It's one of the few that is actually a double wide lot. We have a very large existing
structure, which, you know, this board is very familiar with coming before it all over the city.
the hardship that miss Charles had to endure when she purchased the project was that you know when
you take something when you purchase something at sheriff sale you're not allowed to enter the
project or the building rather before you know what you're kind of getting your hands on
and she was issued a or provided a copy of a imminently dangerous designation so it was not
her personal choice whether or not to improve the project. She had to improve the project
or completely demo the project. So she was put in an impossible position immediately after
her purchase of the project, which was not of her doing. We have, you know, Ms. Emerson raises
a good point about the property and it not being maintained. Ms. Charles admitted that. She had
noted that and even before this project this process started she had retained that professionally
licensed uh individual in order to be the property manager uh going forward and to address all of
those issues um again you have a very large property uh unlike the rest of the lot it's an
existing building um she's our it already has as you can tell three gas meters four electric meters
It was always set up and intended for multiple use, and I think that at this time, Ms. Charles
is willing to accept a three-unit approval instead of a four-unit approval in an attempt
to work with the councilwoman and the neighbors, even though they refused a second meeting
to allow us to address any of their ongoing issues or concerns.
Thank you very much for your consideration today.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. David Fecto, City Planning Commission. Members of the Board,
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at
this location. This appears to be an existing legal two-unit home with a business dating
to at least 2016. There are no unique physical characteristics of the property that would
require it to be used with four units. And since the building has been used for fewer
than four units, four is not the minimum necessary for the applicant to derive value. So the
City Planning Commission is going to recommend that the board deny the use of that.
Thank you. MI 2021-002175-5916 North 13th Street. I vote no.
Harold Tennery, my vote is no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience that has any other cases from the two o'clock?
i see no other hands okay we're gonna take a five minute
Okay, we're going to take a five minute break and then we'll get in here and we'll go through
this 330 as quick as we can, guys.
All right, thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
you can read your spiel okay good afternoon my name is bill bergman i will be chairing this
afternoon's meeting of the zoning board of adjustment with me is carol tenary our vice
chair present ishmael shaheed our board secretary there mr chair thomas holliman our board member
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our board administrator, Tanya Sunkit, and our attorney, Rebecca Cole.
Before we start, let me talk about our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tanyasunkit at philadelphia.gov.
2. For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
3. If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, 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 lastly, please note the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments.
Any comments should be directed to Tanya Sunken, our board administrator.
Let's start with continuances.
I have listed as a continuance number two. MI 2021-003-391-1654-60 Margaret Street is requested by the attorney in order to meet with the RCO. Is there anybody in the virtual audience that has a comment about that?
Number two is continued.
Number two is, pardon me?
I saw no hands for that one, sir.
Okay, number two is continued.
Is there any other continuities that anyone would like to request at this time?
Again, I see no hands, sir.
Okay, so we're going to start.
And the first case that we're going to hear is MI 2021-003-549-5956 Harbison Avenue, Harry Cook.
At this point, no RCO letter from the Wissan-Oming Civic Association.
Mr. Cook.
Mr. Cook will be coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
hi can everyone hear me we can mr cook can you state your name is all for the court reporter
please sure harry cook h-a-r-r-y c-o-o-k anastasio law do you swear or firm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do you i do sir and our vice chair has a few questions for
you sure hi mr cook do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do based on our notes it shows that you have submitted all the required documents is that
correct yes it is okay you may proceed thank you thank you so much vice chair and mr chairman i'm
sorry madam chair it looks like there's no letter am i correct there there is a letter we received
it yesterday okay thank you it was a noming thank you i just wanted to make sure because my notes
were different. Sure, and that just came, and I sent a copy to Solicitor Saleta and also RCOCBA
earlier this afternoon, and it's part of my presentation. Wonderful. You can carry on, sir.
Thank you. I'm going to begin sharing screen.
So today we're going to start with refusal, do an atlas site overview, which will go into
some of the hardship arguments, review the zoning plan, photos, deed to prove ownership,
current NAC certification, RCAO notice meeting letter, the addresses sent to, proof of mailing,
The letter of non-opposition from the Sonoma Civic Association, and I'll call my client as a witness to adopt testimony.
the letter of non-opposition from Wissanomic Civic Association, then I'll call my client.
We are here presenting 5956 Harveston Avenue.
There's a single refusal.
We're trying to change the use from residential to business professional, office, and existing structure.
We're not proposing any changes inside other than repurposing bedrooms and offices and conference rooms.
A little bit about this particular property, if everyone can see my Atlas screen for administrative notice.
This property here is highlighted in blue.
It's very large.
It's almost 4,000 square feet.
It sits at Comely and Harbison and is one of one, two, three, four, five, six points on this intersection.
My client purchased this property in 2015.
He is a seasoned realtor.
Since that time, he has had a very difficult time maintaining a viable tenancy in this property.
Some of the properties next door, 5952, for example, are in pre-court because of different code violations.
This property has no violations. It's well-maintained, as you will see.
Another interesting aspect of this property, a peculiar interesting aspect of this property, is that as far as all of the other properties at this intersection, at this five-point intersection, this is the only one that is zoned RSA, zoned residential.
We believe that in the context of Hertzberg, context matters, and that along with the history here at this property, some of its surrounding neighbors, it is not conducive to residential at this point.
We've received feedback in the past from families with children who did not want to rent this property because of its proximity to this very busy and active intersection.
There's that issue.
And then two, you know, here you have convenience stores, you have delis, you have other sorts of properties that when we go into some of the photos I'll show you, including a bar, that really create a nexus of commercial activity at this intersection.
And again, this is an end cap property on this intersection is at the main four square walk area of the intersection.
And we believe it is more conducive to commercial in that aspect.
We're not suggesting that we put on a Wawa that is directly across the street or a convenience store or a deli or a supermarket.
This is going to be a low intensity use. It's going to be owner operated. It's going to have normal business hours. It's going to have commercial trash pickup. And it's going to, we believe, revitalize that corner in a way that, you know, one also helps other people find homes in the area.
So with that, I'm going to move over to the plans.
Can everyone see my screen?
So here, what we are proposing, it's a two-story building.
As you can see, it's rather large.
There's some outdoor space.
It has a large area here as a side yard.
It has parking availability for prospective real estate clients.
as we come to the interior. Again, no changes are planned. As you'll see in the picture,
this is the current area, the foyer and living room area will be changed to reception with a
reception area here. Conference room in the dining room, kitchenette. Moving up to the second floor,
three offices to replace the three bedrooms that are currently in place.
Basement uses mechanicals and storage. Here you can see it. It's not attached to any other
property. It juts out on that corner of that five-point intersection at Comey and Harbison.
it almost has a look and feel of a physician's office or a realtor's office as it already stands
here is the side area and deck
Here is the side area and deck, another photo of the deck, the driveway
another photo
from Comley, interior, second floor, basement.
As you can see, it's clean and well-maintained
despite the fact that it has not had a viable tenancy in seven years.
My client has been a realtor for almost 30 years in the Commonwealth.
Here's a picture of the property at Comley and Harbison.
You can see the deli bodega across the street there.