Thank you.
Good morning, everyone. Are y'all able to hear me?
We can.
Yes, we can now.
Oh, thank you. I'm so sorry, y'all.
There's always something on hearing day.
How's everybody?
How many people?
Yeah, 52 attendees, and you can start as you wish.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's meetings.
With me is our board member, Cheryl L. Gaston, present Mr. Chairman, our board member, Tanetta Graham, present Mr. Chairman, and our board member, Taya Nguyen, present Mr. Chairman.
So present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting zbaexecutivedirector at phila.gov.
For a 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 address the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All comments should be directed to ZBA Executive Director at philip.gov.
Let's look at our schedule for this.
Number one, MI 2023-003-305-8085 Rowland Avenue.
Jennifer Bozzillo is the attorney.
I understand that's going to be a continuance.
Counsel?
Good morning, Chair.
This is Jedman, and I will be your co-host today.
Jennifer Bozzillo has been allowed to speak.
hello members good morning good morning council could you please state your name is spelled for
the court sonographer sure it's jennifer bazidlo uh b-a-z-y-d-l-o you swear or firm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do i understand you may need a continuance for
this case i do um i just want to apologize to the board i've been having some health issues so i
We just need one more continuance to address some of the community issues that need to be addressed.
Thank you very much.
So MI 2023-003-305-8085-Rolland Avenue, that case should continue.
Thanks for getting on the phone, counsel.
Number two, MI 2023-003-382-6340 Musgrave Avenue, that case is continued.
Number five, MI 2023-003-719-849-North Newkirk Street.
That case is continued.
Number 10, MI 2024-00105.
1328 West Clearfield Street. That case is continued. Number 15.
MI 2024-003-374-630 West Mayfield Street. Bizet Dorm is the listed applicant. We have no exhibits.
I believe this case is going to be continued.
Is there anyone in the audience from this case?
Bissette Durham has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
How are you?
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Bissette Durham, B-I-S-S-E-T-T-D-U-R-H-E-M.
D-U-R-H-E-M.
I'm here as a city expediter for 630 West Mayfield.
I'm here as a city expediter for 630 West Mayfield Street.
We need the owner.
We don't need an expediter.
She's in the Dominican Republic.
She will be connecting shortly, I believe.
She was earlier on.
We don't have any exhibits, right?
I sent exhibits.
I think you sent the Murray Lee.
Excuse me, Ms. Chair.
um miss durham who what is the the owner the property owner's name her name is yesenia
okay um so so first of all the exhibits were not submitted until after midnight last night
they have to be submitted five days in advance and um only the property owner or their attorney
can present the information to the board okay so she was available earlier and um she had to get
of, he lives in the Dominican Republic.
Well, when she
gets rescheduled, she,
while the hearings start at
9.30, there's a whole list of hearings,
so they need to be available to wait until
their case is called.
Okay, so do you
know when it will be scheduled?
You will be contacted
by the ZBA staff regarding the new date.
She has to be present
even though she doesn't speak English?
Yes. Then she needs to request an interpreter.
okay sounds good thank you so thank you number 15 mi 2024 003 374 630 west mayfield street
that case is continued and number 16
MI 2024-003-378-2628 South Watt Street.
Joseph Fiore is the listed owner.
I believe this case is going to be continued.
I have a hand up by the name of Joseph Vaccaro.
I'm not sure if this is the same person.
I'm going to allow them.
That may be the attorney.
Maybe he's representing him.
Mr. Vaccaro.
Good morning, Mr. Bergman.
How are you today?
Do you represent 2628 South Watts?
Correct.
I represent.
Number one, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning.
May it please the board, Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O.
on behalf of joseph fiori the applicant you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do but carol we uh uh we we are lacking a lot of plans so we're
going to wind up continuing this i i i i understand what the board is saying uh besides the plans is
there any other matters or any other there's no plans provided go ahead go ahead yeah as I say
Mr. Ricard there are multiple um documents missing we just received a copy of the RCO letter but we
don't have a deed a tax clearance or a copy of the plans for the proposed edition okay it's my
it's my understanding those were those were requested two days ago from the uh I believe
expediter that submitted the information and we did not receive them I I understand Ms. Emerson
And it's just my it's my understanding that the expediter had submitted these items on Friday, but I could follow up with everybody.
Yeah, no, they did not submit a complete exhibit packet.
I understand. I hear what you're saying.
So, MI 2024-003-378-2628 South, Watt Street, that case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
yes chair i have a hand up by the name of darlene three she has been allowed to speak
good morning commissioner darling three on behalf of the applicant mi-2023-003524 56
18 22 avenue
By the way, could you spell your name for the court stenographer?
Darlene, D-E-R-L-E-N-E, Threatt, T as in Thomas, H-R-E-A-T-T as in Thomas.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Commissioner, what's the address again? I'm sorry.
5618 to 22 Chew Avenue.
That's number three, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Please proceed, Council.
Commissioner, this case was reassigned from a civic association for noncompliance. I had to have a new civic association. I actually noticed this meeting two times. The last meeting, September 16th.
Commissioner, this case was reassigned from a civic association for
Unfortunately, the host had technical difficulties, and the meeting had to be canceled, and I couldn't reschedule again before this hearing. So I'm asking for one additional contingent.
I think we already called this for a contingent. Am I correct, Hillary?
um i'm not sure all right good i'm fine mi2023 003 524 56 18 to 22 chew avenue
cases continued thanks for your call thank you very much and mr jerry i just want to note that
board member johns has now joined us thank you um are there any other requests for continuances
Yes, Chair. I have two more hands up.
Michael McElhaney has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
Michael McElhenney, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, M-C-I-L-H-I-N-N-E-Y.
Warning, counsel. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case do you want to talk about?
I am here for Mr. Orfanides on case address 3910 Germantown Ave, MI 2024-003394, requesting a continuance attorney moving party.
We may be withdrawing this petition or this appeal.
That's number 17, Mr. Chair.
I don't think we've quite gotten to that one.
Hold on
Here we go
MI2024
003 394
3910 Germantown Avenue
Cases continued
Thank you
Thank you for your call
Any other continuances?
Yes, Chair
I have a hand up by the name of Kimberly LaCrosse
They have been allowed to speak
Good morning. Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Kimberly, K-I-M-B-E-R-L-Y, LaCroix, L-A-C-R-O-I-X.
I'm actually not requesting.
Hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth to hold nothing but the truth?
What case do you want to talk about?
I'm talking, I'm calling about 8085 Rowland Avenue, which you have continued.
The reason I just want to speak up is I am opposed to it.
And this is the third continual.
I want to be certain that it doesn't continue in perpetuity.
In other words, I think I think the counsel on that is ill.
And she's had some medical issues.
I understand that.
She also said there are some community issues, which I'm unaware of.
The community is opposed to it, but, but I just want to be certain that.
Just so you know, we, we, we have your letter and we understand your position.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Thank you very much.
Have a good day.
You too.
Any other hands?
I see no more hands at this time tier.
So MI 2023-003-526-4331 Brankford Avenue, counsel is David Chandler or Ha Young Bach. I understand this case is being withdrawn. Is either counsel in the audience?
i see no hands at this time chair and i see no one by the name of david and we had a hearing
listed back in 5 29 24 the client did not show up council said they were going to send a letter
So MI2023-003-526-4331, Frankfurt Avenue, I vote to dismiss.
John, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Sonata Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
My vote is to dismiss.
I'm going to move to our add-on list, MI 2024-003-270-3220 Germantown Avenue.
I vote yes with proviso.
Maximum three units, no basement living.
No basement living.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, saying provisos.
Tynetta Graham, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ty Owen, my vote is yes, with provisos.
And number two, MI 2024-003-175-6709 Essington Avenue.
The vote in this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, October 23rd, 2024, at 9.30 a.m.
We're going to start with case number 18.
MI 2024
1026 to 36
Fairmont Avenue. Augusta O'Neill
is the attorney.
Michael Johns has recused
himself from this
Augusta O'Neill
is coming in as a panelist. Good morning. Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your
name as spelled for the court stenographer? Sure. My name is Augusta O'Neill, A-U-G-U-S-T-A. My
last name is spelled O-apostrophe-N-E-I-L-L. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Do you identify your client in a relationship
to the property? Sure. My client is Frenkel Enterprises. They're the owner of the property.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusals, and do you agree with the accuracy?
I do. And in fact, a corrected refusal was just issued this morning, which your board solicitor forwarded to me.
I understand. You have a letter of support from the 14th Community Organization, RCO, and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Young. Please proceed and share your screen.
thank you members of the board uh this morning i'm representing the owners of the property at
10 26 to 36 fairmount avenue my client is frankel enterprises included at page 34 of your exhibit
package which is up on my screen is an aerial just to orient you to the property i've also
provided some street view pictures of the property in question as you can see this property is
currently a vacant lot we are proposing to relocate lot lines and subdivide to create
22 parcels from one existing parcels and construct a three-story single-family home
on each parcel each of the houses are going to range from 1400 to 1600 square feet
a copy of our plan was included at page 29 of my exhibit package this project did receive a refusal
um in my exhibit package is a copy of the old refusal but as i indicated at the beginning a
new refusal has been issued um the refusal that was issued for this project related to the minimum
lot area as you can see there from the refusal on my screen we are in the fifth district overlay
we're required to provide minimum lot area of 1440 square feet and there are 17 parcels that
are less than 1440 square feet this project is a partnership with turn the key for anyone who
isn't familiar with turn the key the program is designed to take vacant lots in the city of
Philadelphia, such as the one at issue here, publicly owned land and partner with private
developers such as my client to create affordable housing. A lot of the lots are vacant, like
I said, and they can be a real issue for the city because the vacant lots can be a source
of drug use and other crimes. So this partnership allows homeownership to be within reach for
many Philadelphians. The average homeowner can pay approximately $1,300 a month for one of these
houses, which are three bedrooms. The average rent in the city right now is $1,800. So that's a
huge difference. This enables a lot of Philadelphians to create generational wealth
through that home ownership. There are also many city employees who have been able to benefit from
the Turn to Key program. And in fact, on September 27th of this year, just a few weeks ago, it was
my honor to attend a ribbon cutting with my clients for their new development at Bucknell
Square in Girard Commons. These are two workforce housing communities totaling 73 affordable homes
in the Sharswood neighborhood that my clients were also integral in developing. My clients did meet
um integral in developing um my clients did meet with the affected rco for this property the 14th
with the affected argument.
community organization rco on september 5th they did receive rco support for this project
a copy of that letter of support was provided at page six of the exhibit package i just want to
note um that the rco in providing their letter of support did commend my clients for um the
the the answers that they provided to the neighborhood um questions um the vote was
unanimously in favor of my client's application and i also wanted to just note that the um rco
noted in their letter the community expressed support for this application because of the use
of land would be for affordable single-family homes under the turn to keep program and it is
keeping in keeping with continuity of the neighborhood um and as mr terry noted um
And yesterday, Councilman Young's office did also provide a letter of non-opposition, which I'm sharing on my screen.
And with that being said, I would ask my clients, Max and Zach Frankel, to come forward to make themselves available for.
Could you show us the, do you have drawings of the properties?
Why don't you just show the properties?
So I have a copy of the plan.
It's at page 29 in my exhibit package.
I don't have renderings.
we have the elevation but i don't have a rendering
zachary frankel has been allowed to speak
hi this is zachary frankel the owner of the parcel could you state your name and spell it
for the court scenario that's zachary frankel z-a-c-h-a-r-y last name is frankel f-r-a-n-k-e-l
from tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed council
morning zach uh mr frankel did you have an opportunity to hear my testimony this morning
i did was everything that i said true and accurate it was was there anything that you would like to
add there's not okay um and would you like to adopt my testimony as your own i would thank you
um mr chair my client and i are available for any questions the board may have
I'll take questions from the board, but it's kind of difficult not to even see any rendering at all.
And I would think the board may be a little, at least want to have a view of it before we would vote on it.
But I'll take questions from the board now, questions about it.
Well, we may have to have a resumptive hearing on this to take a look at it.
All right.
Oh, Zach, actually raising his hand.
Mr. Chair, I'm happy to walk through the elevations that we provided, if that would suffice for the board.
Why don't you walk through the elevation, and then I'll take questions on the board, and we'll decide where we're going to be.
Sure thing. The elevations detail materials and are true to form to what will be built.
so i think the elevations will actually do a better job than renderings
please proceed
one second
let me just get the elevation up my screen here uh mr chair
Excuse me, Chair.
This is Bettina.
I wasn't sure if I wasn't hearing correctly, but was he sworn in?
Mr. Franco was sworn in.
thank you so much apologies for my audio
no no no not at all not at all
counsel
i'm just sorry i'm just trying to pull up on my screen
chair may i ask if these elevations were shown to the community without without a renderings
they they were shown to the community
they were part of the presentation package to the rco
but you didn't
But you didn't show renderings to the RCO at the RCO meeting?
No, we have not done renderings of the project. Again, when you see the elevations,
I think that this will add a lot more context.
Thank you.
trying to
just having some technical issues here. I'll get them up as soon as I can.
Zach, if you have them at your fingertips, are you able to
share them on your screen or I'm just trying to pull them up?
Are you able to locate them, Guthy?
I have them.
It's just not letting me, for whatever reason, share them.
I should be able to do that.
Unless, Zach, do you have them at your fingertips to bring them up on your screen?
I am working off of my phone right now.
Let me see if I can send them to you.
So this would be for Mr. chair board member when is having some connectivity issues we
just need to make sure that she is able to to get back on before we proceed.
I think I'm here, Hillary. Can you guys hear me?
Oh, you're back? Okay, great.
It's spotty, though. I don't know what's going on.
I got an unstable internet connection sign. I'm trying to reset.
Kelsey, I just emailed your typical elevations.
i just want to confirm uh mr chair this is the brush case i'm recusing from yes okay all right
thank you and you have the next one too
how about if we come back to this
they should be at the top of your email
I just sent them
cancel
you're muted too
Apologies. Okay, this should work. Let me see if I can pull them up.
Are you able to see that? Yes. Okay, so these are three-story homes. They have a second-story roof
deck, and Zach, did you want to take the board? Yeah, if I could walk you through our typical
elevation um and it'll make a lot more sense so these are designed to be contextual within the
neighborhood of west poplar i think that's why the rco applauded us for them um so these are
again three-story rick facades um it's there there will be some mixed materials in terms of
metal siding um and um cladding throughout but they are three stories so there'll be a large
living area on the ground floor the second floor will have two bedrooms and a full bathroom
and the third floor will really be a master suite that has a large bedroom uh of a full bath
laundry and storage as well as a roof deck in the rear um but from the the street level
these will be um three stories you'll have anywhere from three to potentially five
depending on the elevation steps up into the house um metal railings um so obviously the
The materials are meant to be a mix of red brick and differing metal material that is contextual within the West Poplar neighborhood.
It is mostly a three-story red brick.
It is mostly a three-story red brick facade.
Is it built on a slab?
Yes, they are built on a slab.
Questions from the board.
I have one other quick question.
So are the stairs, I can't really tell because the elevations are small right here.
So are they closed in or is it an open area under the stairs like for trash storage?
they they are closed in okay all right i see okay i see it better thank you yeah
the question is from the board
is cheryl on
just confirming none of the units are accessible or visitable
I'm on. I'm on, Mr. Chair. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Yes, I'm tired. I've got noise issues
going on out here. All right. All right. Ty, please proceed again. Yeah, I was just asking.
I just want to confirm there's 17 units and none are accessible or visible. There's 22
units. Did you say they're they're not visible? I'm asking are any of them accessible or
visitable, which means
they would have a zero grade step entry either at the front or the rear.
No, there's no requirement for ADA accessible
units here. So we are not
providing them in this instance.
Okay. And then for
the lot refusals, you said 17 of the lots are under the 1440.
what's the right square footage of the lots that are under
say that one more time for the lots that are for the 17 lots that are under 1440 square feet
what is the range and square footage of those lots the total square footage
the range in those lots this is uh let me see between just pulling it up onto the screen
the range is between 1200 it looks like the smallest is 1215 but again the gfa of the
the homes themselves are between 1600s per feet and then my last question is i know you said that
the rco praised you for contextuality but isn't the richard allen homes across the street not
those two-story homes with a-line roofs of most of our the majority of the lot um faces towards
melon street actually and melon street and 11th street um and around 10th street so is some of the
houses do face the richard allen homes which are two stories um but even on that block of fairmount
avenue there are three-story structures um this isn't our first project in the west popular
neighborhood it was made very clear to us by the neighborhood that they want three-story structures
just in the richard allen homes have you know large front yards and front yard setbacks so
having three-story homes are on this block um are not going to hover over those homes by any means
Okay, thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
When this matter is voted, it should be noted that it is per refusal dated 10-9-24.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Conlon Crosley. They have been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Chair.
Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenography?
Yes, sir. It is Conlon C-O-N-L-A-N Crosley C-R-O-F-L-E-Y.
we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth you're from the council
office my car yes sir all right please proceed sir um i just wanted to uh sorry mr chair he
he didn't answer okay could you answer please i'm sorry yes i do thank you very much please proceed
um i just wanted to uh reiterate i was at the community meeting where it had unanimous support
and that the council office has a position of non-opposition for this project.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
Amy Board with the Planning Commission, A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing
single-family residential RSA-5.
This is the Turn the Key affordable housing project sponsored by the Lane Bank.
In the City's Comprehensive Plan, Objective 1.1.2, B recommends promoting the development of new affordable housing units, prioritizing infill gap vacancies.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant their requested variances for minimum lot size.
MI 2024-005-346-1026-36 Fairmount Avenue.
I vote yes per amended refusal 10-9-24.
Carol Gaston, my vote is yes.
St. Proviso.
Snedda Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, members of the board.
We're going to go on to 19 now.
MI 2024-005-360-662 North 10th Street.
Augusta O'Neill is the attorney. Just for the record, could you please state your name?
Sure. My first name is Augusta, A-U-G-U-S-T-A. Last name is O-N-E-I-L-L.
Do you identify your client?
Sure. My client, again, for this application is Frankel Enterprises. They're the owner of the property.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with its accuracy?
Please share your screen.
are you able to see that almost it's not up yet it's coming up
yep it's up it's up all right um let's just just kind of get this sorry it's um
the little bar for the sharing screen is making it difficult for me to navigate the
the pages so i apologize um so again members of the board thank you i'm here again this morning
representing the owners of the property frankel enterprises they own the property at 662 north 10
street um included in my exhibit package for this application as well i provided some
um some aerials of this property again this is again another application where
um Frankel Enterprises is taking vacant lots partnering with Turn the Key to create those
three-story single-family affordable homes that um we just reviewed as part of 1026 to 36 Fairmount
Avenue for this particular application the property um is going to be subdivided or I'm sorry
the lot lines are going to be relocated to um five parcels and there are going to be five single
family homes on each of these lots. This project also received a refusal. The single refusal
issued was for the lot size. The RSA 5 5th district overlay district does require those
minimum lot areas to be at least 1,440 square feet. And again, we are undersized. We are less
than the 1440 square feet um the application again is of a partnership with turn the key
um to create these affordable homes um and just if the board would like i would
um for the interest of time i won't again detail the program but this is again another partnership
that my clients have engaged in um there are multiple projects as you've seen that they're
working on with turn the key throughout the city um this is another one of those projects and the
same elevations that were shown for 1026 to 36 fairmount avenue um those would again be what we'd
be constructing here and so um the clients my clients did meet with the affected rco for the
property and in fact the um meeting that they attended back in september was for both this
application for 1026 to 36 Fairmount Avenue. Um, so I'd ask that the testimony that I gave for
1026 to 36 be recognized here. And again, just for the interest of time. Um, and so my clients
did receive unanimous approval for both this project and the other one that was, that was
just presented. Um, the properties here, the square footage of the homes is going to range
from 1500 to 1600 square feet. And in addition to getting a unanimous letter of support on this,
And in addition to getting a unanimous letter of support on this project, they also have a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Young's office.
So, again, Mr. Frankel, if you could raise your hand and identify yourself.
Mr. Frankel, you've already been sworn. Just state your name, please.
Zachary Frankel, if you're in the audience, please raise your virtual hand.
Hi, good morning.
Mr. Frankel, just state your name, please. You've already been sworn.
zachary frankel please proceed counsel mr frankel did you have a chance to hear my testimony on
the application for 662 north 10th street this morning i did was everything that i
relate to the board true and accurate it was is there anything that you would wish to add
no okay um and would you like to adopt my testimony as your own yes i would thank you
So, Chairman, I would invite the board if there are any questions about this.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hilaria Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, too.
Planning Commission.
Amy Wood with the Planning Commission.
comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing
residential single-family RSA 5. This is the turn the key to affordable housing project.
The City's comprehensive plan, Objective 1.2.3b, recommends promoting the development of new
affordable housing units, prioritizing infill gap vacancies. The Planning Commission recommends
that the Board grant the requested variances for minimum lot size. Thank you. MI 2024-005-360-667
to North 10th Street. I vote yes. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Tywin, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, counsel. Thank you. Apologies
again. Sure. Number seven, MI 2023-005-953-5646 Cedar Avenue. Verna Agee is the listed tenant
an applicant?
If you're in the virtual audience,
can you please raise your hand?
we see a hand yes chair she has been promoted to
Penalty.
Good morning.
Verna.
Do we hear her hand?
Yes, Chair. It looks like she declined.
Berna, please accept to be promoted to panelists.
Berna?
it appears she's having technical issues sharing she has two devices
that we so here's what i'm going to do i'm going to i'm going to move on i'll come back
to her in a little bit. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. Number six, MI 2023, 003-721-241
East Armat Street. Steve Masters is the attorney.
these masters have been promoted to panelists
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E-M-A-S-T-E-R-S.
Where are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes, my clients are the owners of the property.
could you identify them please uh theodore tillman and a moment
uh i'm sorry i'm just looking for his though his wife is the record owner uh tania govan
We do have a letter from her. Okay. Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusals? And do you agree with their accuracy?
Yes, we do.
All right. And I see there's a unanimous support from Faith Community Development Corporation. Please share your screen and proceed.
Thank you.
good morning members of the board uh steve masters from the law firm of just laws representing
uh this property um ted tillman and uh and his wife what we're looking at here is an aerial view
of the property the property is uh noted by this blue pin and although this is a um zoned
RM1 property, you'll see that the area right here, and we're going to go into some larger
aerial views, is significantly more industrial and commercial than you would expect in an RM1
parcel. What we're looking at here, so our property is this rectangle that I'm
uh moving my cursor to uh here is armat street um and there's three sections to this property that
we'll be that we'll be looking at uh the the middle part of the property um is uh is for three
rental housing units that's not at issue today because that's a by right use um in the very
beginning of the property. Off of RMAT is the proposed area for the business office. And then
in the rear is the area to legalize these four public garages that are used for auto repair.
You'll see next door, this is a property that is being used to park large vehicles,
as is the properties across the street.
Here is a view of the front of the property.
We're on Armat Street here facing towards the rear of the property.
And this is where the business use will be in the first two stories.
The three stories are the beginning of the apartments.
this is a view a little bit to uh the left of of the property um where you'll see uh
uh our property uh wall goes back uh to the rear there um here is one of the three garages that
are at the very back of the property here's another view with a different bay of the auto
repair place. And finally, this is the third property garage on the property. This is a side
view. Here we're facing Armat Street over here where my cursor is. And you may have noted cars
and vehicles parked along this area from the aerial view. These are some of the doorways that
um enter into the to the dwelling units here is another view this is now facing
back towards the rear garages and this is another entry into the the apartment units
uh here is uh one of the garages and then um this is going to be a in office space for um
for the auto and vehicle rental business.
And then we have photos of the various apartments,
all of the three apartments that are not currently in use,
in use but they are that they are outfitted to be to be used
but that they are outfitted to be used.
again there our application isn't concerning these apartment units but there was a request
made by the community group in terms of a proviso that we'll address at the end
And here's our zoning notice for today's date for this resumption here, or not resumption,
but for this continuation of the hearing and the postings that are on the front facade
of the building.
We have a tax clearance that is up to date.
And I do want to show you from the zoning archive on Atlas, we believe that this property has had a public garages in the rear going back to actually 100 years ago.
But here we have, in October of 1978, a permit that was issued showing that the three public garages were an existing use all the way back there.
So what we're talking about here, members of the board, is, as I said, a building that for over 100 years has had those garages in the rear.
We have garages actually next door. The next door property has even more garages. I believe there are six or seven public garages next door.
The residential areas have from time to time been a single family or a multifamily.
And the front of the building has actually been used in the recent past by an oil company that had its business office in the front and then engaged in, filled up its trucks with oil in the rear.
our mr tillman's proposal is to operate a small auto repair and u-haul rental business in those
four rear garages and he's been doing that since 2019 he wants to use the front portion of the
building for a business office and he is he has renovated as you saw the living areas into three
apartments. Our refusal is only for the business offices and the rear auto repair garages. As I
said, the residential uses are by right. The community group requested a proviso that there
be no rooming houses. We have no plans to have a rooming house, but a rooming house use would
require a special exception by by this board and there is no such application in front of you
so we believe that while we don't object to a proviso saying no rooming houses because we're
not intending to have rooming houses we believe that that is not necessary since that's not part
of this application at this point I would like to call Ted Tillman to adopt my testimony
theodore tillman if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand
they have been allowed to speak thank you good morning mr tillman could you please state your
name is spelled for the stenographer good morning my name is theodore till t-h-e-o-d-o-r-e tillman
t i double l man you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth
yes please proceed mr masters uh good morning mr tillman um did you hear the testimony that
i gave this morning um in your case yes do you agree that it was accurate and do you adopt it as
your own. Yes. Is there anything further you wanted to tell the board briefly about this
about this project? Well, I just want to thank the board for recognizing my case and allow me
to be here today to witness the new improvements that we like to make in the community to help
support the community and keep cars on the road so that everybody can go to work and pay that tax
now that's all thank you um thank you um questions from the board uh yes can we go back and can you
show me the it's not one garage you said it's a couple of garages yes a little quickly so can we
I just wanted to see.
Sure. And how are we accessing these? I guess I'm trying to figure out how we're accessing these different garages.
And how are we...
And when you say, well, I guess I'm getting into more questions. When we're talking vehicle repair, we're talking about oil changes, tires. We're not talking spray paint and like body fender spray painting, are we?
um no this is not a body shop this is for auto repair that's that's what mr tillman is operating
is a regular vehicle repair facility so here where i'm where i'm moving my cursor here are
three of the four garages and then this is the fourth one um so the access off of armat street
and where is where's armet street armet street is here in the front yeah okay and then this is the
the driveway then is where on the other side of where these cars are parked and that's how you
access the different garages correct although um there aren't always cars parked here um these are
so either they would come through this driveway
or the one where the cars are parked.
Okay, all right.
And you said that these have been here for,
well, since at least 1978.
Well, the Zonian archives do show
there are garages that go back into the 1920s,
but it's not clear whether they were accessory
to the single-family home, how many years they were accessory
and how many they were public.
It started to pop up as public garages quite a long time ago,
but for sure in the last 50 years where this has consistently been.
And what you have here on this side, this is a neighbor's property.
These are something like seven or eight public garages that are in use.
people are using them for various purposes with their own private vehicles. And there is a
residential use in this part from part of that property. So it is, what we're talking about here
is what we're doing is completely consistent with the neighboring properties. Okay. And then this
office is for, I guess, people to check in or whatever with this repair business?
Yeah. So it's a combination repair business and it's a U-Haul rental business. So the office is important for people to come in and make the rental transactions for the U-Hauls. And also, it's a much more congenial place to transact business than to stand in a garage to transact business.
Oh, okay. Thank you.
Where will the U-Hauls be parked that they're renting?
uh they're already parked um on on the property so um actually maybe we should call mr tillman
again just to give us a little more uh specific details mr tillman can you can you raise your hand
again yes can you hear me yes
so uh the question was where are where are these uh you've all parked at this point so right where
steve said we park them along the driveway sometime in the rear and also we have drop-off
planks on the street which is called armat and the rear bar under the bridge so if you look a little
farther down armat street you probably don't have a good reel of it but we park the trucks under the
bridge with it helps a lot of people from dumping so we have a dumping issue on armat street so
parking a u-haul trucks over there at night sometimes helps with people just dumping trash
there in the middle of the night because they recognize it as a business so i don't know if
familiar with that that's the one of the majors dumping of trash in the whole city so you're
saying right here street so the u-halls are illegally um appointed as vehicles that can
be parked on the street because there are u-halls that people use them to either a move their
personal things or move household stuff so they are legal registered cars to u-haul i don't own
them i'm a subcontract for u-haul so like yes i do have to park the cars on the street but
park them under the bridge okay and could you go could you go back to the uh scale it down again or
that all right so we how there you go so the driveway on the other side you guys share that
driveway with the uh property next to you correct and so my question is if uh you see what that red
car is on the screen so if they decide to park just like all the white cars you know would that
So, if they decide to park just like all the white cars, you know, would that be enough room for you guys to go in and out of the garage area?
be enough room
Correct.
That whole face of the garage area is like 16 to 19 feet entrance.
So, a standard car is about 8 to 7 feet.
So, it's more than ample enough space for both cars.
Thank you.
Is the property next door that you share the driveway with a single family home?
Mr. Tillman, can you answer that?
Oh, she asked that it was a single-family home?
Yes, 245 East Armat Street, a single-family home.
As far as I understand, it has four entrances, though, as far as I understand.
So you have a shared driveway.
You're hoping to have commercial patrons, residential tenants,
and then there's a multifamily building next door.
and you're going to have this shared driveway.
How do you see sort of parking and access working?
So I can give you a little bit more information.
Both sides of the property is my uncle.
My uncle owes both sides, so that's not an issue at all.
No arguments, no actions against it.
That doesn't mean that the tenants aren't going to have an issue.
It's not.
The tenant is my cousin.
So we have actual signatures of the people from that resident address on when we actually went to the meeting for the RCO.
We have signatures of that particular tenant in that house.
So parking is definitely not an issue.
So we don't even park our vehicles in the driveway.
That's just a sometime thing.
It's an in and out thing.
It's not a constant thing.
That's not a parking spot.
We park the vehicles there to help control the traffic so there won't be overflow.
Sometimes I utilize the lot next door.
As Steve told you, there's a bunch of cars that be parked there.
So I have access to putting things in that lot at any time.
Like I do all the time.
Also, Norton.
So Norton is next door here where you see all those cars.
So Norton Toad Company.
Is that 235 to 39?
Yes, that's Norton's Toad Company.
And then on the other side is the Toad Company as well.
So parking U-Haul trucks, that's like a minimum.
There's only one or two or three that be there.
so it's not 10 or 15 like you're looking at a u-haul facility yeah i mean i was less worried
about the u-haul trucks i was asking more so for your auto repair business yeah that's not a problem
we don't we don't park we don't park nothing on it's called a bridge we don't park nothing up the
driveway no and then how many like what is the volume of cars that you're seeing and what's the
average duration for cars that are being serviced at your business well we are we do do inspections
for the neighborhood so at any time someone can you know call in for an appointment and we will
assess them properly so usually we intake them we let them park their vehicles outside we'll go
receive their vehicle we bring it up and down the driveway and then let the customer leave out
that's how it generally works understand it but you didn't actually answer my question my question
is what is the average time that a patron's car is on your premises oh so each inspection is one
island so typically cars are only so you're only doing inspections so we
don't auto repair guarantors inspection so the inspections go with it and then
we if they need repairs we have to repair their car because it's not safe
on the road for the vehicle I'm just trying to understand like when you do
repairs how long are the cars on your premises so one hour each inspection is
It's undetermined because sometimes a car doesn't start.
As for average, like is there a car there for four days?
Is it there for two weeks?
Is it there for six hours?
A day, day, day and a half.
Day and a half.
And so you have four garages.
Are you only taking four cars at a time?
Minimum two.
Minimum two.
And what's your maximum?
Maximum three.
So like I said, I operate parking spaces next door.
So I have a whole plethora of parking spots that I utilize and pay for next door to park my vehicles.
Steve, how long has he been operating this?
Mr. Tillman, is it 2019 that you opened up your business here?
Yes, 2019.
Since 2019, we've been going back and forth downtown trying to, you know, get permits and things of what sort.
Eleanor's coming up there asking questions of regards to permits so we've
been in the process since 2019 they've been a long journey since we've been here
yes and mr. chair I I realized that I didn't show the board the the petitions
i realized that i didn't show um the board the um the petitions and support um there are 85
and support
yeah i i have a thing here says 95 signatures yes and 22 of those are are documented near neighbors
and other ones um i believe are uh customers and and other other um uh residents of of the of the
broader area. So our petitions start all the way up here.
and it was a unanimous uh support for the project at the rco meeting there was there was no one
who had any opposition and uh it was as i said unanimous and then the the rco has also agreed
any other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this actually sorry sorry one quick question um mr masters you said that they're
proposing three dwelling units i was a little bit confused on the floor plans because it looked like
there were four but maybe that's the existing and they're reducing by one
mr someone can you can you clarify that so you staying for the rear for the
auto repair no no for the for the apartments yes three three and three in
the top and then possibly one behind the office which is a two-bedroom so yes
Yeah, but we're not
doing housing today, right, Steve? Right. This is a
buy-right use. Buy-right for three, right? Buy-right for
three. Am I right? Yes, I don't know if
it would be buy-right for four. That would have to be reviewed, but what's on the
refusal is three. So if they want to increase, they have to go back to L&I
and see if that can be done by right or if that needs additional zoning relief.
understood only thing we wrote on today is the business part of this yeah
questions or comments on the virtual audience
yes sir i have a hand up by the name of charles richardson they have been allowed to speak
good morning mr richardson good morning mr chair charles richardson sure charles richardson
R-A-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N
Councilwoman City Bass
Room 508 City Hall
We're affirmed to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Please proceed
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance
Thank you. Are there anyone
else in the first audience?
No, sir. I see no more
Planning Commission
Amy Boyd with the
Planning Commission. The comprehensive
the plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from the existing residential
multifamily R1 to industrial residential mixed use RMMX. Under the recommended designation,
the refusals would be consistent. We believe that the proposed use for vehicle repair shop
would have negative impacts on adjacent residential conforming uses. The planning
commission therefore recommends that the board deny the variance for personal vehicle repair
and maintenance and business and professional offices.
Is that deny, Amy? Is that what you said?
MI 2023-003-721-241 East R. Matt Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tannetta Graham, my vote is yes.
i win my vote is yes thank you council thank you so much we're going to move all right we're going
to move to number eight and number nine together mi 2024 000 76 736 to 38 maple lane parcel a
and MI 2024-000102-736-38 Maple Lane, Parcel B.
Nixon-Kanah is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the 42nd Board RCO.
Nixon-Kanah will be joining as a panelist shortly.
Good morning, Commissioner.
It's still morning. Good morning, Commissioner.
Good morning, counsel.
Morning, Counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Could you?
Yes, my name is Nixon. My name is Nixon, K-A-N-N-A-H. Attorney ID number is 89654.
On behalf of the applicant, property owner, Nader Jabert.
Where are you from? Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, Chairman.
you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and do you agree with its accuracy yes um please
share your screen and start your presentation yes um yes mr chimp the first first um
let's see
Green button on the bottom. Share your screen.
Okay. Let me just get back to it.
Green.
Okay. Here we go. Sorry. I have my screen minimized.
Please.
Everybody see that?
We can.
Commissioner, this was the property where my client purchased it. As you can see, it's two separate properties, 736 and 738. Both properties have a separate entranceway where these two vehicles are, and then this other side.
But for whatever reason, when the property was purchased, the deed to both properties were consolidated into one lot, and that's one deed.
Notwithstanding the fact that this lot for this property actually extends all the way to East Wyoming on the other side.
But when my client purchased it, he purchased it as one unit. The D showed that the D has somehow been consolidated into one lot. So my client took it upon himself to basically trace the record of this property and was able to get the property separated again into what it was initially, which was a two-family unit, two separate unit, 36 and 38.
Now, he's basically trying to legalize the use of this as a first floor unit and a second floor unit as it previously was.
So, he made some renovation to the property, and the package that we submitted, I believe number two, is the...
I know we're doing these together, but the first package I'm going to pull up is going to be for 736.
Okay, that is basically the outline of everything that's included in the package.
We still see the same original photo.
I'm sorry?
we only see the original photo you put up oh okay let me
let me get out of here real quick
there's your pet here's your package right okay
so that's that's the original um this is this is the d to to the initial property
It basically was to have 736-738 as one parcel of land.
So my client basically was able to get the lot subdivided into lot A, B, and C.
And that's the drawing that showed a lot as it was.
And he got the permit to get all that done.
And I believe there's an engineering report here as well from the city for the subdivision.
for the subdivision. So the subdivision now is an A, B, C lot.
That's the new description of 736 that was approved by the zoning.
And this is the D now to 736.
Counselor, do you have pictures of the property?
Yes, yes.
That's the next one I'm getting at.
Just building already separated into duplexes. Both of them.
Yes. Yes, they are. And we we have we have the support of the community.
I'm just trying to show you what.
sorry i always got to minimize to share my screen that's it there now okay so that's what it looks
like now correct okay is that up yeah just better so that's what it looks like now we basically
maintain the two separate driveways. 738 is on this side and 737 is on the other side.
They both have their own separate backyards.
Apartment A is on the first floor. Apartment B is on the second floor.
well it's a three-story building right
correct so um apartment two is um takes over the second and the third floor and i believe the
third floor again my client will speak more to that the third floor is more more as far as um
access fire escape and everything is back there as well
And it's the same similar package. This matter was previously scheduled and it was rescheduled. So I'm resubmitted a package that have
basically given the one letter that covered both 736 and 738.
And I recently submitted the tax certificate that showed that my client property tax is up to date.
Do you guys have that in a package or do you want to put that up on my screen?
just make sure our council has copies of it okay i believe
this is the letter from from the rco basically saying that um the support letter it's going to
be for both for both properties is that on the screen commissioner yep okay and these are the
posting for this meeting. It was posted September 15. Posted again on the 22nd. And I guess the
last day he took that photograph. It just had today's date on it. And this is the tax
clearance. And the same package is the book. This one is for 736, 738, 738. 736 has a
similar package and
similar attachment.
How long
have both
these buildings been duplexes?
When my client purchased it, he noticed
it when he made the
purchase that it was a
duplex. The issue came up
when he tried to get a renter's license
for a duplex.
That's when he was told that it was a single lot.
And actually it wasn't, it was coming up as it was just 736 or 738.
How long has your owner, how long has your client owned the properties?
Okay, let me just look at the initial D was received.
back in 2020 no yeah purchase it back in 2018. thank you
why don't you bring your client on to adopt your testimony yes
can you bring your
Mr. Jaber
can you hear me
yes good morning sir
good morning sir
could you please state your name
it's spelled for the court stenographer
Nader Jaber
N-A-D-E-R
J-A-B-E-R
where or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
please proceed counsel
Nader good morning
Good morning.
Did you hear the presentation I just made to the board?
Were you adapted as your testimony?
Is everything that I said, is it accurate and, excuse me, true and accurate?
Is there anything else you would like to add to the board that you believe might help
or make a decision?
No, I think you got everything.
Questions from the board.
i'm sorry i um i uh uh i'm having a noise issue out here okay sure all right so um question do
we have i i saw some steps are there any other interior photos of this well let me go back to
my first question. Am I getting this correctly that when you purchased this property, it had
the two addresses and they were already four units within these two properties and that you then
subdivided the lot so that now you have those same four units, one with one address, 736A,
another one with the 738. Is that what I'm given to understand from the testimony here?
Counsel on mute, please. Yes, yes. As you see from the previous picture,
there were actually two separate houses, two units each. Both units had their own separate
driveways um but the master d had it as 736 dash i'm sorry 736-38 and once once my client finished
you know fixing up the property he goes for a rental license and they're looking at the
the initial deed as as a one unit
okay so you didn't really answer my question when he purchased it where they're already
within that 736 through 738 property where they're already four units within correct
yes i'm i'm sorry board member yes okay all right thank you other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney
Hillary Emerson
not at this time Mr. Chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands at this time Chair
Planning Commission
Amy Boeber the Planning Commission
so this will be for 736 and 738 Maple Lane
the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the residential single-family RSA 5 zoning at this location.
The plan has shown that there are unique physical conditions
or circumstances of the property that would prevent it
from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant
the requested variance for two-family household living.
Thank you.
So, number eight, MI 2024-000076-736-38
Maple Lane, Parcel A. And number nine, MI 2024-000102-736-38, Maple Lane, Parcel B. I vote yes for both.
Michael Johnson, my vote is yes for both.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes for both.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes for both.
Iowyn, my vote is yes for both.
Thank you. Thank you, Council.
Thank you, members of the board. Appreciate it. Everyone have a good day.
5458 West
Burke Street. Vern Anastasio is the
attorney.
Vern Anastasio is coming in as
a penalist.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Counsel. Could you
please state your name and spell for the court
sonographer. It's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, on behalf of property owner, Mr. Leroy
Wichett. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do.
We do not have, at this point, an RCO letter or summary, but we see that the neighbors did
received proof of the mailings. Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal
and do you agree with this accuracy? Yes, sir. Please proceed, sir. Thank you.
yeah we're up
took me a little while for some reason
Berks Street is
a pre-existing
non-conforming use here
the history of this property
is it was converted to a two
family dwelling 60 years
And page 49 of my 65-page exhibit packet clearly demonstrates 1960, went from a one-family physically to a two-family.
I was not kept up with rental licenses.
And at some point, the RSA 5 classification went into effect.
as a result my client purchased this in 2022 when he tried to get a rental license he learned that
the two-family dwelling was expressly prohibited use and that's when he contacted me to go through
this process so this is for the legalization of a pre-existing non-conforming two-family dwelling
I want to try and pull something else up for a moment so you can see.
Prior to his purchase in 18 months ago or so, he saw this ad.
This is the MLS listing.
54-58 West Berks.
Opportunity for the owner to invest in a multifamily property.
Right down here, two to four units.
It is, in fact, a two-unit building.
You end up purchasing the property for a whopping $280,000.
So just under $300,000.
We'll put on evidence and testimony that it's impossible
to turn this property into a compliant single-family home
without laying the whole project to waste.
So with that...
I'm going to go back to my binder.
So after seeing the ad, he purchased the property in 2022.
As I said, he went through the process of trying to secure a rental license.
And, of course, that is when he found out that the...
the property was zoned for single family.
Here is the plot plant for the site plan
for the existing two-family dwelling.
And here is the interior layout.
Again, all existing conditions.
This is a basement with no habitable space.
It's just what you have there are the two heaters,
the two water heaters, the two gas meters, and, of course, the two electric accounts.
All in there, all pre-existing. The first floor, as you can see here, is a two-bedroom unit.
And the third floor is, I'm sorry, the second floor is a two-bedroom unit.
two-bedroom unit.
I'm going to show you some photos.
As the plans show, there'll be trash storage underneath the fire escape stairs.
And as you can see here, there's photo evidence of the two-family dwelling being recognized
not only by PGW, but PECO as well through the years.
As I said, the property was purchased for just under $300,000 to convert this two-family dwelling to a single-family home now would lay it to waste.
And there are really no more bedrooms than there would be if this were a single-family home.
the community meeting was held rco letter here and my client also provided proof of mailing
he did this by himself we have the poster and we have proof of posting
and then we have the history again that shows the long history from 1960 of the conversion
there are no current violations on the property
and with that i'm going to ask my client to raise his virtual hand
bernard could you tell me what happened at the rco meeting i didn't attend the rco meeting my
client put his presentation on and then the meeting was dismissed uh we don't know their their
disposition
sir which it yes how you doing today good could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer sure leroy l-e-r-o-y which it w-h-i-t-c-h-e-t-t
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Wichit, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
And is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Is it true and accurate?
Is it true and accurate?
It is true.
I do have one other.
yes what what do you want to add mr wichett was that i did have the uh community meeting
yep we're aware of that and there is no disposition as of yet
do you adopt my presentation as your own testimony sir
yes there was a presentation there was sir please listen to my question carefully
do you adopt my presentation as your own testimony yes thank you mr chair because of the reliance
interest and the vested interest uh in this property uh by mr which i respectfully request
the granting of the variance thank you questions from the board i have a question how uh when did
the applicant buy the property? About 18 months
ago, 2022. And how long had it been
used? When was it last used as a duplex?
It was converted in 1960, and it was
consistently used as a duplex.
Do we know if the owner received, got a title report?
A title, my client
Got a title report.
A report prior to closing on the property?
Yes, of course.
The title report didn't show that it was a duplex?
The title report only reports on liens and encumbrances.
What about review of L&I?
The title report doesn't do that.
It was presented by the realtor as a two-family dwelling throughout, as the evidence shows.
and they went to settlement under the guise that he relied on,
that it was a legal to family dwelling.
What's up?
I have another question.
So the realtor and the owner never checked the zoning on the property?
Because I'm looking at the list.
I'm looking at the list. I mean, the listing on Zillow shows it as RSA 5. I feel like anybody buying property in Philadelphia knows that RSA 5 is single family. And you just told Mr. Johns that it's been continuously used as a single family since 1960. But the notes that we received from our attorney said that it was not, that it's been single family since 1994. Do you have proof that it's been used as a duplex?
I mean, the listing on Zillow shows it as RSA 5.
I feel like anybody buying.
yep uh the evidence is in the photos of number one uh the photos just mean that i mean the owner
could have converted it right before sale and attempt to try to push up the sale price so
no uh well even if that's the case my client would still be prejudiced because he relied on it
uh but but my client did not check the zoning he went with a realtor who produced materials that
it was a legal two-family dwelling. And then he proceeded with the purchase. The notes that you
have show that someone in 1990-something filled out paperwork for a single-family home, but there
is zero evidence of any building permits that converted that duplex to a single-family home.
This property was converted legally in 1960 into a two-family dwelling.
Therefore, it's a pre-existing, non-conforming use that predates the code.
And the only question that this board can ask and have answered is, is there a unique physical condition to this particular property that renders compliance,
which would mean gutting and turning it into a single-family home, impossible or impracticable.
That's your opinion.
No, no, that's the law.
That's the standard by which this case has to be reviewed, right?
So I would submit my opinion is that it is impracticable because, again,
he just spent close to $300,000 on a duplex that he believed was a duplex.
and for him to convert it now would lay the property to waste completely upside down so
there is a unique physical condition to the property it is that it presents itself and it has
for 60 years as a two-family dwelling
and it's never been converted to a single family regardless of the paperwork that was filed 30 years
The other question?
Questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands
at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
A comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the residential single-family zoning at this location, RSA 5.
The zoning of this parcel dates back to 1967.
The appellant has shown that there are unique physical conditions
or circumstances that would prevent the property
from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the proposed variance for two dwelling units.
Vern, I'm going to hold this for two weeks
to see if we can get a letter from the RCO.
so that would be the two weeks wednesday whatever that date is i'm not sure and then what we'll do
is whether the rco third mr chair october 23rd whether the rco sends it or not we will vote on
it then okay vote on that morning you won't need yeah we won't need a resumption hearing or anything
like that no no no everything's closed very good thank you all thank you yeah
Number 12, MI 2024-000179-1514-16 Church Lane.
Tameka McCoy is the attorney.
An email from Oak Lane Worcester Community Coalition confirmed that the meeting occurred and indicated it was taken in a position of non-opposition.
tamika mccoy has been promoted to panelists
good morning counsel good morning good morning everyone
you state your name and spell for the court sonographer
sure tamika mcc capital k o y where or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth yes indeed could you identify your client the relationship to the property
Sure. I represent the consultant group on behalf of Julia Bradley, the owner of the property located at 1514-1516 Church Lane.
dash 1516 church lane you simply to the reading of the refusal and agree with its accuracy
You should play to the reading.
yes your honor yes i do all right um please um share your screen and start your presentation
sure if i may just have a moment
it's like a raincoat
like a gray raincoat
a silk gray raincoat
one room is yours
Gaspin Webster
mute yourself
yes okay here we go all right um thank you for the opportunity to present i am
showing the packet that had been previously submitted in reference to the property at 1514
Church Lane. The application is to seek a variance to legalize a three-unit apartment
that had been existing as a three-family unit since 1933. As of right now, it's a 9,000 square
structure where my client, Ms. Bradley, acquired the property by virtue of it being bequeathed
to her from her deceased brother. This property essentially was bequeathed in 2022.
And when Ms. Bradley went to get a rental license, she learned that there was a need to have this
property legalized as a three-unit structure. As of today's date, there is zero balance with
regard to the taxes. The property I'm going to show you, a little out of order.
What I'm showing is a document from 1955 that shows that the property has been used essentially
as a three-unit apartment structure since that date.
This was a variance that was applied for in 1955
that was approved.
It has been in consistent use since that date
as a three-family dwelling.
And the intention is to have it continue
the use as a three-family dwelling. Actually, there are two long-standing residents inside
of the unit. The third floor unit has been occupying that premises for 30 years, the
second floor for 20 years. It's my understanding as well, there is historical documentation
to indicate that there are other properties on the same street that has been allowed variances
for the same purpose. I'm showing here photographs and information relative to the structure.
It's a 9,000 square feet structure.
What we're looking at here are the floor plans for each of the unit.
The basement is unfinished.
It's where all of the utilities are kept.
And the first floor, second floor, and third floor units are depicted, each having a kitchen,
a designated space for a living area, and designated bedroom spaces.
The first floor does have laundry equipment within the property.
There were 98 area neighbors that were notified with regard to the request for the variance.
Mailings were sent to each of these residents.
There were two RCO meetings. One was on September 20th, 2024. The second was October 1st, 2024. On the September 20th date, none of the residents appeared to express any objection. So we redid it, held another RCO to give the area.
Redid it, held another RCO to give the area community another opportunity to voice their concerns or expressions with regard to the request.
Again, no one showed any opposition. The RCO did send an email to the board indicating that they do not have an objection to the request for the granting of a variance.
i will go back uh this is a copy of the deed and the deed essentially shows that uh robert bryan
and his executor essentially um had the property conveyed to miss julia bradley as of august in
2023. So this is a recent acquisition by Ms. Bradley, but the property has been in the family
for over 40 years. There would be a extreme hardship to essentially modify the existing use.
And at the present time, it doesn't appear that the use poses any hindrance or harm to any of
the neighbors or neighboring property. There are no environmental concerns in terms of damage,
pollution, or any destructive qualities with regard to the property being used for
its current and pre-existing purpose. Included in the packet are also photographs. This shows
the view if you were standing on the porch looking across the street. The photograph that's shown now
shows as if you were looking to the right of the property.
This is a photograph standing across looking, facing the property.
And this next photograph shows if you were standing in front of the property
with your back to the property and you look to the left,
you would see the corner depicted in this photograph.
This is a photograph of the rear of the premise.
And we also have interior pictures.
The third and second floor units, as I said, are occupied.
They're occupied by longstanding tenants that has been there 25 and 30 years, respectively.
What I'm showing is the interior of the first floor unit that is currently vacant.
This is a notification that had been posted on the front door of the property,
letting the community know of the impending application for the variance. Also affixed
with this packet is the trash plan, which has been essentially in operation for 30 years.
Basically, the trash is stored in the rear of the property until trash that is brought
to the front of the property. With that, I would ask that Ms. Julia Bradley be admitted into
the meeting so that any additional questions can be addressed.
Bradley? Yes. Yes. Could you please state your name and state it and spell it for the court
stenographer? Julia Bradley, J-U-L-I-A Bradley, B as in boy, R-A-D-L-E-Y.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Ms. Bradley, did you hear the representations that had been made to the zoning board this morning?
Yes, I did.
And do you adopt them as your own, as truthful and accurate?
Is there any additional information that you think would be necessary for the board to hear,
or have the information been provided in such a manner
that it explains the full history of the property?
Yes, it does.
I would submit on that.
Questions from the board.
Question, how long is this currently occupied?
Yes, sir.
It's occupied by two tenants.
There are three units in the building.
The second floor and the third floor are occupied by tenants.
One had been there for 25 years.
The other had been there for 30 years.
The only portion of the premise that's vacant right now is the first floor unit.
Are there separate utilities?
In the basement, it basically shows that the utilities are broken apart.
Question, how many bedrooms are there?
Question.
How many bedrooms are there?
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, it's a little small.
it's a little
Sure, no problem.
So the first floor unit has one bedroom.
The second floor unit has two bedrooms.
The third floor unit has one bedroom.
and uh you have uh shown a history for 1512 uh correct so uh essentially we have the first
variance that had been granted was back in 1933 then there was another one that that was applied
for in 1955 um at one point yes but is this this application is for 15 14 through 16.
this is 15 14 through 16 that's correct i'm showing a history of the area as well that
the use is not uncommon for the area all right um the application here that i am showing uh is
the next door unit and as I indicated that was from 1955. All right so what you're showing is
what's in a neighboring property not what's in this property. In terms of the uh historical
use permit that's correct. Okay so historically the area has accepted um this usage. All right
and and this is what you showed the community uh groups yes and was anyone there able to
just kind of anecdotally um uh attest to the multi-family use of this program
not anyone in the community because no one appeared to express any objections or concerns
So, then we scheduled a second hearing to, you know, just in case, give them another opportunity. And, again, there had been no one that had appeared to give any concerns or anything like that. The RCO did, in fact, send an email to the board indicating that they do agree with the request and variance that we can solve.
All right. Thank you.
so i have a question um do we know when the last time there was a legal rental
license on this property like to be clear we are legalizing an illegal triplex yes you're you're
100 correct and i do not have that information your honor i was not able to acquire that
information however when miss uh brantley acquired uh the property from uh her brother who had who
was deceased, she went to get an application. She went there twice, actually. And that's how
she learned that it was necessary to request the variants so that she could legalize the existing
use. And then just a note for the record, the second floor bedroom per the existing plan is
not illegal to bedroom. So just, I do want the owner to be aware of that. You cannot have a
bedroom that only accesses through another bedroom so that would like eventually this is
going to have to get legalized this two one bedroom apartments i mean three one bedroom apartments
any other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Charles Richardson.
He has been allowed to speak.
Richardson, you've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record, please.
Yes, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 508 City Hall.
The Councilwoman is not opposed to granting the variance.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, I see no more hands at this time.
Okay, Planning Commission.
And we voted with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
There are unique physical conditions and circumstances of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the requested use variance for three dwelling units.
MI 2024-000179-1514-16, Church Lane, I vote yes.
Michael John, my vote is yes.
Michael John, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Tywin, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
Have a good day.
Number 13, MI 2024-000259-5131 Woodland Avenue.
Tracy Soller is the attorney for the owner.
Out my hair.
Tracy Soller is coming in as a
panelist
Good morning,
Counsel
Good morning
Could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer
Tracy Soller, it's T-R-A-C-Y
Last name Soller, S as in Sam
S-M-A-U-L-E-R.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Yes, my client's name is Sang Chimrowski, and he is the owner and operator of the property and business at this location.
To the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with this accuracy?
I would also note that we have a letter of unanimous opposition from the Southwest Philadelphia District Services, and Councilmember Gauthier is in opposition also of this project.
Share your screen and please proceed.
Thank you.
We're here today to request a variance for the use of a property at 5131 Woodland Avenue.
to be used as a distributor. The property as pictured here on this photograph is a corner
property on the corner of 52nd Street and Woodland Avenue. I have a couple of photographs that will
show the neighboring area so that you can see the street and how it's set up and the other
businesses at that location the current use of this property is a as a restaurant with a valid
r liquor license the location here
across the street at a diagonal there is a gas station next to the property there is a food market
And directly opposite the property is a Popeye's fast food restaurant.
I have a couple of photographs of the interior of the property so that you can see how it's set up inside.
There are tables inside.
Restaurant equipment.
Bathroom.
And I also have photographs of the posters that were posted on the front of the location as well as the side of the location due to the fact that it's a corner property.
This property is currently zoned CMX2.
And as I stated before, it is validly operated currently as a restaurant.
And the request is for a distributor.
Now, we did meet with the people of the neighborhood, whoever showed up to the meeting.
We had a good amount of members on there.
And we sent out notice here as proof of publication for everyone.
And then I have a copy of the deed, which just proves ownership.
And then I'll just share lastly the tax balance at zero, which bear with me one second.
It's on a different screen.
so we did meet with the members of the community and i know you said that there was a letter of
opposition that was received there was a strong opposition from the community in regards to the
the business that is currently at the location um as much as we tried to talk about what was
being requested to be at the location, the variance for the future business use,
the conversation kept going back to the current use of the operation. So what I wanted to go over
with everyone today is, you know, having a beer distributor here would not change or impact
the neighborhood. It is a very large street on Woodland Avenue. There are
It is a very large street on Woodland Avenue.
There are, it is commercial all around this corner and it is currently set up as a bar
restaurant.
There is a laundromat right next to this building and that use is not changing.
That stays as a laundromat.
So this would only impact the very corner of the property and it would not change the
traffic in the area because it would be similar in traffic to what would be used currently as the
restaurant bar. The main focus of the neighborhood meeting and the opposition that we received
is in regards to how the business operates now. So right now, as I said before, it is a bar
restaurant. The neighborhood has expressed some concern that people hang out inside and then
sometimes outside of the building. That is pretty consistent with what takes place at a bar
restaurant. People are going to hang out inside. They are going to drink inside. That's part of
what the business does. That is irrelevant to what we're asking for today, which is a change
in the business. The change that's being requested is as a distributor, which would not allow for
anyone to be in the distributor drinking or hanging out. They would purchase their alcohol
and they would leave the premises for consumption at their home or wherever they choose.
The other issue that was raised were the difference in the hours. So right now,
the restaurant is open seven days a week there would be a change in the hours as a distributor
they would have more limited hours and that is the distributor would also be operated by the current
owner and he is seeking to limit the days of week and hours that the new business would be open
we would like to enter this packet into evidence as our exhibit i'm sure that people have some
comments that they would like to share from the community. And I would just like to reiterate that
we are here today seeking a variance and a change of the business use. And this is not the proper
place to discuss the current use of the business. You have your client, is your client going to
adopt your testimony? He is online. He is not very technically savvy. So we can try to have him
adopt it and if not i can as his attorney speak on his behalf also the court will accept your
testimony thank you i have a hand up by joyce sitner not sure if they are associated with your
case or not um before we take testimony well questions from the board
so for clarification he's not going to be operating the restaurant anymore no
longer. He wants to change that
to just a distributor. That's
correct. Yes.
The questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I have a handout by the name of
diane settles they have been allowed to speak i could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer good morning my name is diane last name is settles spelled s as in sam
e-t-t-l-e-s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth? Yes, I do. Are you a neighbor? Yes and no, but I was one of the RCOs that participated
in the community meeting. Sure, proceed. First, I would like to say that the proposed
place of selling alcohol would also be selling 40-ounce bottles of alcohol, which will be
used for individual use,
which people can easily stay there and drink.
And as far as the lawyer's saying about the community
had questions and opposition
about what it is currently used for.
And like she said, this may not be the forum,
but the community, from what I gather,
the community was concerned about the operation
and how it butts up against the church.
There are two churches in this community,
This property and Christ Tabernacle Church, they butt up beside one another.
Christ Tabernacle Church is from 1509 to 1531.
Christ's Tabernacle Church is from 1509 to 1531, I believe, South 52nd Street.
This church also has a large pantry giveaway that occurs every Thursday where the line stretches from the beginning of their property down to Willing Avenue.
This is a widely received food pantry that people use public transportation, a 52 bus, 11 trolley to come to this establishment.
As far as the pictures that the lawyer showed when she made her presentation for this facility, it was inaccurate because we showed an actual live pictures of what it looked like at that particular time.
So the community has concerns about this person conducting this type of business from the past history that they have had.
And while it is on a busy street, it is directly across from people's houses where they will encounter whatever goes on there as well.
It's not like it sits back and it won't be seen or, you know, the community won't be affected, the neighbors won't be affected by it.
but because it is on a community property.
Settles, thank you very much for your call.
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, on a corner property, I'm sorry.
Okay, thank you very much.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have a hand up by the name of Joyce Sitner.
They have been allowed to speak.
Morning, could you please state your name
and spell it for the court stenographer?
Can you hear me?
I can.
My name is Joy Sidnor, J-O-Y-C-E-S-Y-D-N-O-R.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
No, I'm not a neighbor, but I'm in that area.
I actually work at the church.
Sure, please proceed.
I was at the virtual meeting when the presentation was made,
And I think she neglected to show how our church actually abuts the establishment.
And the pitches are inaccurate, too, because that's not how the building looks on a regular basis.
And, yes, we do object to not only the variance, but we object to the establishment altogether.
And most in our community, we call it a deli, not a restaurant with a bar.
Thank you very much for taking the time to calls.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of George Goski, Jr. They have been allowed to speak.
Mr. Goss, it may be for another case, but we can check.
That's correct. I apologize. That's okay, sir. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no more hands at this time, Chair. Planning Commission.
If I may respond briefly.
Sure, sure. Yeah. I heard two things in the comments. One, I just want to reiterate that
as a distributor, you're not actually allowed to sit in. So all of those tables that are pictured
in there now would be removed. There would not be, no one would be allowed to stay. You would
have to, by the rules of the liquor board, take your alcohol that you're purchasing and leave
the premises. I just wanted to reiterate that. Okay. All right. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Amy Ward with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change
in zoning at this location from the existing commercially mixed use CMX2. The appellant has
not shown that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances that would prevent the property
from being used in conformance with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends
that the board deny the requested variance for wholesales and distribution.
MI 2024, 000259, 5131 Woodland Avenue, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is no.
Iowan, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 14, MI 2024-002-965-1520-30 Washington Avenue.
Dawn Tangrady or Clemente Amazon are the attorneys.
A letter of support from East Point Breeze Neighbors Coordinating RCO.
and a letter of support from
South of South Neighbors Association, SOSNA.
John Tancredi will be joining us as a panelist.
Doran Tancredi will be joining us as a panelist.
Michael
Michael Johns will recuse himself from this project.
Mr. Chair, I just wanted to note we have received this morning a letter of opposition from Concerned Citizens of Point Breeze along with a petition.
Thank you.
okay good morning council i'm sorry could you please state your name and spell for the court
stenographer sure good morning mr chair and members of the board don tancredi
my first name is d-a-w-n my last name is t-a-n-c-r-e-d-i you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Do you identify your client in
relationship to the property? Sure. I represent 1520 Washington Avenue, LLC, the owner of 1520
Washington Avenue. Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with
this accuracy? Yes. Please share your screen and start your presentation. Thank you.
Okay, so thank you, as I mentioned, I'm the attorney for the owner of this property.
With me here today is Michael Carosella on behalf of the owner, Agata Reister, the architect
that prepared the plans, and Paul Loney, the engineer and president of Aqua Economics.
I ask that these submission materials be incorporated into the record.
The materials do include the refusal, a letter of support from East Point Breeze neighbors,
a letter of support from SOSNA, a map showing other larger scale mixed use projects on Washington
Avenue, photos of the property and surrounding area, posting photos, previously approved city
approvals, including the Water Department, Stormwater Conceptual Approval, Streets Department
Approval, City Planning Approval for Landscaping, and Art Commission Approval for Canopies.
Also included in the application, in the submission materials, is the application for appeal, the PIF form, the RCO notice letter that was sent out to over 500 neighbors, the certificate of mailing, and also the deed and certificate of tax clearance.
Thank you.
so as a recap the rendering is shown before you here the proposal is to demolish the existing
warehouse structure and erect a beautiful seven-story building with 55 residential units
commercial space on the ground floor with 71 parking spaces including three ada spaces
one which is van accessible, two interior accessory loading zones, and 40 bicycle spaces.
And for context, the property is situated on the corner, the southeast corner of 16th Street
and Washington Avenue. Washington Avenue is made up of multiple lanes of traffic
in both directions eastbound and westbound and there are bicycle lanes. The property consists
of a one-story warehouse structure on a 22,900 square foot lot. The property is zoned I-2 which
is intended to accommodate light industrial uses, manufacturing, distribution, and other activities
that may generate noise, odor, vibration, or traffic impacts well beyond the subject property
lines. The property has been marketed for an industrial tenant for years, yet it remains
partially vacant. The existing tenants pay below market rate rent.
the map before you shows the area surrounding the property it's made up of a mix of residential
multifamily dwellings commercial and industrial use there is an abundance of multifamily residential
There is an abundance of multifamily residential development along Washington Avenue.
development along washington avenue
For example, the largest development on the west side of Broad Street is located at 1100 South Broad Street and has a total of 495 units.
This proposed project is small in comparison.
So before we were able to get here today, in advance of today's presentation, we did obtain the Water Department Stormwater Conceptual Approval,
the streets department approval, city planning approval for landscaping and art commission
approval for the canopies. We met with the RCOs several times as far back as January 2023.
Changes had been made to the plans as a result of the meetings, including reducing the height
and density of the project. We do have a letter of support from East Point Breeze Neighbors
and also from SOSNA. The developer offered to provide 15% affordable housing as part of this
project and also to find a tenant for the commercial space so that the tenant would
space would be used for a job training with a market rate rent there. As for the 55 residential
units, there's a range of units from one to three bedrooms, and the size of the units ranges from
861 square feet to almost 1,400 square feet. The commercial space is approximately 9,400 square
feet, and that could be divided into two spaces. Before I ask Agata, the architect, to share her
screen and go through the plans, and before we hear from my client, I'd like to address the
hardship. An unnecessary hardship exists to justify the use variance due to the fact that
the property is a partially vacant warehouse that has been marketed for industrial use to
no avail. There is no demand to cover the triple net lease at this location. Further,
the proposed use is consistent with the surrounding area.
There is no adverse effect on the public health, safety, or general welfare because the surrounding
properties consist of similar uses. The applicant addressed concerns raised by the community.
other permitted uses are more burdensome on the community, and the proposal is in
alignment with the comprehensive plan which suggests Washington Avenue should
be rezoned to IRMX. The request is the minimum variance that will afford
relief because the residential mixed-use conforms to the current character of the
area and the Planning Commission recommends rezoning the area. The proposed use is less
intensive than the permitted industrial uses. So with that, I would like to stop sharing my screen
and I would ask Agata to share her screen and go through the plans.
Agata?
Agata, last name, starting with R, has been promoted to penalist.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Agata?
Can you hear me now?
I can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon.
Agatha Reister, A-G-A-T-A-R-E-I-S-T-E-R.
And I am with Landmark Architectural Design.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
I'm sorry.
Agata, could you share your screen and explain the plans for the board, please?
Yes. Can you see my screen?
We do.
I would like to slightly recap Dawn's presentation.
The site is pretty much 100% occupied with the exception of a small court
and occupies more than half of the entire block that you see in here.
and occupies more than half of the entire block that you see in here this is entirely impervious
site um and our excuse me when i was talking about occupied i meant with tenants but right
no no no um i'm saying it's it's pretty much occupied um as a building wise talking but yes
it's pretty much occupied um 100 by the building with the exception of a small courtyard and so we
what we would be proposing is creating a site that offers just one second computer is slightly slow
with the zoom presentations a site that offers green roof landscaping landscape courtyard
as you can see. There we go. The building itself, proposed, occupies 80% of the site at first and
second floor. Third floor to seventh floor is actually shaped as a horseshoe. The heart of
building facing south is occupied by a landscape courtyard that would be accessed by the residential
tenants at the very top of the roof we're proposing green roof to offset the stormwater
overload and also landscaping at the southern portion and also at the eastern portion of the
site. So what you see in here in comparison to what the site presently presents, we have an
open, occupied, impervious portion of the site that is the driveway that connects Alter Street
with Washington. The part that I would like to mention is the photograph that Dawn presented.
This is a 22 to 26-foot tall wall, solid building that from a person standing outside, it looks 100% occupied, structure-wise occupied.
It is not pedestrian-friendly.
Anybody that's working in there has absolutely no connection to the outside.
These photographs that you have seen, I would just like to recap.
altar street is primarily a solid wall along the sidewalk and a building on the opposite
side of the street it's primarily repair garages or storage garages
and i would like to go before i get into floor plans
what we are proposing is a vibrant corner that if utilized by commercial tenant it could provide an
area for um seating area for a small restaurant or a community center this is this space can be
divided from one to two potentially three tenant spaces as don't mention it's 9400 square feet
We had located the entrance to the residential lobby away from the busy corner and also closer to the public transportation.
The materials that are proposed on this building are of high quality.
We have brick, two tons of brick to separate the commercial space with the lesser active residential use.
So you see brick, one color. We have secondary brick. We have an element that is the residential circulation area that would be very nicely lit at night because what we are proposing is to create a building that's not only attractive during the day, but also has its charm at night.
the canopy that the approvals were obtained but as you can see this corner from what was
what is currently it completely transforms the street and also the way the pedestrians will
experience this this is a view of 16th street again the commercial portion carries on this is
entrance to the parking in the basement. The basement parking proposes 31 spaces. There's
also access to mechanicals, elevator compartments, and so forth. The material, the higher quality
materials, they turn the corner onto Alter Street. And thanks to the City Planning Commission's
suggestions altar street became a much better um vision actually with what this project had started
vision, actually, with what this project had started. Originally, we placed loading zones
originally we
in this portion that you see in here. City Planning Commission recommended that we move
the loading zones to the driveway area, enlarge the driveway slightly, but provide this altar
street more pedestrian-friendly, maybe in a spot where people would like to actually sit down.
And in that section, it almost enlarges the sidewalk area to nearly 20 feet with the
connection from the edge of the sidewalk to the inwards of the building with this landscape court
and i would like to this is a view of altar street um there is a portion that is um roofed over by
the building that benches can be placed and people can experience this whole section more of a as a
front rather than the back of the building what you see in here is the driveway that connects
altar street to washington avenue and per city planning commission recommendations we had
navigated the traffic to enter from altar street and egress onto washington avenue but only egress
into one direction so there would be no ingress egress off of washington to keep the bike lane
and also the pedestrians safer this view in here is the view of the lobby portion this would be a
view from Broad Street looking west again this is high quality materials this all of this is brick
brick turns the corner all around and this is basically that portion as well this is the
courtyard that was recommended by the city planning commission and what you see above right here this
is the landscape portion for the residents for at the second floor roof and what I would like to add
is the 55 units they range as don't mention from high 800 square feet to all the way almost 1400
square feet the one bedroom units are 860 square feet which typically considering that i've done
many multi-family buildings most of our two-bedroom units are 800 so to give you an idea this is a
one-bedroom unit that's really with the footprint of a two-bedroom size. All of the units are very
generous. Most of them are two bedrooms. 45% of these units are two bedrooms. 36% of the units
proposed are three bedrooms, and only 18% of them are one bedroom, and none of the bedrooms proposed
utilize borrowed light. Every single bedroom in here has access to natural light, and we try to
orient as as much of the bedrooms facing southern portion and just giving nice quality
light as as as much as possible so the tenants are happy stimulated and stay with our client
for as long as possible and that is his motto to provide larger units so tenants do have a
possibility to grow so it's it's it's a development that's potentially family friendly rather than
I'm just a working, you know, single professional or this is this that there is room to for growth.
And that pretty much everything that I wanted to mention, I believe I have mentioned.
Counsel, could you could you our note says 71 interior parking spaces?
And I didn't I didn't hear that from her architect.
Yes, we have 71 parking spaces, 31 of the parking spaces, and I'll pull up.
31 of the parking spaces are proposed in the cellar.
36 of the parking spaces are proposed on second floor.
Okay, thank you.
Yes, and four are in the carport.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
um do you want to have your client come on and yes adapt the testimony yes i'd like to ask him
a couple questions sure is michael carosella promoted to panelists
michael carosella has been allowed to speak now could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer hello my name is michael carosella m-i-c-h-a-e-l c-a-r-o-s-e-l-l-a
where or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you and michael could you please tell the board what is
your relationship to 1520 washington avenue i am the owner of that project
I am the owner of that project, of that location.
at that location.
And how long have you owned it?
I owned it now for anywhere from two and a half to three years.
And can you tell the board why did you acquire the property?
We acquired the property.
We are the owners of CNR Building Supplies across the street from this location.
And we acquired this property basically to expand parking for our employees and for basically storage of every day.
materials. That's one of the reasons why we acquired this property.
And have you been able to use it for those purposes?
Recently, when we acquired this project two to three years ago,
the actually housing went down.
The interest rates went through the roof and we had more parking necessary at
our location than I thought we were going to have.
And one of the other issues became is that trying to load storage into Washington Avenue, this site, at the site that we have now, we have setbacks in our parking area to unload any type of vehicles, these big tractor trailers.
And at this site here, it takes up the whole footprint of the land using Washington Avenue to put a forklift across and bringing it to store.
It is not working out too well.
So we basically used a small portion of this property, but it didn't work out the way I thought it would work out with the interest rates, the economy, and housing at the time also.
And have you marketed the property for other tenants?
We tried marketing the property the best we possibly could as what it is and not having much success with rent.
And some of the tenants we have there are just a bare minimum rent, just to have some sort of income coming in.
When we try to put it as a triple net lease with the taxes the way they are in the UNO, it doesn't work for anyone.
So we swallow that cost just to have income coming in and lease it out the way it is at this time.
And, Michael, could you describe the surrounding area on Washington Avenue?
Washington Avenue, the surrounding area.
I've been on Washington Avenue, my brother and I, with a building supply for the last 30 to 35 years.
And Washington Avenue basically went through a lot of changes.
I remember the train tracks running up and down Washington Avenue as we were kids working here.
And it's changing to the positive.
An industrial site, even our building supply we have now, it's changing so fast for large vehicles to load and unload.
It's getting very difficult.
And we have in our 16th and Washington, we have a big setback in our parking lot to some of the trucks to get unloaded.
But what I see is happening is that what we're trying to do now is change it from what I see is a lot of retail and a lot of apartment spaces over top.
And I see that flow moving forward. And that's what I see on Washington Avenue as being here for the last 30 to 35 years.
Thank you. I have no further questions.
Questions from, did he adopt your testimony?
I can ask him. Michael?
Michael?
So in addition to everything that you've testified to today, did you hear what I stated earlier?
And is it true and accurate?
And do you adopt it as though it were your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Yeah, could you clarify for me?
So does this parcel or this building goes from 15 to 16 street back up?
Or is there like the little street?
Not all the way.
You have to create the street.
Agata, could you show the?
just one second it runs from washington avenue through to altar street it does not run from
16th all the way to 15th so so is there um is there any obstruction on altar street right now
that would that you would have to that the building uh takes a a portion of or is it the
altar street is just straight right now altar street is straight okay all right okay 15th and
So, the traffic would come from possibly, well, if you were entering the building to park, you will enter on Alter Street and then go out at 15th Street?
Is that the flow of traffic?
The flow of traffic is for the cellar parking, the underground parking, you would enter it off of 16th Street.
Can you show the other plant that shows the dry vial?
Can you show the other plan that shows the drive aisle?
Just one second.
Alter Street, plan south.
This is the driveway, and this is Washington Avenue.
This blue ramp, this is access to the cellar parking. The green ramp, this is access to the second floor parking. For basically an ingress to second floor, you will be coming off of Alter Street, but egressing onto Washington Avenue and be forced to make a right.
There would be no left turn from this parcel onto, and that was a requirement of the Planning Commission and a suggestion of the Planning Commission.
This would be a one-way driveway with the two loading zones right along.
That's why there's a little kink in the curb.
I'm glad you showed this diagram.
So that landscape strip right there abuts the building next to it, right?
That is correct.
We are not attaching ourselves to the building.
there is a 34 foot gap between the two buildings all right thank you you're welcome other questions
from the board yes uh you're going to have 15 of affordable units is that what was agreed to yes
so that's eight units out of the 55 correct it comes to just above eight percent above eight
units okay all right thank you other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hilly emerson
just a quick question the i know the affordable units was something requested by the rco and
that's something that that the um the zoning board cannot add as the proviso is that being
done via a cba or deed restriction or how my client agreed to that with the rcos and it's
not via a deed restriction and they did not ask to enter into a cba okay my client agreed to it
and we'll provide that okay that's fine i just wanted to be to be clear for anyone here that
we can't we that is not something the cba can enforce so because i know the rco did request
that thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience yes sir i have a hand up by
the name of Madeleine Shacumba that had been allowed to speak. May I just ask one question
of Ms. Emerson? You mentioned that you received a letter and petition. I haven't received any of
that. Would you be able to send that to my attention? Yes. Yes. Thank you.
Why, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Madeline Chacumba.
M-A-D-E-L-I-N-E Chacumba.
That's like in Sam, H-I-K-O-M-D-A.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am an RCO.
I'm not a better next to the, of course, the street from the proposed.
All right, please proceed.
I am representing the North of Washington Avenue Coalition.
We are co-coordinating RCO with SOSNA, which is the other RCO, okay?
We're not surprised that SOSNA has supported this project because their board currently has a developer on it
and several of his members who are employed by him.
And he has a number of properties in our area that are residential.
We are opposed to this being a residential because we want jobs, okay?
Residential don't bring in jobs.
And we have enough residential on Washington Avenue already.
We have the one that's 1100 Washington Avenue, which Dawn talked about, 1100 people.
We have already built on Washington Avenue at 21st, 22nd, and 23rd additional residential reading.
and they seem like they want to turn
all of Washington Avenue into nothing but
residential. We,
as I said, need help jobs.
We are struggling now
and we don't want to see Washington Avenue
turned into nothing but rich
residential housing.
It would cause a chasm because it would be between the rich and the poor.
It would cause a chasm
because it would be between the rich and the poor.
Many of our people are seniorly and they are moderate income people.
We cannot afford a rise in our taxes because they're inviting these rich folks to come in here
and buy these houses that they are building.
We are not supportive of the IRNX suggestion of B's only Washington Avenue to be nothing but residential,
with Trump Park commercial, usually low-income paying commercial.
We lack jobs in our areas, and our history is based on that being an industrial background,
not a residential background.
We are the second poorest city in the country.
We need creation of affordable housing, not expensive residential housing.
And we do not want you to have our zoning re-zoned so that they can bring in this expensive housing.
None of the upcoming proposal for housing or every upcoming proposal we have is all for expensive housing.
This has had detrimental effects upon the existing residents who are middle class and senior lead residents.
The increased real estate taxes are sure to have a negative impact.
We saw no attempt by the developer of this property to seek industrial uses,
and we would like to see what exists in the past return to Washington Avenue.
We are struggling very hard to do this, okay?
The loss of industries hurt not just our area, but the economic base of the city.
We must all work together to create this base.
Our population is already drilling.
We once were the third largest country and the third largest city in this country,
and now we are close to being the 10th, 8th, or the 9th, or somewhere in a way.
We need to attract businesses for our survival, and we need to have an area where they can develop.
we continue to invest in housing and not in job creation and we continue to do
this we will all do we economic investment in the area that can't
extract investment the current developers are only looking to have the
money in their pocketbooks we ask that you do not approve this and that we
allow Washington Avenue to develop as it has been they are now impacting
Washington Avenue is next to a residential area
and these tall buildings are
impacting negatively on our residential
area because they're building them tall
blocking the sunlight and everything
else. We had one at 1600
coming up now
with a developer who wishes to put
a tall building there impacting
on a small street
and he
he's getting away with it because he
went and developed
Let's concentrate on this building. Let's concentrate
on this. I'm sorry. Okay.
Are you, you're, obviously you're, listen to me, obviously you're against this project.
Yes, I am.
And I appreciate your call and your comments.
Thank you very much.
I do have one question.
Ms. Chacombo, could you please place your address on the record?
My group address, they were in my organization today, 22, 2234 Bancho Street.
we are a non-profit organization and we've been in the area for almost 40 years
thank you thank you other questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes chair i have a hand up by the name of richard gillenick they have been allowed to speak
how many hands do you have up i have a total of four more hands up after this
Thank you. Could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
Sure. My name is Richard Gliniak. It's G-L-I-N-I-A-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
I am on the South of South Neighborhood Association board and also on the zoning committee.
And I'm also I'm also a neighbor and also a committee person in a 10th division, which is two blocks from this project.
Thank you. Are you in favor of this project, sir?
I am strongly in favor of this project, as the zoning committee unanimously was strongly in favor of this project.
And thank you. So go ahead.
I just want to, and I can go, I mean, it's the applicant's attorney did specify all the details, but this particular project meets a very high standard that we often require of any development on Washington Avenue.
In fact, you know, it has steel construction, affordability units, plenty of parking that won't impact adjacent homeowners or residents, a green roof.
And what's really special about this, it has a large percentage of two and three bedroom.
It has a large percentage of two and three bedroom apartments, which is ideal for families.
And it would be our hope that families would move in there with children.
And those children would actually go to Stanton Elementary School, which is a few blocks away.
And Stanton has and is suffering from low enrollment.
And any additional families moving in would be a really great thing.
I also want to speak, you know, we have a national, well, first, we have a housing shortage in South Philadelphia, Graduate Hospital, Center City, excuse me, Southwest Center City, and nationally.
And so we need to be building more housing.
And if that was the case, then prices would go down.
So, you know, it's a high standard.
It's a beautiful architect that the zoning committee has worked with before.
They did 2401 Washington Avenue, the Exile Theater at 13th and Reed.
They do really high quality work, and we strongly support this.
I also want to make somebody make a comment.
Sorry, we appreciate your comments, but I have several other people who want to get on now.
And I think, but thank you very much.
We appreciate it.
Next hand, please.
Marie Spencer, who has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Marie, M-U-R-R-A-Y, Spencer, S-P-E-N-C-E-R.
I hope you can hear me.
No, I can.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor, Mr. Spencer?
I am the chair of the SACSA zoning committee, and I'm also on the architectural review committee with Richard, who just spoke.
So I guess the question I have for you is, are you for this project or against?
Right. Again, I'll be brief. We are. I'm supporting this project. Yes.
On behalf of the South Arizona committee and the architecture committee.
Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate you taking the time. Next hand, please.
Tony Marino has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
tony marino t-o-n-y-m-a-r-i-n-o you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do i do are you a neighbor yes and also a business owner okay um are you for this project
or against this project sir against okay um we've we've had a lot of comments relative to
the person who testified before why, is there anything different that you can offer?
Yes, especially parking. I'm on Alter Street.
Okay. All right. All right. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate you taking the time.
Next hand, please.
Nicholas Feely has been allowed to speak.
I could please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Oh, yes. It's Nicholas Feely, N-I-C-H-O-L-A-S, and then Feely, F as in Frank, E-A-L-E-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Sir, are you a neighbor?
Okay. Are you in favor of this project or against?
I'm in favor of it.
We've had a lot of testimony about why this is an interesting project for people.
Is there anything different you can offer?
Yes, I just have one thing that's different.
Two things are different.
I'm the chair of the Vision Zero Strong Towns Committee.
And I just want to say like mixed use buildings, you know, make our cities more financially resilient and reduce long term liabilities.
And they produce economic activity and jobs.
I'm also agree with everything said previously with Richard and Murray.
and I also
were in favor of it having like bike parking
as well
thank you very much
for taking the time we appreciate it
next hand
chair I now have four more hands up
phone number ending in 065
calling user has been allowed to speak
could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer
Tiffany Green concerned citizens of Point Breast
you swear
or a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Hold on, hold on, hold on.
Are you for this project or against?
We're in opposition
against the project, okay?
We've had a lot of testimony already.
Is there anything you could tell me differently?
Yes, I would like to, on behalf of
the residents that live on this
side, make the case for them.
They don't have a lawyer, and I'm just asking for
a little extra time
so that we can make the case,
because we're the RCO on this side, okay?
First of all, I want to say that the coordinating RCO that held the meeting held the meeting on Juneteenth, which is a black holiday.
First of all, I want to say that the coordinating RCO that held the...
And if you look at their letter, they have no nearby neighbors that came to that meeting.
And so as a result, our group decided to go out and do the petition where I went out myself and two other people because we felt strongly about this.
And so we, as you see on our petition, most of the people live between the 1,400 block and the 1,600 block of Ellsworth Street.
These are long-term residents, majority African Americans, who live right behind Washington Avenue, okay?
And I'm just going to take from my letter.
I want to just add in, because I think this needs to be on the record in case it goes further, that the resident's position was to keep it commercial.
This is what we feel on our side.
Washington Avenue has been a business corridor for over close to 80, 100 years, okay?
It is a snow route emergency.
It is also a route where truckers, trailers, and delivery trucks connect from I-95 to 76, and so they've been used on this.
What has happened is that the Planning Commission in 2012 split Washington Avenues down the middle and put on the other side, the north side and south side, I believe, intentionally,
where they allow Sajna to control the other side
and point freeze on this side.
Now, Sajna has put many buildings on,
and they never invited a lot of the black-led RCOs to their meetings.
So, Tiffany, listen to me.
This is not about somebody else.
Tell me what you think about this project.
I'm telling you what we're thinking.
I'm telling you what the situation is.
I don't want you to have to tell me what Sajna's doing wrong.
I want to know where you are with this.
I'm telling you what Sajna is doing wrong.
them to speak. Wait a minute. We're saying
that we have buildings at 25th Street.
You allow the lawyer
to say that they have all these wonderful
buildings there. I'm saying to you, Chair,
allow us to say that they have those buildings
and we had no say on it. For them
to come on today and want to push this
is not right. The multifamily
buildings at 25th Street, 24th
Street, and your zoning committee
may not be aware of this information.
22nd Street, 21st
Street, 18th Street. I'm concentrating on this.
Tiffany, listen. I'm concentrating.
You know, we have over 2,200 units on the north side of Washington Avenue.
So when he came, when this developer came with 50, we said to him, this is not really making a dent.
A lot of the apartments are still vacant on the other side.
Can you try and do something for us on this side and maintain it?
On our side is all commercial from 25th Street to 15th Street.
Recently, we got in Habitat for a Manu Resale business.
We have a storage.
We have a new pet hospital. We have restaurants on this side and soon to come a gym at 19th and Washington Avenue as well.
They have a bakery there. And then they're going to also have more professional offices.
Now, with this particular project, he could he could do because there's no hardship here.
This is self-imposed. And as you know, variances does not include economic hardship, does not make right for a variance.
So, therefore, we have proposed what they have, what Bach School,
vocation school was turned into when a young lady purchased it.
She has what they call a little small marketplace with little unique
businesses, boutiques, and everything.
They even won an award for Le Bach Fin, the restaurant on top of the roof.
Okay, so we were saying that would be great because you have 2,200 apartments.
That's a walking crowd.
They would love to come in and do boutique-ish type of things,
and this is something that he could do.
Or he could do an office building with specialty, like cardiologists.
But Tiffany, Tiffany, Tiffany, Tiffany, listen to me.
Listen to me, Tiffany.
No, I hear what he should do, but this is what he wants to do.
And the question for us is the variance.
Are you against this variance?
Tiffany?
You can press star nine to unmute yourself.
Unmute, please, Tiffany.
We are, okay, what I'm saying, we are against this project, but I think that if we should be given the time to make the point that they, Tiffany, I hear everything you said.
I understand your points, and we're going to move on to the next person.
Next hand, please.
Morgan Rodriguez has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
Hello, Morgan Rodriguez, M-O-R-G-A-N-R-O-D-R-I-G-U-E-Z.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Are you for or against this project?
I am for this project.
You've heard a lot of testimony already.
Is there anything different you can offer?
Yes. And just as a note, I am joining this as a neighbor, and also I am the current chairperson of the South of South Neighborhood Association.
And just as a note, I am joining this as a neighbor.
We've had several people testify already from your organization.
Yep, I have a different comment to make, and I did want to clarify a comment that was made earlier in regards to our board about the owner and developer of this.
Okay, just concentrate on this building, please.
Okay. He is not part of our board, though. But that being said, Washington Avenue on the west side of Broad Street has been zoned solely for industrial use for as long as that has existed. And that zoning classification no longer has a place on the street in the current world. And the rezoning of Washington Avenue is long overdue. And we welcome mixed use development along Washington Avenue on the west side, which will bring more residents and jobs to the area.
Thank you very much for taking the time to cause. How many more hands do you have?
I have one more hand here.
Thank you.
Tony Marino, you're not allowed to speak.
Didn't he testify already, didn't he?
Hi, my name is, excuse me.
My name is Rosa Marino.
I'm co-owner of the business that is.
Could you spell your name, please, for the court stenographer?
It's R-O-S-A-M-A-R-I-N-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes. Please proceed. Okay. Now, here's the point. You know, your husband testified before. Is there anything different you can offer about this project? And I'm sure you're going to be against it. Am I right?
Yeah, more particularly because of the serious concern of the parking and the traffic and the parking and the impingement on Alter Street during and after the construction of this building.
As you know, Altar Street is extremely narrow street, very narrow. And how is that going to be impinged upon by the construction of this huge building? And then further on, parking spaces will be taken away on the 16th Street side.
you said you want to make it more pedestrian friendly there are many businesses that uh
affront altar street how will that affect the traffic now and for the business that you know
our own altar street this is marina thank you very much for taking the time to call us we
appreciate it planning commission
amy board mr chair may i make up go ahead you can go ahead no no you should you should if you
have a comment make your comment before the planning committee i just i just wanted to
make the board aware that um when the community meeting was scheduled on juneteenth we recognized
that it was scheduled on a holiday and we asked the uh rcos if they wanted to reschedule that
and that the meeting was not scheduled by us.
I just wanted to point that out.
And thank you.
Thank you very much.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
This property completed its Civic Design Review in July 2024.
The Civic Design Review's committee advisory recommendations
are not an expression of the City Planning Commission's recommendations
or opinion regarding zoning variances, special exemptions,
or other discretionary approvals associated with this proposal the comprehensive plan recommends
a change in zoning at this location from the existing medium industrial i2 to residential
industrial mixed use irmx under the proposed zoning the requested uses would be allowed by right
we also note to the board that absent participation in a city state or federal program or city zoning
initiative affordability mentioned in the palace testimony cannot be enforced by any city agency
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the request of variance for multifamily household living and for balconies.
Council, we've had a lot of testimony.
I'm going to take this to our executive session two weeks from today, and we will vote on it at 930 a.m.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I think we have one more case that we have to go back.
Number seven, MI 2023-005-953-5646, Teter Avenue, Berna Adji.
Do we see any hands?
Yes, Chair.
Berna Adji is coming in as a penalist.
I also see Attorney George Gossett.
i don't know if he's the one who's actually giving the presentation this is verna verna do you have
This is Verna.
Verna, do you have an attorney?
an attorney
Yes, he should be on the line, Attorney Gossett.
All right, all right.
I'll get back to Mr. Gossett.
Can you hear me?
I can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
So my name is George Gossett, G-O-S-S-E-T-T.
Attorney ID number is 82983.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you please turn your video?
Oh, there you go.
There you go.
There I am.
And Verna Aji is your client?
That's correct.
There's a letter of support from the West Philadelphia Economic Development Council.
There's a letter of support from the generationalist of Philadelphia, and Councilmember Gauthier is in non-opposition.
Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and you agree with its accuracy?
Please proceed and share your screen, sir.
Certainly. So thank you. So this is my.
I'm sorry we're so long, but when I called her earlier, I had a hard time getting her in.
I understand these things happen.
My client is the Motivated Community Resource Center.
Verna Aggie is the CEO of the community center.
This is a variant asking to use a row home, as it currently is right now, as a community center.
Let me share with you just some quick pictures so you can get an idea as to what we're talking about.
I do apologize.
In the processing, the pictures came across upside down.
And I think you may already have copies of the picture.
But this first one that I'm sharing right now is the community, sort of a community classroom where they do after-school work with children.
They also have community meetings there.
Is it sharing?
I can't see anything.
He didn't do it yet.
I'm sorry, can you see it?
George, you're not up yet.
Oh, okay.
I'm sorry.
Let me see.
You should bring your documents up, then hit the green share screen.
All right.
Let me see here.
So you're saying bring the document up.
Usually you bring your documents up, then you push the share screen button on the bottom.
All right.
This is my first time doing it.
Okay, I see it here.
Share screen.
Got you.
There we go.
Yeah, you're coming up now, George.
Okay, thank you.
Thanks for your patience.
okay so that would be the picture of the uh classroom community work yep all right but you
gotta it's not coming up we see where it says but we need to see the photo so you gotta tap on that
and bring it up am i right yes so you're just sharing your um document screen you would have
to stop sharing and then reshare.
All right.
Instead of hitting documents,
just hit on share screen.
We're a tech person here.
Sorry.
Yes, I am.
I think he's better.
We're good.
We're good.
So that's upside down, you're saying, right?
that's the upside down classroom that's sort of the community room um i'm also going to share
with you a picture of the front of the house if you need to see that with the actual zoning sticker
is it possible to turn this photo right side up let me see you see if you see right next
right there yeah there you go all righty okay so as i stated before it's a it's a um 1500 square
foot, 1,600 square foot row home that has been being used as a community center. That
is a small, that is the small community room, general purpose room, where they do after
school work and they also have community meetings there. All right. I'm going to show you another
picture of just the front of the building so you can see the
So you can see the front of the building along with the zoning sticker.
Right.
is that showing up yeah could you turn that one too please yes sir
okay so that's the turn and hit it again
there we go
and how long have they had this project this property for this use i believe this is the
third year. They've just signed for a new lease, but I will bring my client on
at the end of my presentation just to clarify, but I know that they have in fact signed a new lease
to continue on this, to continue with this.
You want to bring your client on?
i'm here can you hear me yeah hi could you please state your name and spell for the course
that is verna aggie v-e-r-n-a-a-g-g-i-e where or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes all right please proceed counsel ms aggie how long have you
been uh operating at this at this um location about three years we've been operating for about
three years all right and you have can you describe very briefly just the services that you
offer we provide community resources to the west philadelphia area we provide workshops um
workshop senior cooking classes senior classes for youth and also cooking classes for children
We have bingo classes for the senior.
We also distribute food to the community on a Saturday.
We feed about 150 people in the community on Saturday.
And we also provide events during the year, such as we're getting ready for our Holiday of Hope next month.
I'm sorry, that's in December, where we are giving out 350 coats to the children.
And we're feeding the families food, a catered meal.
It's going to be a really nice event.
And next month for Thanksgiving, our goal that we're working on is to feed 500 families, turkeys, and all the trimmings.
And that's going to be all held at the Christie Recreation Center.
So our goal is to continue to be able to provide resources in this West Philadelphia area.
And do you partner up with various other groups within the community?
We have a partnership with University of Pennsylvania.
We have a partnership with Philly Lift. That's part of the city of Philadelphia government agency.
We also have partnerships with local churches, Abiding Truth Ministries.
We have a new partnership with the Corner Grocer, who's also working to provide fresh vegetables and produce and a new way of eating in the West Philadelphia area.
So we have quite a bit of partnerships in this area.
Can the members of the ZBA, can you see the actual zoning snippet?
I see. Yep, I see.
Okay. I want to direct your attention, Ms. Aggie, to September 30th.
Was there a community meeting held at that time?
Yes, absolutely. It was held. We had a great meeting.
Everyone was for what we do, loving what we do,
and to let us all share that they are 100% on board
and love the work that we do in this area.
And I believe that the ZBA,
you already have copies of those actual letters from RCOs.
We do.
We do.
Would you have your client adopt your testimony from earlier?
Will you adopt my testimony?
Yes, absolutely.
Is there anything that you would like to add or any further explanation you'd like to give?
No, everything is good.
Thank you so much.
Questions from the board.
I have a question.
Does the community center operate on the second floor as well?
We have storage rooms up there, and we only operate on the first main floor.
The questions?
the questions what's the what's the hours of operations we're here from 8 a.m to 4 o'clock
What's the hours of operations?
in the afternoon no after no after school stuff well we have uh students that come in from
families who homeschool their children and they come in in the afternoons to do some work with us
Now, right now, we're looking to provide a structure after school program from three to six, but that's also still in the works.
Questions from the board?
Yes. Question. Yeah. The signs, are they on this permit?
Yes. If you look at the picture that he showed of the front of the building, you'll see our sign.
That's hanging up above on a porch that says Motivated Community Resource Center.
No, no.
What I mean is, is this on this permit application?
Did you ask the sign?
No, I sure not.
That's just a temporary.
That's not a permanent attached sign.
It's just basically just that has information on it.
Yes, that's correct.
Are you planning to have a sign here?
Just the one we like, which is we don't want no permanent signs, just something that we can just put up to let the community know the location.
So right now it's a cloth banner, like a mesh banner.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hints at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
In report for the Planning Commission,
the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the residential single-family RSA 3 zoning at this location.
The appellant appears to have established a community center
without the benefit of permits.
Tutoring is incidental to this use.
The appellant has shown that legalizing this community center
will not injure the use of adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant
the proposed use variances for personal services and community center.
Thank you. MI 2023-005-953-5646-Cedar Avenue. I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tynetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Tywin, my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a good afternoon.
You too. Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called from the 930 list?
I see more things at this time, too.
Okay. Thanks, everyone. See everyone at 2 p.m.
Thank you.
You can proceed as you wish, Chair.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member, Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member, Taya Nguyen.
Also present is our Attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Here's our virtual format. The proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded. Video will be available by contacting ZBA Executive Director at phila.gov.
For a court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying. If you're participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand, star six to unmute. 200 appearance statement call 267-270-5548. Leave your email address and also the address of the property in question.
Finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for testimony. All comments should be directed to ZBA Executive Director at phil.gov. Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
i'm going to take three together number four mi 2024 002 411 3212 york street number five
mi 2024 002 412 3210 west york street and number six mi 2024 00
And number six, MI 2024-002-413-3208 West York Street.
All three, the hearings in the matters have been rescheduled to Tuesday, December 17th, 2024 at 9.30 a.m.
This is the final continuance for this matter.
Thank you.
And then number 16, MI 2024-005-135-2401 North 32nd Street, this case has been continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Okay, we're going to go to our add-on cases.
Number one of our add-on, 2024-005-594-9901 Frankfurt Avenue.
The vote in this matter has been continued to Wednesday, October 23rd at 2 p.m.
Number two, MI 2024-004-449, 1401 66th Avenue.
I vote yes with proviso.
Interior access to the restaurant by public is prohibited after 10 p.m. and before 5 a.m. on Monday through Thursday and after 11 p.m. and before 5 a.m. on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
Customers may order and pick up from the drive-thru lanes until 2 a.m. Sunday through Saturday.
My vote is yes to Michael Jones with Provisos.
Gerald Gaston, my vote is yes with Provisos.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Provisos.
Tywin, my vote is yes with Provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Provisos.
Number three, MI 2024-004-290-21 Wall Street. The vote in this matter has been rescheduled
to Wednesday, October 23rd, 2024 at 2 p.m. And number four, MI 2022-007-577-3935
Ogden Street, this is a request for reconsideration. I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Can we specify the votes involve reconsideration and rehearing?
Thank you.
I vote no to request for reconsideration and rehearing.
Michael Johns, my vote is no for, I can never remember that, reconsideration and hearing.
Yep, reconsideration and rehearing, yes.
Reconsideration and rehearing, yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Tywin, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thank you.
We're going to start with number 10, MI 2024-004-844, 4248 North 7th Street.
Joseph Consul is the attorney.
There's a letter of non-opposition from Esperanza Housing and Economic Development, RCO.
Africa also has a petition signed with 10 signatures from neighbors, all from that block.
joseph consul will be joining us as a panelist good afternoon
mr consul could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer
that's joseph consul that's j-o-s-e-p-h last name is consul c-o-n-s-o-l-e
we're referring to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes would you identify your client a relationship to the property
yeah my client is lndk acquisitions llc they're the owners the representative kirk wechter is on
this call my chair has a few questions sir good afternoon counsel do you agree to wait to read
another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy yes have you emailed then all the required documents
and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes thank you counsel please proceed and share your screen okay
sharing my screen
it's up all right uh so this property that we're um here for today is
4248 north 7th street uh we're here seeking approval to uh use this property as a duplex
In 1949, the property was first approved.
In 1949, the property was first approved as a duplex.
It was built as a duplex at that time, and there's nothing in the archives that would indicate that it was ever down-zoned back to a single family.
My client purchased it as a functional duplex.
I'll show you the photos in a second.
And he's seeking to legalize the use as a duplex.
So because it's known to RSA 5, we are here because that's single family only,
and we're seeking approval as a duplex.
Here's our proof of mailing.
Posters we home.
Exterior.
My client is doing cosmetic work, nothing structural.
this is kind of a trip into back in time here um you can see some of the panels on the left
very rough sketch kind of showing the the layout of the property uh as as it's been
one bedroom on in the first unit two bedrooms in the second unit just give me that again real quick
Deed, showing my client purchased the property in July of this year.
Or a tax clearance certificate.
Here is a petition that was gathered.
We made it very clear what we were looking for here, the time and date of today's hearing.
and we have a good number of owners from the block
that have signed a petition in support.
Again, that's the ZBA archive.
There's a few entries from the time that it was converted,
building permits for the tube family.
Again, that dates back to 1949.
And then finally, the letter from Esperanza
stating that they have no opposition for legalizing this property.
as a as a two-unit building that I'll call my client Kirk could you raise your hand I'll just
take you back to the interior showing the entrances to the units inside the initial vestibule
what's your client's name kirk k-r-k
kirk has been allowed to speak hi sir could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer
yes kirk wechter k-i-r-k w-a-e-c-h-t-e-r you swear or firm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel good afternoon kirk did you hear
my testimony just now regarding your property at 4248 north 7th street i did uh do you adopt it as
your own yes okay nothing further mr counsel what's the rest of the block look like there
Just out of curiosity.
Kirk, can you give us a little bit of insight into the rest of the block?
Let's see.
In regards to what exactly?
I'm not really sure how to answer that.
Multiple families.
Are there other multiple families on the block?
To my knowledge, there is.
There is no commercial, though.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
or yes what was the outcome of the RCO meeting oh we uh they have a they submitted a letter of
non-opposition uh that the neighbors that did show up from the block acknowledged that they
believed it was always set up as as a two unit and um they agreed to sign the petition which
we had submitted uh with our with our packet okay other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission good afternoon chairman and uh
david fechter with the city planning commission that's f-e-c-t-e-a-u
where we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir i do please proceed thank you chairman uh um chairman and members of the board the
Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa
The city rezoned this property to single-family in 2019.
The zoning archive shows that this property was converted into a two-family home in 1949.
The city planning commission recommends that the board grant their proposed zoning variance for two-family dwelling.
MI 2024-004-844-4248, North 7th Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Kanata Graham, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to go to number one now.
MI-2022-005-219-4212 Parkside Avenue.
Meredith Verlager is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of support from East Parkside Residents Association.
Meredith Verlager will be joining us as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, counsel. Could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenography?
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Sure. My client is 4212 Parkside Development, LLC, which is the owner of the property.
Please share has a few questions for you.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy
i do have you emailed in all the required documents that's needed
and required to proceed five days in advance of this hearing i did thank you and please proceed
counsel thank you uh good afternoon mr chairman members of the board again meredith ferlinger of
delworth paxton my client today is 4212 parkside development uh which is represented today by
Eugene Nadevich, so he should be here on the Zoom. The case before you today is quite straightforward
in terms of request and did receive a vote of support by the local RCO, which is shown in your
packet at Exhibit 15. I'll just bring that up real quickly. To summarize, this application seeks to
legalize a sixth dwelling unit in an existing structure, which is a use that has a documented
yet inconsistent history dating all the way back to the 1950s. The application before you today
concerns 4212 Parkside Avenue in the city's East Parkside neighborhood. Tax clearance is shown at
Exhibit 2, and at Exhibit 3 you will see the deed to this property showing my client's ownership.
As you can see here on the zoning map at Exhibit 6, this property sits on Parkside Avenue between
North 42nd Street and Belmont Avenue and is zoned RSA 3. I'll come back in a moment and explain
all of the little dots that you see. On the aerials at Exhibit 7, which is now up on your
screen, you'll begin to see the context of this area surrounding the property. You may take note
that this is a very large, over 5,000 square foot structure that sits along a historic row of
structures along Parkside Avenue. Looking from the south, you can see that these are large
twin structures all facing Fairmount Park. And again from the east, this is looking towards the
back of these structures where you can see they're all really quite uniform and they do back up to
this alley that separates them from the homes on Viola Street. At Exhibit 8, I've included
additional exterior photographs to provide a little bit more context. 4212 Parkside is the
twin structure on the left side of this photograph. This next photograph again just shows the general
relationship of this property to the park across the street. The next two photographs show the
adjoining structures to the northwest as well as to the southeast. And really, again, you can see
this is a really beautiful, quite uniform block. This block has had historic protection by way of
a historic district since 2009. And I did include evidence of that historic district in the exhibit
packet at Exhibit 13. Now, to give you a better view of the property itself, I've also included
Now to give you a better view of the property itself, I've also included photographs of the
photographs of the
side 12-foot alley that leads to the rear of this structure. You can also see this is where trash is
stored for this property away from public view. Additional views of the alley are provided in
this next photograph where you can also see the six electric meters with labels on them
that are on the side of this building.
Moving along, photos here are shown from the rear of the structure,
and this is the entrance to the rear first floor unit.
This also, of course, shows the rear yard for the structure.
And again, just another image of the rear and the alley looking towards the back.
We did also include photographs of the timely posting,
which was made on September 18th, 2024.
Before I turn to interior photographs and floor plans, what I'd like to do first is
just walk you through the somewhat bizarre history of this property. At Exhibit 11,
which I have up on the screen, I've included some marked up snapshots of relevant history
of this property. In June of 1942, over here on the right, you can see that the property
was granted a variance for use as a three-family dwelling. In 1952, in the middle, it was then
requested to be increased to a six-family dwelling, which was seemingly from the history denied
solely because the applicant back in the 1950s did not present the board with a floor plan.
Seeking to avoid the 1950s version of the one-year rule, records show that the owner followed staff
advice to reapply for a five-unit building, which was approved despite the fact that six units
seemingly already existed in the property by that time, which is how it has remained ever since.
And again, you can see that 1965 approval here on the left-hand side. As you will see in the
photographs that I'll show momentarily, these units are all historically sensitive, with only
small cosmetic updates having been made over the years. There is no evidence from a structural
sense or a layout sense to indicate that this sixth unit was added any time after 1952
when that request for legalization was first made.
Now, originally, this applicant was seeking to add two extra units to bring the total to eight.
However, after extensive discussion with the community, as you can see from the fact that this is probably one of your last remaining applications with a 2022 in it, that request was abandoned, and the applicant is now only seeking to reconfirm the longstanding existence of that sixth unit.
We did secure an amended refusal, which is shown at Exhibit 1. So, if the board is inclined to grant the request today, which we certainly hope, it would be based on an amended refusal issued June 6, 2024.
So, with some of this history in mind, let me walk you through the floor plans, which you can see here up on the screen.
In looking at the floor plans, you can quickly gather that the property has likely had six units since its last major renovation in the 1950s.
There are two units per floor.
The front units, which you can see here, are all 665 square feet, and the rear units are all 785 square feet.
There is a central staircase in the middle that provides a natural separation from the front and the rear units.
Each of these units is a one-bedroom, one-bathroom unit that have ample windows.
And the first floor units, as you'll see in the photographs, even have some historic fireplaces that are really neat looking.
The first floor unit, the rear first floor unit, has a private entrance from the rear, which I did show you in the earlier photographs.
And that is access from the large 12-foot wide alley that is on the left-hand side of the property if you're looking at it from Parkside Avenue.
We've included some interior photographs at Exhibit 9.
And again, you can see one of the many fireplaces that still remain in these units.
So I'll scroll through to give you a sense of what the units look like.
These first couple of photographs here are of a first floor unit.
And again, this is just looking towards the front and then flipping the view towards the back.
And one of the things that you'll notice here is that the floors are the original condition, but obviously have been restored.
And you can see these units are really quite large and nicely laid out and are also occupied.
quite large and nicely laid out, and are also occupied.
And again, this is another one of the first floor units,
and you can see again that entrance from the rear for this particular unit.
Next, there's some images of some of the second floor units,
and again, you'll see some of those historic characters that trim around the windows
and the long-standing existing floors that have remained here.
And again, you can see these are really nicely laid out units that have, you know, longstanding tenants that live in them.
And again, this is now moving on to the third floor.
And again, you'll notice here that these units really benefit from a lot of natural light and are quite large and nicely laid out living spaces.
And again, another one of the third floor units and the kitchen and living areas.
Because the property is zoned RSA 3, the application to legalize the six units was denied.
However, as this board has seen and will see throughout the rest of the presentation, these six dwelling units have continued to exist since the 1950s.
The hardship here is apparent on several grounds.
First, the evidence presented to the board has shown that these six units have been in continuous occupied existence for over 70 years.
Seemingly, it was a pure error or discrepancy that has followed this property ever since the 1960s.
Second, the evidence and the pure logic from the layout here shows that it would be an extreme hardship to convert this property to a five-unit dwelling, which is the last approved use from the 1960s.
The board has heard and seen that the physical characteristics of the interior of this property would render it extremely challenging to combine two units to create one, given the central staircase that acts as a natural separation between all of the upper level units.
And you can see that on the floor plans here, that the staircase really separates the front and the back units.
In addition, you can also see that there is a structural wall down the middle that would jeopardize the historical integrity of the structure to remove it.
And of course, that would be quite, quite expensive.
Furthermore, even if you could get past some of these challenges and combine two units, you would be left with a unit of nearly 1,500 square feet that would be entirely out of character with nearly every dwelling surrounding this property.
Putting aside the history of the property and the unique physical constraints, the applicant submits this board may also grant a variance on the basis that this property is located in an area with unique characteristics that make multifamily use of this structure with six units entirely appropriate.
If I flip back again here to Exhibit 6, which is the zoning map, I marked off to show the board the use of all surrounding properties in the RSA 5 zoning area.
I did not continue the markups much into the RM1 area since multifamily is permitted there.
As you can very clearly see here, and this is pulled directly from city records at Atlas, nearly every single property along this stretch of Parkside Avenue is not only used as a multifamily dwelling, but the vast majority have six units.
This makes perfect sense, given that these structures are nearly identical, physically speaking,
and were likely converted around the same time period in the 1950s. And again, this really
represents the historic character of these original conversions of these structures.
In the absence of the property history, this particular property would still be uniquely
situated to accommodate multifamily use with six dwelling units, given the physical layout and the
consistency of surrounding multifamily uses. The applicant submits that the variance requested is
the least minimum, given its use as a six dwelling unit for over half a century. It is the least
minimum variance here to legalize the current six residential apartment units versus the physical
and monetary hardships that would result from converting it back to a five-family use,
particularly in light of the consistent use of all the surrounding structures
and the very long history of the current condition. The applicant further submits that the request
will not increase congestion, endanger the public, or harm the neighbors. The applicant
application merely seeks to maintain the status quo and remediate a decades-long permit problem
and remediate a decades-long permit problem that poses more risk to safety than does granting the
that poses more risk to
instant application, as the city only has on record right now that there are five units,
even though there are six. Ensuring that the city has complete records for every unit is critically
important. The property sits on the dominant Parkside Avenue corridor, which has ample access
to significant public transportation. Before I conclude, just a brief note on some relevant case
law. Case law that I have referenced in the Memorandum of Law at Exhibit 14 confirms it
would be unreasonable and by no means the least minimum variance to ask a property owner under
these circumstances and based on this evidence to convert a structure back to its last documented
use after a long history of six-unit multifamily use. It also goes without saying that this is not
a self-imposed hardship as my client purchased the property in this condition and is undertaking
the process to ensure it has all necessary permits in place. Based on this significant
evidence before the board today, the applicant submits it has met each element entitling it
to variance relief provided at Section 143038E of the code, and as I mentioned, full analysis
is in the memo of law submitted to the board at Exhibit 14.
At this point, if the administrator could look for Eugene Nadevich to adopt my testimony.
Eugene Nadevich has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Eugene Nidovich, E-U-G-E-N-E, last name N as in Nancy, A-Y-D-O-V-I-C-H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Eugene, when you purchased this property, were there five or six units in the building at the time?
Yes. And just in terms of property management, do you manage this property?
I do. Have you heard all of the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board
today? I did. And would you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt it as
if it were your own? I would. Thank you. We would ask the board to enter our exhibits into evidence
and we're very happy to take any questions that you have. Thank you. Questions from the board?
yes when did you purchase this property
purchased it in 2015 2015 and you've gotten rental licenses since then for six units when it's no
board member gaston rental licenses have only been issued for five units and that's why this
is important to remediate so that the rental license can reflect the actual number of units
that's in the building okay and i guess maybe i missed in the history you uh back in the day
there was an application for the six units and that was denied because there wasn't a floor plan
even though that isn't a zoning issue okay but then there was an application then for five units
and that was approved and that was approved and it's been that way since even though there are
six units there that's exactly correct okay from what from what the history it looks like in the
history that in 1952 uh whoever the gentleman was that owned it at the time sought to uh convert it
to six units and best we can tell from you know the limited history l and i has he probably went
and converted it and then sought to legalize it and and this is ultimately the history that came
up you can see it was the same applicant andrew bowen okay and then he never tried to just get
one more proofed in all this time there's there's no history to show that he took any other steps
after 1965. all right okay other questions thank you yeah i i do i just uh uh it is a very unique uh
structure in a unique location. I don't know that I agree
necessarily that it would be difficult to convert that first
floor back into a single unit. I'm not
confident that that really is a structural wall
that separates the front unit and the back unit. It's actually pretty
horrible to have to walk to the back of the building to get to your unit.
I don't see that necessarily as a difficulty
to achieve with just punching a three-foot opening
into that wall there and creating a larger unit,
uh creating a larger unit very nice large unit as a matter of fact uh that being said i i do
very nice large unit, as a matter of fact.
That being said,
agree that the majority of those large historic buildings have been converted to smaller one and
two bedroom units so it is fairly uh consistent and and board member johns um i eugene will
correct me if i'm wrong but i actually think that that rear unit has one of the longest term
tenants in the entire building eugene is that right uh yes i believe she lived there for
definitely before covid well okay okay the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um only to note that there is an amended refusal mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time too planning commission thank you chairman and board
members david effecto with the city planning commission uh chairman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa3 single family residential zoning at this
location. The single-family zoning dates to 2014. However, the zoning archive shows that this is a
long-standing multifamily building with six dwelling units. The City Planning Commission
recommends the board grant a proposed use variance for a sixth dwelling unit.
MI 2022-005-219-4212 Parks Avenue. I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 6-6-24.
michael johns my vote is yes with um proviso
cheryl gaston my vote is yes with proviso
sonata graham my vote is yes with proviso
hiya win my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shahi my vote is yes with proviso
thank you thank you see you momentarily
number two mi 2023 002787 90 red lion road
Sean Ward is the attorney. This is a reconsideration hearing.
Sean Ward is coming in as a penalist.
Mr. Ward
Mr. Ward
It took a little bit longer
to get logged in
but I am here with
my clients are in my office
with me
Why don't we start off with you stating
your name and spelling it for the court stenographer, even though everybody knows your name.
Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N, last name Ward, W-A-R-D, Attorney for Applicants, Owners.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
So the evidence and testimony from the February 22nd, 23 hearing in this matter is incorporated
into the record for today's hearing.
The scope of this hearing is limited to presenting information that was not presented at the original hearing.
So why don't you start and just give us additional information that we need.
Let me.
Trying to find my packet here.
bear with me this is unusual
coming up
no that's
no that's not the one i want to share sorry hang on a second let me let me close that
okay try this again mr chair
how's that that's uh you're up that looks
that looks more like normal right okay it does thank you
More like normal, right? Okay.
It does.
Thank you.
I'm going to go.
Yeah, Mr. Chair, members of the board, you know, their record should reflect that my clients, Kakaberi and Miranda Chivinezzi, were before the board, before their council of record.
unfortunately
had his law license suspended
and then of course
following same
they were assigned other counsel
who was
I think everybody would agree
was not a zoning and land use
attorney recognized by this board
And graciously enough, this board honored my request for reconsideration and rehearing.
So that's what brings us here today.
In my typical exhibit packet, I have at A1.1 our petition for reconsideration, which was approved by the board.
A1.2 is the original notice of refusal.
Again, this was an application for personal vehicle sales in an existing property on Redline Road.
It is our position that the property has been previously approved for auto repair, as were other sites at this location.
And there's basically four lots, 70, 80, 90, and 100, Redline Road, us being 90.
70 is an existing auto repair center.
100 is an existing auto repair center.
80 really doesn't play into this application or discussion because they're a sign contractor.
So we'll just, you know, leave them out of it. All right. But in any event, personal vehicle sales require pardon me requires a variance.
variance. So A2 is the original ZBA application followed by previous counsel, which includes the
project information form. A3 is the original project information form. A4 is our proof of
ownership, our deed. A5 would be our tax clearance, showing that all taxes are paid through the
current year a six are some archive zoning site plans a seven or floor plans currently as the
property exists a seven or some substantial photographs and subject property exterior
interior street views aerial views and i added some off-site vehicle storage uh to show that um
You know, we store our vehicles off-site, and they are not the subject of any current complaints.
With regard to the original RCO meeting and notices, we attach at A8 the meeting notice with refusal, the certificate of mailing, the RCO letter of support from Greater Busselton Civic,
and the latest email notification indicating that Councilman O'Neill was not opposed to this,
but I think that may be in dispute at this time.
We never received an actual letter from the councilman, not in my file or prior council.
A10 is the relevant zoning history from 70-100 Redline Road.
It is very substantial. If need be, we can, you know, you know, go through those. But at A11, you will see recent L&I violation history, which, again, excludes 80 because they've never been part of this application, nor the complaints, nor any controversy.
With regard to 90, there was a code violation issued in 2024 at 078981 that has since been complied and closed.
That did include a stop work order and or.
uh, uh, uh, stop work order and or, uh, cease, uh, operations. Uh, there were also issues,
uh, uh, violations issued regarding 70 redline road as well as 100 redline road. Uh, to my
knowledge, they are both still open. However, uh, everything related to 90 redline road has been
closed, complied. And we're just here with our application today, seeking reconsideration
for the auto sales and accessory auto repair related to S.A.M.
A14 is the zoning map. A15 is the aerial photograph. Again, with regard to my comments
and representations, which will be verified and adopted by my clients, we're seeking only
approval for auto sales with accessory auto repair and maintenance of for sale vehicles
and a business office for auto tags and insurance, et cetera.
Again, it's going to be limited to sale vehicles. This is not a retail auto repair site.
So we would have no retail repair sales parts, et cetera.
Um, we submit that the properties have a long established auto repair history as evidenced by our, uh, zoning history, which is attached.
Uh, the subject property is the target of the enforcement due to other owners on site.
I don't believe that my clients are the, you know, the the violators at interest here.
And they have complied with every directive and or order, you know, from L&I.
So we are now in compliance.
Right now, the you know, they are not operating.
The property is, you know, pretty much silent and dormant pending this board's decision and final clearance from L&I regarding the violations.
Currently, all vehicles purchased by my clients are stored off-site.
Um, any vehicles being stored or transported at 70 dash 100, uh, do not belong to us.
Um, you know, you, you may see pictures and, or, um, you know, comments by, you know, uh, interested parties in this case.
Um, but currently none of those prop, you know, none of those vehicles are, are, uh, owned by the owners at 90.
You know, we submit that it's, you know, more than likely 70 red line road.
But so pardon me.
So, again, we have our request for reconsideration.
OK, we have.
My transmittal letter, I would also point out in my transmittal letter.
that prior to
and I think this is important for the board
prior to their
engagement of the operation at 90
Redline Road, at least on two occasions
via 311 app, they were
advised from O&I that the use was permitted.
OK, and then, you know, they they proceeded upon that reasonable expectation that because they were advised that it was permitted that they could, you know, proceed with the use at this site.
Unfortunately, I, you know, I think L&I did not consider the overlay, you know, from the, you know, the four-year-old piece overlay.
So, yes, Mr. Chair, you had a question?
I did not.
Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
Um, so, uh, we include in our packet, our request for reconsideration, um, um, we have
our, you know, you know, emails, et cetera.
Um, let me get to, all right, we have our deed.
just real quick you know taxes are paid
You know, taxes are paid.
Here is the site.
Let me, so you can see that at 70-100 Redline Road,
it's bordered by Gantry Road,
100 would be the corner, 90, 80, and then 70.
Here again would be a zoning site plan from the archive, and you can see outlined in red
is our subject property.
What they are looking for would be to have several display vehicle, you know, sale vehicle
spaces out front facing Redline Road.
Uh, the parking spaces in front of the building would be used for, um, you know, customer parking and, you know, owner parking.
This is a better.
So again, we propose four display parking spaces out front at the property line.
The five spaces directly in front of the building would be used for customer parking and or owner slash employee parking inside the property is.
there are two lifts
which were installed by my clients
based upon the prior
zoning confirmation
from LNI
there's a copy of our
zoning notice
and again you can see
the cease operations on the site
this is
photographic evidence just to show that any vehicles
pursuant to the violation notice that were
unregistered or untagged have since been
removed and any vehicles on site
are duly registered. As a matter of fact, this is
my client's vehicle right there. This is
the rear of the property. The red truck
is not on our property.
That would be to the left.
Right?
That would be 80.
These are just pictures of the office.
This is inside of the...
And there's the two lifts that I mentioned.
This is Redline Road facing west.
Redline Road facing east.
The property to the left was the former bud plant, then it was a golf course, and now I believe the future site of a UPS facility.
Here is a overhead Google, so not going by these Colby Dental, I don't know what that is, but this would be 100, this would be 90.
this is 80 and this is 70 so uh in the back you know again this is a google aerial um so there
is entry from gantry road which traverses the back of all four buildings same thing without front
there is entry from redline road as well as gantry road um 100
redline road
erected a
fence which
blocks the
driveway
which we were cited for
but I notified
L and I that that was not
our fence it was
erected by 100
what was that photo just up with all
the cars
what this one
yeah what's that
This is our off-site storage.
And I can show you.
And where's that at?
Hang on, hang on.
All right, so this being our site, Mr. Chair,
that property is the next block over.
So on your site there,
show me where you want to have the four cars
the display where are you going to display cars they would be right out front
on this front of the trees in front of the trees
On this front of the trees in front of the trees.
Well, the the the trees are high canopy trees.
OK, all right. OK, all right. You know, so, you know, from the street, you know, they would not be blocked by the tree.
But OK, no, we're looking for, you know, up to four vehicles, you know, facing the road that would be for sale.
um the uh the trees i mean you had a parking spaces in front of the building would be used for
um you know our employees and or customers and here let me go back to
so again going back to the plan yeah so here's the building um here's that driveway coming in
from redline road this is coming in from gantry um we're simply looking for the
four spaces out front for display vehicles and then you know obviously customer parking and or
you know owner uh when you know when they come in to go to work in the morning and again these are
the two lifts that were evidenced in the photographs um and i would point out that
But, yeah, this property has been, you know, of notable objection and inconvenience to some of the other business neighbors.
And basically, you know, my clients, you know, without zoning approval, have been trying to just make ends meet because they got a mortgage to pay.
and uh but their ultimate goal is for auto sales to to repair and maintain those vehicles that
they're going to sell uh most of the sales would either be uh online or at the auction
um you know they're not looking for an auto sales lot you know i i i want to be clear about that
so uh you know just looking out front you know this is here's their front door uh we we have
those parking spaces left to right in front of the building um you know spencer industries yeah
i believe that is uh that's 80 i think they are the uh yeah architectural signage okay um
And then over here is the subject fence that was erected by 100 Redline Road, not us, which is the subject of an L&I violation, but not associated with us.
Again, we are complied and closed.
And we are just looking to do auto sales.
And here's another interesting note.
They concentrate in Priuses.
And I asked my clients, I said, why Prius?
Apparently, Prius is the most affordable vehicle for newly emigrated persons.
uh to obtain in in the united states uh number one they're they're inexpensive to acquire
and number two they're inexpensive to operate because they're hybrids and uh so uh sean sean
do you let me ask you do you do the body work there too do you paint it no no painting no no
painting no body work uh well well you got all them parts there i mean do they just put them
on the cars or take the old dance off and put new ones on? Mr. Chair, they could swap out a fender
and then send it out to a paint shop. But no, the place does not have any painting
apparatus, no body work going on. That's another thing about a Prius. Believe it or not,
But the parts are easily to swap out. So so they have they have plenty of parts.
But no, they they do not do any painting or auto body.
So it is just. You know.
So, Sean, Sean, you talked about what's happened.
Are you aware of the letter from the L&I commissioner?
No, I am not. I understand that the L&I commissioner was going to be involved,
but I have never been provided a copy of that letter.
Could we make sure he gets a copy of that, Hillary?
Yes, I'll take care of that now, Mr. Chair.
Basically says they're not taking a position,
but they discuss efforts across multiple city departments
to address issues that happen at that property.
Well, again, my suggestion to the board is that it is not simply 90 Redline Road, 70 Redline Road is, you know, definitely involved in the same kind of business.
Well, again, my suggestion to the board is that it is...
And ever since the cease operations order that was issued, when was that?
Last month, two months ago.
the parking authority police department l and i to uh tow uh you know a substantial number of
vehicles parked on gantry road uh etc but i i stand here today and i submit to this board and
my clients are right behind me that they were not their vehicles um you know all their vehicles are
parked off-site or
within the building.
Sean, is that your presentation?
it is.
Your testimony adopted?
Hang on one second.
Miranda?
Miranda, could you state your name and
spell it for the court stenographer?
Miranda,
M-I-R-A-N-D-A
P-S-K-H-A-D-A-D-Z
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I get it.
Chair, excuse me.
This is the court reporter.
Could I ask the witness to get closer to the microphone?
Thank you.
Did you get her information, John, or do you want to do it again?
uh mr chair uh her name is actually listed on the uh exhibit packet yep sure all right
so you know for the record uh both her and her husband's names are on the
uh the exhibit packet which was submitted uh miranda you heard my representations to the
zoning board are they are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge information and
belief yes and would you adopt them as your own testimony yes okay uh make sure we want to swear
to husband uh sure why not okay state your name please and spell for the court stenographer uh
Kakaberi Chubinidze, K-A-K-H-A-B-E-R-I.
First name.
The last name.
C-A-T-U-B-I-N-I-D-Z-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Sean.
You've heard my representations to the board today?
Are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you adopt them as your own testimony?
And the two of you have reviewed my 198 package, you know, page packet.
All right.
That's all I have today, Mr. Chair.
So, Sean, just so you know, we're not going to vote on this today.
Understood.
Because the board members have not seen the video.
I will open it up to questions now from from the board on just your presentation today because they haven't seen the past video.
So questions from the board on relative to Sean's presentation today.
All right. Can I ask a question when you you're referring to a video?
Is that the video of the last hearing?
The last hearing. Yes.
OK. Yeah. I haven't seen that either.
So, well, well, we'll let you get a copy.
But I thought maybe, well, how did you know the guy had a problem presenting?
They came to me after they received a denial.
And then when I looked into it, I discovered that their original counsel was suspended.
And then, you know, he assigned it to another attorney who was not, you know, it wasn't a zoning attorney.
So the board is going to look at the past hearing.
Right.
So what I'm saying now is, I've talked to Hillary about this, the board can ask you questions now about your presentation today. So questions from the board.
Yes. I'm still having a problem with understanding what it is you really want to do there. You're saying you want to do just auto sales and these are used.
You're saying you want to do just auto sales, and these are used autos?
Yeah, Cheryl, if I may, if I may.
They are looking to get, you know, currently right now, he has an auto salesperson's license that he operates out of another location.
What he'd like to do is get a auto sales license for the location, and he wants to be able to sell his own vehicles online or at the auction and maybe have four cars out front that, you know, maybe somebody driving by might want to stop in and purchase.
He's not looking for your typical auto sales lot like you would see on Tarsdale Avenue or Frankfurt Avenue in Mayfair or other places in the city.
He just wants to be able to repair his own vehicles, prep them for sale, and sell them either online or at, you know, NADA, you know, the National Auto Dealers Association.
You know, they operate out of, you know, Bordentown, Mannheim, you know, a couple other locations.
um and you know to have the ability to have one or two three cars out front you know maybe
maybe somebody in the northeast is driving by and says you know i want to buy a prius
but this is okay so let me make sure i'm understanding again okay this is primarily
going to be the online sales with a few that are going to be out front so people can see them maybe
and driving
because even if you're doing
online sales you have to have a lot
from what I understand
you have to have
some kind of place where people can come
and actually see their cars
that's my understanding
so is that what we're doing here
we're not really
using this
as you would a
regular
auto sales lot this is more for like an online sale kind of thing with people yeah i mean
yeah it's it's clearly not the facility that you would you know picture as an
an auto sales lot right so um and and we are not looking to create an auto sales lot there
We just want a location that is licensed to be an auto sales facility.
That way, he can get the auto sales dealership license to be able to sell from that location, whether it be online, at the auction, or, you know, maybe somebody driving by and seeing one of the four cars out front.
All right.
And you're talking about only having a few cars out front.
You're not talking about the kind of lot
Like we saw in one of the pictures
No, no, no, that's a storage lot
That's it
But what you're saying is a block away
You probably have 50 cars there
Yeah, give or take
About 50 cars in the back
So then you're saying you're going to shuffle them
Back and forth when you sell them
Yeah, they would be
Brought into the facility to be repaired
I'm saying I go by, I see four cars
I don't like the price, and he says
Well, wait a minute, I got 50 cars down the street
then he shuffles another one up is that what you're saying no no no no the the the cars
the cars off site are inventory cars that are that's what i mean i i i see the four cars in
the front i don't necessarily like all four of them then they'll say to me well i got 50 more
down the street let me go get another one for you right now the you know mr chair the 50 cars off
site are not ready for sale they got to be they got to be repaired and maintained okay uh they're
not they're not inventory yet until they are repaired all right thank you and it's and it's
that with the and you have bays so that you can do these kinds of repairs are the bays going to be
used to repair refurbish these cars that we're seeing from a block away is that how you're going
to do this yeah you have a storage inventory and then you go to someone say calls or i i you're
going to do this online they they see a car they say or you advertise and then you're going to
refurbish this so that you can sell this to them and you're going to do this refurbishing
at this facility. Yeah, Cheryl, if I may, currently he buys cars.
Yeah, Cheryl, if I may, currently he buys cars online or at auction, and he brings them to that off-site lot.
And then he would bring a vehicle into the shop, you know, one or two at a time, and refurbish them, polish them up, make them nice and shiny and clean, and sell them.
So right now he's selling them under a salesperson's license, which I just, I just printed, but, but, but he would like to do it under his own facility.
okay so basically those cars that are sitting off site um they're not parked on the street
uh that that was a big problem uh that you know that the complaint was going on about gantry road
about and again we submit it was not us it could have been 70 um redline road you know i i don't
know the owners there but they are also in the prius business okay and all their vehicles
um you know towed in uh whatever parts uh were parked on gantry road um you know my client made
uh painstaking efforts to not have their vehicles parked on gantry road which were the you know the
lightning rod of uh the you know the complaints uh upon everybody you know in that industrial park
and uh you know we we've tried to assure them that it's not us uh but but here we are right
now they're they're not operating because they're under a you know a cease and desist
um but what we're looking to do is you know you know what they what they wanted to do from day
one is auto sales, repair their own vehicles, and then sell them online, sell them at the
auction, and maybe have a couple out of front.
Understood.
Thank you.
Any other questions for the board?
Yeah, I have a quick question.
So is there an intent to do rental?
No, that just falls under the definition, sales and rental.
But no, we're not a rental facility, obviously.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience on testimony from today?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Alice Udovich.
They have been allowed to speak.
Alice, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Chairman. Members of the board, Alice Udovich, on behalf of Councilman Brian O'Neill. My last name is-
We're referring to all the truth. The whole truth is nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
Chairman, it was stated by Mr. Ward that the Councilman somehow does not oppose this. He continues to oppose it as he did in the first hearing.
And in this instance, we actually got to see how this operation would work.
So the opposition is even greater.
We've had many complaints about this property.
You can see that the neighboring property saw the need to put a fence because there have been so many cars parked there on the berm that fronts Red Lion.
Behind the property, cars in state of disrepair.
I've never seen the property look as clean as it does in those photos, but I did want to say that the councilman opposed it then and continues to oppose it.
Thank you.
Thank you for your time, Mr. Chair, just to respond.
Can I, can I wait, Sean, wait, let me see if there's anybody else in the audience, right?
So then you're going to do it at one time.
Anyone else in the audience?
Yes, Chair. Mark Rosenberg has been allowed to speak.
And Mr. Rosenberg, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Mark Rosenberg, M-A-R-K-R-S-E-N-B-E-R-G.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
I own the property at 9994 Gantry Road and 9990 Gantry Road.
We've been in business there for the better part of 40 years.
Please proceed, sir.
Our objection to what's going on, okay, at number 90 is, basically speaking, even if you saw the pictures, okay, the storage of those parts that have been moved inside over the past several years.
Okay, the storage of those parts that have been moved inside over the past several months were all stored outside, okay?
The rear of that building was a junkyard, all right?
Our objection to what's going on right now, all right, is the fact, okay, that the facility is not really suitable for the kind of work they're doing.
There is work going on and out.
The dock for cars to come in and out of the building has to go up a ramp because this building never had a drive-in dock.
So our objection to what's going on here is that the facility just isn't proper for doing work on these kind of cars and storing the cars on their own property.
So therefore, cars are unloaded on the street.
And as of just several weeks ago, there was a car carrier unloading a car.
I went out to the car carrier because they were parked in the street blocking traffic.
I said, excuse me, where are you going?
And that car carrier was, in fact, going to number 90.
So our objection as a company owner there with 60 employees working there is that the whole park has become a problem, and this is contributing to the problem.
Mr. Ward, do you have any questions?
I have no questions but I have a response. Is there anyone else in the audience?
No chair, I see no more hands at this time.
Okay, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I received a copy of an email from Jack O'Hara at
creator busselton civic uh indicating that you know the councilman was uh hosting a meeting
regarding 90 redline road and jack o'hara in that email indicated that there was no indication that
the councilman was opposing the application so i just want to correct that i i did not i did not
want to uh speak on behalf of the councilman whether he supports or opposes the application
I was just working on, you know, the information that I had received.
My clients are sitting here right next to me.
We just heard, you know, the comments by Mr. Rosenberg.
Did I get that name right?
Was that right?
Yes, you did.
That delivery was not to 90 Redline Road.
It was to 70 Redline Road.
And my clients, in fact, sent me an email that day with pictures of that car transport, you know, dropping these vehicles.
And they indicated to me, you know, just want to let you know, these are not our cars and they're not coming to us.
And so, you know, you know, I apologize to, you know, the neighbor thinking that it was ours, but it was not, you know, they are just not, they're not operating, they are not operating.
And right now, they're sitting on a bunch of vehicles off-site and looking to get permission and approval in order to refurbish these vehicles and put them up for sale to worthy buyers.
and uh and but but as of right now you know and and and his comments regarding uh you know access
to the rear you know with the you know you know he he's certainly not a uh you know a planning
uh you know professional or an architect or an engineer uh so you know whatever comments he has
about access to the rear of the property uh you know i think are you know unwarranted and uh you
You know, and quite frankly, they have access to the, you know, the back of the property and they've been using the ramp.
So, but again, you know.
But let's not, don't go again.
I mean, you're starting to repeat yourself.
So please don't go again.
I'm sorry.
I get, I get worked up.
I know.
All right.
Questions, comments from the Planning Commission.
Is there anything today that you would want to change your position?
No, sir, Chairman.
and we were, I believe, in recommended support the last time,
and we would recommend support again.
So we're going to hold this until the rest of the board has a chance to look at the video.
Thank you.
Okay, and can I get, Hillary's going to send me a copy of the letter?
She will.
And make the video accessible to me too, correct?
Sure, yep.
Awesome.
All right.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I thank you for your time.
question
All right. Number three, MI 2024-002-341-231 West Rittenhouse. Steve Masters
is the attorney. This is a resumptive hearing.
Steve Masters will be rejoining us as a panelist.
good afternoon mr chair mr masters you've already been sworn just for the record state your name
steve masters s-t-e-v-e-m-a-s-t-e-r-s i see uh um this is a resumptive hearing um am i right yes
we're limited to just testimony of the planning commission and then the vote by the board that's
right that's right um so i see we recommendations to improve landscape have also been made am i
right steve we have proviso plans mr chair um that are the revised landscape um buffer plans
we went over with the planning commission they wanted um some additional time to review them
because um the the revisions came in just before our last hearing and then the planning commission
informed us that they were prepared to sign off and stamp the plans at this point, but that
because of the posture of the case, they're going to be presenting testimony supporting the variances.
So, Hilary, what we have right now is the Planning Commission, did it go?
Yes, but just a quick question, Mr. Masters, because there was also an application for a
waiver so the plans that that you provided those are reviewed by planning but they did not stamp
them but then you provided a waiver request that was partially granted partially denied
um did you make any changes to the plans following the waiver request we did um that's what our
proviso plans are that's it's a second iteration of the plan and now the planning commission um
believes that we are well they'll testify to it I don't want to I don't want to present their
testimony obviously but my understanding is that they they now support this project with with the
revised plans okay so they have seen this they have seen the second iteration of the revised
plans yes that's what we presented to them just a couple days before the last hearing oh okay but
then after the hearing you also applied for a waiver or was that before the hearing that was
before the hearing oh before okay got you okay thank you planning commission thank you chair
bergman and good afternoon david effecta with the city planning commission chairman and board
members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa2 residential single family
zoning at this location the appellant requests to legalize a non-accessory parking lot built without
the benefit of permits this portion of west rittenhouse street has industrial buildings
which are used for commercial activity a non-accessory parking lot would serve these
businesses the appellant also requests variances for landscaping the appellant submitted a proviso
plan to correspond with a waiver granted by the city planning commission so the city planning
commission recommends that the board grant a proposed use variance for a non-accessory parking
lot and the landscape variances conditioned on the revised proviso plan
mi-2024-002 excuse me mr chair quickly so there's there's one page of revised plans
um and also if the board is inclined to grant that there could be a proviso as well just indicating
that the plans need to be stamped
by the Planning Commission.
Thank you.
MI 2024-002-341-231 West Wright-Nale Street,
I vote yes.
Revised plans need to be stamped
by Planning Commission, is that it?
And then also revised plans,
one page stamped by the ZBA today, October 9th,
and then plans must also be stamped revised plans must also be planned to be stamped 10-9-24
and also revised plans to be stamped by planning commission yes thank you michael johns uh yes
with those same provisals i don't need to repeat them no you don't okay all right thank you
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisos.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with provisos.
Tywin, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Number seven.
Okay, number seven.
MI 2024-004-400, 1825-31 North 6th Street.
Alan Nachmison is the attorney.
There's unanimous support from South Kensington Community Partners.
Tenant support, zero opposed.
and also the applicant provided petition of support signed by approximately 14 neighbors 13 from the
mr knox yes good afternoon mr chair members of the board alan knockamson
just for the record spell your last name uh
N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You identify your client and the relationship to the property.
Yeah, my client is Lenny Cherniak.
He is the equitable owner of the property by way of an agreement to sale.
Dwight Sher has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Counsel.
do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this? Yes, we have. Thank you, counsel. Please
proceed and you can share your screen. All right, thank you. I just want to make sure
the right screen up before I start sharing.
Good afternoon again, Alan Nockamson of Nockamson PC. I'm here to present 1817-31 North 6th Street.
This is in the South Kensington area of Philadelphia. During our presentation,
We're going to review the notice of refusal for this proposed child care center, along with a letter of support from the South Kensington Community Partners.
I believe when I was being transitioned into as a panelist, I heard the chairman state that it was unanimous support.
We also have a letter, I believe, from the district council member as well in non-opposition to this proposed use.
We also have a petition that my client circulated with occupants on the 1800 block of North 6th Street.
So the individuals who would be most directly impacted by this proposed child care center are in support of this project.
Also, we have a little information about Alphabet Alley, the operator of this proposed child care center.
An aerial view of the property. We're looking to consolidate these two lots. One lot has a former warehouse on it and the other lot has a parking lot. And you'll see from there that we're leveraging the parking lot for the use of this warehouse and child care facility.
Then we'll review maps of the area. While this property is designated as RSA 5, the combined lot score footage is over 30,000 square feet. In addition, you'll see from the past use and the current use of this property, it's nothing like an RSA 5 property.
Again, it has a warehouse on one of the lots and it has parking on the other.
It's a long history of non-RSA5 uses.
And then you'll see maps of the area where you'll see from those maps that even though this is deemed a residentially designated area, it's really commercial in nature.
You'll see that we're right behind Cousins Supermarket.
If anyone knows this area, like Fifth and Burke's, there's a nice shopping center there that has a supermarket.
We're not that far from there.
And there's other commercial uses nearby as well.
Then we'll review photographs of the property, which will confirm, you know, what I was stating about how it's currently configured in terms of a warehouse use or at least a warehouse structure, as well as parking as well.
And then plans. We have plans and drawings.
I have the architect for this project, his design plans.
I'm Michael Thompson. If you have any questions about the, you know, the configuration of the child care center or, you know, how we configure the parking lot, we did have multiple meetings with the community.
We provided an extensive amount of landscaping pre-community input, and then we added additional landscaping, for instance, in the.
community input and then we added additional landscaping for instance in the play area outside
to provide shading as an example then we'll review the rco meeting notice this is just for the last
meeting but we had the community group south kensington community partners asked us to have
two meetings given the size of the lots um and you know the potential impact it would have on
the community and again at the last meeting there was unanimous support in favor of this project
But we have the community meeting notice along with proof of mailing of that.
Then we'll review the application for appeal that we filed.
And then there's the agreement of sale, which is still effective.
And I believe we do have the copy of the deed showing that Goodwin Development is the owner of the property.
And finally, certificates of tax clearance showing that there's no real estate taxes due on the account of the property.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Alex Berenson, who's the operator of the daycare facility, virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
I'll have a few questions for him.
And given that this is a use request for a child care facility, if I can't answer any questions, I would just ask that maybe Alex can answer those questions.
Notice of refusal.
Again, these two lots are RSA 5.
We're looking to combine these lots.
No changes to the proposed building structure or in terms of size.
Obviously, we're doing work inside.
And we're going to leverage the surface parking lot to include 12 parking spaces, including one accessible space.
And it's all, you know, was all submitted to L&I as part of this process.
And the only refusal we have is because these are RSA-5 properties, a child care center is not allowed by way of right, and we're seeking a variance in this respect.
Letter of support from South Kensington Community Partners.
As I stated, we met with the community multiple times.
They were very supportive.
We made some minor modifications, for instance, with the playground to provide more shading for the kids.
But otherwise, it was a very positive experience for the community as well as my client, and we received unanimous support from the community at the last meeting.
And then it was also a well-attended meeting of 22 individuals.
And then because of the support we received from South Kensington community partners as well as the community at large, we just received today a letter in non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
and then the petition as well like again we reached out to members of the community who
would be most directly impacted by this proposed use so we really limited to this 100 block of
north 6th street and this is just a map showing where those signatures are in relationship to
where they live and then here are the signatures for this you know for this petition as well as
letters, form letters of support. And then a little bit about Alphabet Alley. It's been in
business for some time. It has another location. This would be its second location. And what I did
was I went on the state's website to show that all of the certifications that would be required
of Alphabet Alley for its current location are that they have them and they're in good standing.
And most importantly, they've never had a negative sanction against them for their other location.
They're looking forward to opening up this new location. We think that there's a definite need
in South Kensington for a daycare of this type. And then in addition to like looking at the state's
website about Alphabet Alley and their child care center. We also went on Google and out of 105
reviews, they have five stars every single time. They're well liked, they're well respected,
and they're well run. And then the aerial view of the property. So this is 1817. And then,
you know, which shows the warehouse structure here. And then this is what would be the parking
lot at 1825-31. And then maps of the area. So it's a rather large combined lot of over 30,000
square feet. Again, Cousins is up here. There's a lot of CMX use as well. You know, there's a lot
of commercial use, but more importantly, there's a need in the community for a child care center
and people have really embraced the fact that they're hoping that Alphabet Alley opens nearby
to them. And then again, from a Google Maps perspective, shows that shopping center
nearby. And then there's some more commercial aspects around here as well.
There's some more commercial aspects around here as well.
I believe this is German.
I believe this is Germantown, which is also commercial in nature.
And then photographs of the property.
Again, this is a great adaptive reuse of a property.
It has nice bones as a warehouse.
And then this is a different angle from the southern viewpoint.
But this is the warehouse.
This would be where the parking lot is.
It's not been in use for some time.
And then these are the proof of posting.
of the hearing notice posters for both properties and then this is north 6th street to the right of
property north 6th street to the left of the properties and then our plans and drawings so
you can see my client has made you know the building pop through an adaptive reuse uh lots
of you know cleaning up the brick lining up the brick adding new windows even having a mural here
and have a centralized location in the parking lot.
So when there's a pickup and drop-off,
we're not causing traffic congestion.
And then again, this is just a site plan,
but basically people would be coming in here.
There's a ton of landscaping around here.
You can see this is by the way,
where the playground is,
and this is where the extra shading is.
But it's just basically there's 12 parking spots here.
include one handicap accessible spot. But this is the opening of the building. There's also a
temporary area for parents to drop off the kids, the younger kids. But it's just, we figured it'd
be a very slow line of pickup and drop off here. And then people can park if necessary as well.
And then this is just, again, elevations of what the property would look like. We're completely
cleaning up the facade, adding new windows, you know, guiding the place out and making it really
nice. And then these are just the two different floors. Again, the main area is right here
to open up. You have an office here. We have an elevator. So everyone is ADA accessible,
good for the kids as well. And then each room has different children of different ages. Each
room is going to have a bathroom. And what my client tried to do to make it interesting,
And because it's a longer building, he curved the hallway to make it a little bit interesting for the kids and for the people that are there as well.
And then this is just a landscaping plan and then more detailed elevations.
But we're not changing the building structure at all.
This is the survey showing that we're consolidating the parcel.
And then this is the hearing note. This is the community meeting notice. We had a meeting September 25th. We went out September 11th, two weeks beforehand. We emailed that notice and proof of mailing of that notice to the coordinating RCOs, coordinating RCO as well as the relevant parties.
99 addresses were mailed, received this notice.
Those in the addresses that received it, proof of mailing to those addresses,
our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of the applicant,
along with the letters of refusal and the project information form,
the agreement of sale that my client is under right now,
closing is scheduled for January 31st, 2025.
Hopefully with these approvals, maybe we can move that up a little bit.
It's with Goodwin Development and the Certificates of Tax Clearance.
And that is my presentation in a nutshell.
I would ask that Alex virtually raise his hand and, you know, we can give some information too about hours of operation and, you know, where the trash is going to be stored.
and, you know, how many kids they expect in the facility.
Yes, this is Alex Berenson.
Can you guys hear me?
Yes, sir.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenography?
Alex Berenson, A-L-E-X-B-E-R-E-N-S-O-N.
Where are a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes. Alex, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Okay. According to my notes, and I just want to make sure, just confirm, you're going to have around 20 to 25 teachers at the facility, right?
That is correct.
Yeah. And it's all dependent on the amount of children, right? Because you're regulated by the state, right?
That is correct. That's based on the ratio per class.
Yeah. And then it's not just a one-time certification. Every year there is an inspection
there is an inspection and certification and process you have to go through with the state, right?
and certification and process you have to go through with the state, right?
That is correct. We get recertified every year.
All right. And in addition to being five-star rating on Google,
you're also Keystone certified as well by the state, right?
Yes, we're a four-star facility, which is the highest rating.
Okay. And then your hours of operation I have is nine to six. Is that right?
Yes. So it's eight to six.
Okay, sorry, eight to six, sorry.
But primarily, you'll have to drop off anywhere from, I would think, from seven to nine.
Correct.
And the pickup over the last two hours from four to six, right?
That is correct, yes.
All right, and then you, you know, obviously, this facility would, of course, agree to commercial
trash pickup, which it looks like two to three times a day, right?
Okay, and then all of your bathrooms are ADA compliant.
That is correct.
and um you what's your anticipated amount of kids that are going to be in this facility
anywhere between 200 to 250 kids again and you don't get to just decide that it's based on
the spatial limitations um of of the facility so if the facilities are a certain size you're
limited to how many kids you can have in each room based on those sides and how many teachers
you have, right? That is correct. DHS will come out. We'll do the final inspection. And based on
the number of square feet that we have per room and number of teachers, they will assign the number
of kids allowed for the facility. Okay. And then I think that's it. I think if there's any other
questions from the board, we can honestly answer them. He adopted your testimony, Alan?
I think he did, but do you adopt your... No, that's fine. That's fine.
questions from the board.
Yeah, I have a question. Can you go back to the site, Blaine?
Sure. You mentioned three trash pickups
a day. How is that going to be handled?
I think I said a week. Per week.
Oh, per week. Okay. Sorry if I misstated.
Yeah, I thought it hurt for a day. It seems like a lot.
I was really concerned about the neighbors.
you know and the kids and trash trucks three times a day yeah that's a little bit much i think uh
yeah um what's the what's the what's the route how are they going to um alex you want to speak
while i i go through this i'm trying to think where our trash cans are on the side i think
they're down here is that these that yep that's all the way on the right so there will be a trash
pickup by you know the commercial company and they will come in pick it up uh i mean it's most
likely it's going to be twice a week but we'll see based on based on the use uh there'll be six
or nine yard containers there okay all right thank you other other questions from the board
what age range are the children
from infant to
to kindergarten
so five
five yes
after school programs at all
we're you know depending what happens
as we see once we get our licenses we might
have an after school program as well
thank you
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon.
David Fechter with the City Planning Commission.
Chair and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The zoning in this section of South Kensington dates to 2016.
The appellant proposes to reuse a legally non-conforming building as a child care center.
While this proposal does not conform to the current zoning,
the comprehensive plan recommends reusing former industrial sites which have no industrial potential.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant a proposed use variance for a child care center.
M.I. 2024-004-400, 1825-31 North 6th Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tannetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Alan, could you stay on, please?
um mi 2024 004763
MI 2024 004 763 3412 North 19th Street Alan you are the attorney no RCO letter but there was a
meeting September 17th 2024 before Allegheny West Civic Association I feel like I do have a letter
let me see let me just uh let me go uh oh okay well why don't we just start and we'll see here
Let's see, share screen, let's see which one that is, 3412, okay, so I'm here to present,
first of all, Alan Nockmson, Nockmson PC, I'm here to present 3412 North 19th Street,
in the virtual audience should be its owner, Jason, Tina.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Counselor, do you agree to waive the reason of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
So I do actually object to the refusal, and I'll tell you why.
There is a previous use of this property by way of a zoning permit for garage use.
in the rear. And I have a timestamp of it that got off of Atlas. So I think the refusal is
incorrect because it does not reference the existing garage use in the rear. And I would
think, and I defer to Ms. Emerson, because this is an RSA3 property, because we're requesting
multi-family use of three units, we would have had a refusal for lack of off-street parking.
So I think they incorporated the garages, but didn't reference it, and that's why we didn't
get the refusal. But I'll divert to Ms. Emerson.
Counsel?
um if you if you'd like i can take this back to lni and see if they want to change that because
you are correct there you know it there should be a reference to accessory parking on here because
it is an rsa3 so um if you want i can take it back to to lni and just make sure all of that's
referenced on there because yeah i did see the information you provided about the garages being
recognized previously and we just need to hold it for two weeks because that's when we come back for
hearings next that's fine i'd rather do it right okay not a problem we can get that taken care of
thank you council care yep please proceed all right thank you all right so 3412 north 19th street
um we're going to review first notice refusal um this property has a long history of multi-family
use. You'll look at the previous zoning permit of four units plus a significant amount of garages
in the back. So we have no issue with off-street parking, in my opinion. And the use that we're
requesting of three units is less than what's been in the past. Plus the properties, my
understanding is that from the left and right, also are multifamily in nature. We made a presentation
to the Allegheny West Civic Association. They were in support of this matter. My understanding
unanimous support. I believe we have a letter. We'll take a look at that. We also did a petition
of nearby neighbors who also supported this matter. Then we'll look at the property history
again to confirm the garage use as well as the four units in the past. We're not disputing that
we have to go through this variance process in that the multifamily use was discontinued for a
period of time. We're trying to clean this property up, fix it up, actually lessen the use to three
units, which I think is more appropriate given the size of the building structure. Then it's
non-common to have multifamily use nearby for RSA5 properties. We have a list of properties
that are nearby. It was also advertised to my client as multifamily. So he detrimentally relied
on that. And we have the Redfin listing for the property. Then we'll review maps of the area,
photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our simple plans and drawings, our RCO
meeting notice, along with proof of mailing of that notice, our application for appeal,
the deed to the property, showing that Jason is the owner of the property. And then he's under
a tax payment plan. And we have like reference to that as well in our presentation materials.
Conclusion, my presentation, I would ask that Jason virtually raise his hand, be sworn in,
and then I'll have a few questions for him. And then obviously we'll take any questions for the
board and then we'll hold it under advisement until we clean some stuff up at L&I. Notice refusal,
Notice refusal. Again, RSA 3 property. It's for the use of an existing structure for multifamily household living, three units, where RSA 3 is not allowed. We should have a parking requirement. If it didn't reference the garages, we do have garages. We'll clean that up, hopefully, in the next two weeks.
again, RSA 3 property.
we have a letter of support from the allegheny west civic association uh it was unanimous support
and the explanation of the letter as well hillary do we have a copy of that
i think we just got it like in the past 24 hours so okay i if we just got it we may not have seen
it yet okay um if if alex just submitted it so but i will i will look and make sure we have a copy
while alex presenting okay yeah we'll we'll i mean we obviously every time we update our materials
we refile so but separately we'll send it uh to miss emerson so she has a copy at her disposal
So petition, again, well documented, well circulated petition in support of this use, which is actually a downgrade from the original four units to three units.
And then the history of the property. Again, if you look here at one point, this was four families with 12 garages in 1960.
Not uncommon to have multifamily either. 3414 North 19th Street, three units.
3408-10 North 19th Street, 11 units. The Redfin listing, you can see here, we got it offline,
but it said it was multifamily. Maps of the area, we don't dispute the fact this is an RSA5 property.
It's rather large in nature. It's 7,724 square feet, the lot size. So it's a rather large lot.
we're also near train tracks too which makes it difficult to accommodate that single family use
it's really hard to have single family use when you're butting up against a training track which
is the aerial right here photographs of the property again my client just wants to clean
this property up it's a beautiful property architecturally and my client wants to
revive this property that's not been in use for some time.
So this is the orange notice poster right here, showing proof of posting.
Then these are the existing garages.
I don't think there's any dispute that we have a lot of garages in the back.
We have more than enough ample parking.
And then the inside of the existing garages.
Another angle from the rear of the property looking forward for the existing garages.
Then North 19th Street to the right of the property, to the left of the property, our plans and drawings, very simple.
This is the, you know, you walk through a common entryway on the first floor.
You have a two-bedroom, like you walk in.
You have the dining room, kitchen, and the living room.
You have two bedrooms, and you have two baths.
Instead of going, you know, into that first floor unit, you go up a flight of steps.
It's the same floor plan, two bedrooms, two baths.
And then the third floor is not a full floor.
It's a one bedroom, one bath.
RCO meeting notice.
We met with the community on September 17th.
We mailed that notice out to the community on September 3rd.
We also emailed that notice the following day to show proof of mailing of that notice to 48 addresses.
These are the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of YYJ LLC, the entity that Mr. Tina owns.
Notice of refusal with it, project information form.
sorry for the lag it's just slow uh the deed to the property showing the corporate entity owns it
and then finally showing proof of the tax payment plan it says right here we're in a tax payment
plan right here and then just proof of like the last you know of the tax payment plan as well
With that being said, I would ask that Jason virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Jason?
So I have a hand up by the name of Ysantina. Not sure if they are affiliated with this case.
I think that's how you pronounce his name is Jason, but I could be wrong.
I think that's how you pronounce his name, is Jason, but I could be wrong.
Thank you.
Okay, I have allowed them to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
How are you? My name is Jason Tenna.
My name is spelled Y-E-I-S-S-O-N.
My last name is T-E-N-A.
Where or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Jason, you heard everything I had to say today about your zoning matter.
I did.
And is it true and correct?
Of course, yes.
And do you adopt as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Can you, I just want to be clear.
So you're not going to do anything with the garages and therefore the garages are for the tenants.
or how does that work?
Yeah, I think, again, Jason, correct me if I'm wrong.
You're not doing anything with the garages from a structural standpoint, and they are
going to be for the residential tenants, and if there's any
additional uses of the garages, obviously you're going to have to come back for a Zoddy
variance. Is that correct? Correct.
Okay. Also, thank you for putting furniture on
On the plans, the units do look like they're decently laid out of the questions from the board.
Can you tell me where the trash is going to be stored? Where's the trash in the room for all three units that have access to the room?
Yeah, we have an almost 8,000 square foot lot. So, and everyone has access to decide side yard.
Thank you questions for the board.
questions from our attorney hillary emerson
uh not at this excuse me not at this time mr chair i just note that we uh did thank you for
the app and we have received uh copied the letter questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes chair i have a phone number ending in three five five two they have been allowed to speak
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
This is Adrienne Fernandez of Swampoodle Neighborhood Parsons Association, RCA.
Adrienne, could you just, for the record, spell your name for the stenographer?
Oh, yes. I'm Adrienne, and my last name is spelled F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
yes please proceed um i just wanted to um add three provisos to support from the group of our
co's go ahead okay um the first one is a limit of three units um so we don't have um future requests
by current or future owners to um have more apartments in this building um the next one
is no basement living and the third requested proviso is no rooftop deck okay so okay thank you
alan yeah um and again we we talk about this a lot uh no or sometimes we are only requesting
three units so if we are requesting any additional ones we would have to come back through this whole
process again uh same thing with the deck like if we were proposing to put a roof deck on here
um well i guess it's not part of this application i'm wondering if we can there may be an opportunity
to get that through i don't see like uh jason do you have any issue with the no roof deck
installed as part of this project
i don't know if he uh i think he sounded like he's little
oh here it is i'm sorry i'm back um no there's there's no uh plans for any future uh um decks
all right so i don't think at this present yeah so you wouldn't have any issue for proviso
no uh uh no no uh roof deck uh access structure would you that's fine okay and then the final
one was living in the basement i don't think our plans even show that do you have is there
an opportunity to have to be down there that wasn't in our plans now so thank you
other questions or comments from the virtual audience yes chair i have a hand up by the name
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Charles Richardson. They have been allowed to speak.
of charles richardson
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I just want to interject briefly in terms of the roof deck proviso. This is a change of use application only. There's no construction as part of it.
So typically we don't do construction related provisos with change of use applications. So I want to make that note for the record.
Thank you. Mr. Richardson, just state your name for the record.
yes sir mr chair charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall
the councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance thank you very much anyone else in
the virtual audience no chair i don't see any more hands at this time planning commission thank you
chairman and good afternoon david vecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from RSA 3, Residential Single Family, to RTA 1, Residential 2 Family.
This proposal for three dwelling units matches the character of the other homes on the west side of this block face.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant a proposed use variance for three dwelling units and any subsequent variances from the parking requirements in RSA 3.
You know, Mr. Nockens will hold the vote and we'll vote on this two weeks from today, hopefully at 2 p.m.
Thank you.
OK, thank you. And by the way, stay on my side. I'm not saying goodbye to your state.
So MI 2024-004-767-70-80 East Worcester Street.
Letter of support from Wakefield 49ers Community Development and Improvement Association.
Letter of opposition from Solo Germantown.
Councilperson Bass has taken a position of support.
Thank you. Again, Alan Nockmson.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, my client, my clients are two individuals, Zafer Aikman and Mahmoud Yader, who are the owners of the property.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to leave the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
I do. Oh, actually, no, I don't. I'm sorry.
So there is the refusal says that we're asking for 19 units.
We're actually asking for 21.
I don't know if there was an administrative, I don't know if there was an error in our part or administrative error, but we're actually, we're not asking for 19 units, we're asking for 21.
So I'm objecting to it. And so I did provide revised plans just in case as well, that if, you know, the board feels so inclined to grant this variance request, they would grant it by way of proviso with revised plans.
the only difference is it says i put 21 units on the site plan so i do object to the uh limitation
of 19 units so council what did you present at the rco meeting 19 or 21 we did 21. understood
have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed before you proceed with
this case five days of the day uh yes we have thank you council please proceed thank you
All right. So this is one of these projects where the process has really worked.
Over a year ago, we proposed to this community 28 units with no off-street parking.
The community had a number of requests, and we hit every single one of them.
They said, first of all, we have nothing against multi-family use.
This property has a long history, even though it's an RSA-5 property, of non-residential single-family use.
I believe it was some type of meeting hall back in the day.
There's some history behind it.
Couldn't find anything on the L&I website, but there is definitely a history of that being a meeting hall.
So nothing against multifamily.
They said, it's just a little too much multifamily.
And what are you going to do about the parking?
So they said, come back, give us less units, give us parking, give us some three-bedroom units, put a responsible trash plan such as a garbage room, give us an elevator because even though you're not required to, it's only four stories.
We want an elevator here for our older community members. Obviously, we would want commercial trash pickup, which we have no issue with.
Obviously, we would want commercial trash pickup, which we have no issue with.
Make it ADA compliant.
And, you know, those were some of the items.
And then we had the community input.
There were some more requests, such as adding brick to the side.
And also, you see here, which we haven't updated, but we have a retaining wall here.
There's a retaining wall right now at the property.
They want us to repurpose the stone of the retaining wall to honor the history of this property by reusing that stone and putting it in here, which we have no objection to.
So a lot of these, you know, what we're doing is because of the request of the community.
So during our presentation, we're going to review the notice of refusal.
And then we have a letter of support from the Wakefield 49ers Community Development and Improvement Association.
Now, there is a letter of opposition, although they hedge and say, well, we oppose. But if you grant it, we have all these provisos. Also, I think there was a again, I wasn't there with the vote. My understanding with the vote, every ultimately everyone was in support.
you know solo just you know wanted they had like several board members there that they wanted
each of them to have a vote which i was limited to only one vote and then ultimately they didn't
vote at all but they had a letter but ultimately we met all the requests and needs of the community
and because of that the district council member bass um is in support of this project so after
the letter of support and i don't have a letter of support from council member bass i don't know
if Mr. Richardson is going to verbally say that, but I don't have a letter from their office.
We have the revised proviso plans form. We presented 21 units at the community meeting.
They approved it as 21 units. So I just, again, we changed the unit count from 19 to 21 on the
site plan. And again, there's nearby multifamily structures. Not of character here, 37-55 East
Worcester is a 47-unit senior living facility, and again, not that this matters, but given
the size of a lot, if this was an R-in-1 property, we would be well within the unit count of 21
units.
Then maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our plans
and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, which was a well-attended meeting and well-laid
out our what we how what we did and how we changed it based on community input um because the
community organizer literally you know stated okay these were our requests tell us how you changed
it and we went point by point on each one of how we changed it based on the original meeting our
application for appeal our deed to the property showing that my client owns this rather large lot
on the 70-80 East Worcester,
and then our Certificate of Tax Clearance.
At the conclusion of my presentation,
I would ask that Zephyr virtually raise his hand
and be sworn in.
Alan, Mahmoud is here, not Zephyr.
Okay, Mahmoud.
Okay, so he's here,
who will, again, be sworn in,
and we'll have a few questions for him.
I also have Christopher Johnson of 24-7 Design,
the architect on the project hopefully he's still here it's been around a long list but like you
know hopefully if you have any questions he can answer them so a nose refusal it sounds worse than
it is but you know we're trying to do 21 units there's 11 parking spaces 10 class 1a bike story
spaces there's an elevator there's a nice size roof deck for the for the community as a whole
for this community, the apartment building. And we have several refusals. First, we're set back.
And, you know, that's a refusal. Well, if you look at the property now, based on its current use,
the stone walls there, it would have the property set back anyway. That's the history of that
property. So we're in line with what, you know, what you've seen before with regards to this
property. Then the next refusal has to do with the fact that we're not preserving heritage trees.
If we have a layout of where all the heritage trees are, they're littered throughout the entire
property. There is no way to preserve it and have an actually develop a lot. We did ask for an
exemption from the city and we're proposing to have 18 trees there as replacement for the heritage
trees we're also doing a significant amount of landscaping in the front so we're set back we are
you know because the you know because the community and because of the history of the
property also to give ad accessible ramps like to for people to be able to you know
get to the property responsibly but there's a significant amount of landscaping that
get to the property responsibly but there's a significant amount of landscaping that's going
to replace that in those heritage trees as well then the next refusal was self-inflicted in terms
of the off-street parking but that's what the neighborhood wanted they said we want parking
off you know on your property for this apartment building which we gave them then the next thing
had to do with the amount of units where the refusal says 19 but we asked for 21 we proposed
that to the, we presented that to the community as well. Not out of character for this lot. It's
a rather large size lot. It was not single family to begin with. It was like a meeting hall of some
sorts. It's not out of character in the neighborhood. Again, on that street, there's a 47 unit senior
living facility there. The next refusal has to do with the positioning of the, or the size of
the roof deck. Again, the community wants outdoor space, and we gave it to them by way of a nice
outdoor area on the roof deck, which they appreciated. By the way, the other thing that
we did, which I failed to mention, is they wanted a community center in the apartment building
itself, which we did, again, for the occupants of the apartment building. But that was another
requests which we did as well um but here they wanted outdoor space as well we said you know we
we enlarged the outdoor area instead of having in the back where we originally had it that's where
we put the parking we instead had it on the roof uh there was no objection to that and then finally
is the rear yard setback where nine feet is required and we're only doing seven again to
accommodate the accessibility of the building. We had to push the building back, which made it a
shorter rear yard. Also, the fact that that's the history of the property, the building structure
to be set back. So it's not out of character and that's a de minimis zoning variance request.
So the letter of support from the community organization, the coordinating RCO, kind of sets forth exactly what I said. They wanted a number of three bedroom units. We gave that to them. They wanted a garbage room with a responsible trash storage or removal plan. We gave that to them. They asked for an elevator. We gave that to them.
They want the brick on the side of the building. We gave that to them. They want the community room. We gave that to them. They want the off-street parking. We gave that to them. And we gave them also the accessibility of the building for their aging population in the neighborhood.
So, according to the vote that they tabulated, it was unanimous support.
and then there was some discussion about what happened with solo there i don't want to get in
the middle of it i just know that this was what was asked of us we did the community was supportive
of that my understanding is then solo sent a separate letter in opposition they claimed that
there were some community members that opposed the project again i'm just taking i'm not there
when the vote happens I'm just I just collect this the letters and I can tell you the temperature
of the room when I was in there was very positive people were appreciative of all the changes we
made over the and this project has been you know being baked for well over a year like we had a
whole nother zoning appeal which we discontinued to like start from scratch and you know to give
them everything that they asked for. But this is, you know, Solo's letter. I don't know if the unit
count's correct. I wasn't there. I mean, not the unit count, but the count of the votes. Well, I
can tell you from the temperature of the room, it seemed positive. And then revised plans here,
simple. We're just changing it from 19 to 21 units. Just made that one small change. That
was what was presented. So if the board feels so inclined to grant this variance request,
I would ask that they do it by way of proviso with revised plans. Also, if they want, they
can say maximum 21 units. Not out of character to have multifamily here. In addition, there's
77 East Worcester, which is multifamily, in addition to what I stated at 3755 East Worcester.
And that's 3755, which is the 47 units.
Maps of the area, again, we're not the traditional RSA 5 lot, even the neighborhood.
We're near CMX 2.5 and RM 2 and RM 1.
There's a lot going on.
We're near a public bus route.
But, you know, down here, which looks like there's a commercial border.
But, you know, down here, which looks like there's a commercial quarter to help them support that commercial quarter, it's always helpful to have density created as well, which we hope by way of this project.
maps of the area so as i was stating like you see here here's the stone wall you see the steps that
leading to the stone wall so you can see that the setback that that we're asking for this which is
one of our refusals it's not out of character based on how the property has been configured
in the past we're also again to respect the neighborhood's wishes where we're taking hopefully
that stone wall and repurpose it for the uh the new construction project this property has been
the vacant lot, basically as far back as you can see on Google Earth or Street View since 2008.
We took, you know, we put orange noise posters all around just to make sure everyone knew that
there was going to be a hearing today. This is East Worcester to the right of the property
and to the left of the property. Our plans and drawings, again, Chris Johnson of 24-7 Design,
I think did an excellent job here.
He even added to it by putting brick on the sides.
That was requested of him.
But you can see there's a ramp here,
which allows for accessibility for this property.
Also kind of replicating the stone facade that's there.
We're going to hopefully repurpose that stone for this stone facade.
Also landscaping here.
And most importantly, a two-way drive aisle that was at the request of the community.
this is where you can see the roof deck it's an ample roof deck even the height of the building
you know again we were 38 feet high while it is higher than the surrounding buildings it's not
out of scale to what's around there either but you can see the ramp here from from this perspective
which is also what was asked of us because you know in order to provide accessibility
for this property. We needed that ramp, so we needed to have setback the building, which is
one of our refusals. The other refusal then is by sending the building back, now we have a rear
yard setback refusal, again, at the request of the community. And then this is just our site plan.
And then these are our floor plans. Again, you can see a two-way drive aisle. We have 11 parking
spots, two handicap accessible spots. You can see here is our community space, ample lobby.
Here's where our elevator is. This is our mail room here. This is our trash room. And again,
thoughtfully, what we want to do is be able to have double doors here and to have the ability
to roll the trash out, obviously with commercial trash pickup, which will be on our property
where the trash trucks would be.
So we're not blocking traffic either.
And then our floor plans are the same from two through four.
We have, and we try to put furniture in here
just to kind of show you how they would lay out.
I think Chris Johnson of 24-7 Design did a really good job.
But we have three three bedrooms
because the community said,
we want people in our community to have good housing
and new housing and families to have that so there's three three bedrooms two uh nine two
bedrooms and nine one bedrooms so to provide a diversity of housing options for this uh
proposed apartment building oh and then each of the floors
oops i think that's the wrong page
Each of the floors have a separate trash chute area so where trash can then be shot down to the trash room so they don't have to take it in the elevator or walk it down the steps either.
Oh, another thing that was asked of us is to have a separate egress out the rear as well.
So this staircase was created specifically at the Red Cross in the community so everyone would have access to the rear as well.
straight into the parking lot
and then this is our roof deck
these are the heritage trees
this is the diagram prepared by 24-7 design
as you can see the heritage trees are where the building is
the heritage trees are where the parking lot is
so we really can't escape that
but we respect it as well
so we have again landscaping in the front
landscaping in the back and you know based on the letter prepared by Chris Johnson we're asking
And, you know, based on the letter prepared by Chris Johnson, we're asking for a waiver.
And in that letter, we're asking to plant 18 new trees of three different species.
Our RCO meeting notice, we met with the community on September 24th.
We sent out the notice two weeks in advance.
We emailed that notice along with proof of mailing of that notice to those, you know,
coordinating rco and other rcos um showed that we mailed it to 155 addresses so these are a list
of the addresses blog addresses proof of mailing to those addresses our application for appeal
that we filed on behalf of my clients or individuals they're not hiding behind any
corporate entity you know they bought this property in their personal names and they
plan to develop, hopefully, in their personal names.
The deeds of property showing that they personally own it.
And the certificate of tax clearance.
I'm going to stop sharing my screen for now. I would ask that
Mahmoud virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Mark, could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
My name is Mahmoud Yeter, M-A-H-M-U-T, last name is Y-E-T-E-R.
Fair or affirmed. Tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Counsel, please proceed.
Yes, Mahmoud, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
And is it true and correct what I stated?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, and specifically, like, you know, again, we originally presented or envisioned this project to be 28 units with with no off-street parking.
Right. Is that correct? Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There was a list of requests that the community made of us.
And over time, we were able to change our project dramatically at their request. Right.
yes all right thank you questions from the board
questions from the board or questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um just briefly mr share um alan i i was corresponding with with alex while you were
speaking so i checked the application to see if there was an error um and it looks like
unfortunately this was filed as a 19 unit building both the verbiage and the plans show 19 units so
we need to amend the application needs to be amended to get the 21 units on there that you're
requesting and presented to the community all right so can we do that by way of an authorization
letter and then I don't need to represent, right?
No, you do not. You presented 21 today. The community letter
was very clear that you presented 21 to them.
There was some sort of mix-up with the initial application that was filed
as a 19 instead of a 21.
We'll send a letter today or tomorrow and if you just give us
authorization, then I guess we'll just make a resubmission for
21 units.
Yes, you'll just, if you had submitted, if you had submitted plans, you need to submit updated plans to Alan and I.
We will.
Other than that.
Hillary, we're going to hold the vote?
Yeah, so we'll hold it.
Yeah, this is kind of like a correction, but unfortunately the documentation was for 19 units, so we have to do an authorization to amend.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a phone number ending in 1232. They have been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good evening. Good afternoon. The name is Pamela Bracey, B-R-A-C-E-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I did attend the meeting that was just stated.
There were several members of the community that were against this project.
We did hear these items that the lawyer just spoke about.
We did talk about the trees.
We did talk about the trees.
There was a question about the...
There was a question about the roof deck and children being up there.
That was a concern of safety.
And we asked about any land on the ground being utilized for children to play.
I understand we're getting landscaping front and back.
I understand that.
I understand it was stated we have a playground a couple blocks away,
but individuals are a little hesitant sometimes to travel with their children to a playground.
And also, Worcester Street has very limited parking during the day,
so there's going to be an issue of individuals.
You have the parking spaces, the 11 parking spaces, but that's about half of the units.
So there was a question from individuals at the meeting about where individuals were going to park.
And there was a concern about the two-way coming into this space and also about the trash truck.
So these were some of the things that were mentioned.
Yes, I am a member of Solo Germantown Civic Association.
I'm not saying that we didn't hear some good things, but these were some of the things that were raised.
So thank you very much for listening.
Thank you, ma'am. We appreciate your interest. Anyone else?
Mr. Chair, why don't I wait until I see who it is. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Charles Richardson. They have been allowed to speak.
Mr. Richardson, just state your name, please. You've already been sworn.
Yes, Mr. Chair, Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 508 City Hall.
Thank you, sir. I was at the meeting for the first half of the meeting. I had to go to another RCO meeting that evening.
uh and i had so therefore i logged off understand i heard that that things went very south after i
left the meeting um and that there were points raised that had nothing to do with variances or
anything along those lines um the vote count that solo has is incorrect and um you know i really
don't know where they got their their vote count from but uh rosamund mckelvey of the wakefield
49ers submitted her letter and summary, and I've spoken with the other two RCOs that were involved
as well. There were four RCOs all together, Wakefield 49ers, the 12th Ward Democratic RCO,
and the Faith CDC RCO, as well as Solo. The other three RCOs all voted, had the same conclusion,
and voted in favor of the project.
The Councilwoman supports those three RCOs
and rejects SOLO's characterization of the meeting.
And we are supporting the project today.
Thank you very much for taking time to calls.
Is there anyone else in the first audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have a hand up by the name of Rosalind McKelvey.
They have been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer?
Good evening. My name is Rosalind McKelvey, R-O-S-A-L-I-N-D, last name McKelvey, M as in Mary, C-K-E-L, V as in Victor, E-Y.
Fair or affirmed, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Are you a neighbor?
I am the president of the Wakefield 49ers, one of the four RCOs represented, and there's one RCO overlapped. It did not show.
Thank you very much. Please proceed.
Okay. Greetings to everyone.
And our Zoom meetings, at the way the city has it set up, gets time restraints on them.
Mine is shared with another company.
But at the beginning of the meeting, we did say that we have a certain amount of time.
The date for this meeting had to be looked into, and we had it at 630, but it's also, we were checking, it was on the date of Solo's RCO, and I requested from, I believe, the only one that really speaks for them is Ms. Weiss.
If somebody else could show, she was quite upset that it was on their meeting date, but the other three RCOs said yes.
And so our developer had some restraints too, as he's busy, and we moved it to six o'clock.
So as I proceed, everyone at the meeting should have the neighborhood concerns.
Everyone at the meeting should have the neighborhood concerns.
So as we went into this, I looked at our summary, by the way, and I request that if Solo puts in a summary that they remember there was three other RCOs.
And as we go down, we had a meeting last year up at the Haitian church.
And the neighbors came in quite numbers because many of our neighbors don't have Zoom.
They're elderly and don't do it.
And we asked for different things.
When they showed it there, we asked for a community room.
We asked, the neighbors had asked for where's the mail going to go.
They had asked other questions.
And he said he would make provisions and provisos.
And we appreciated that.
And he said he would come back when he had a better offer.
And it was 28 units.
And he moved it down to 21 units. So 19 or 21, the neighbors didn't have a problem. The block captain, if they look at the plans when he showed them, there is no houses across from it. There's only three houses to the east of it and only one occupied. It's a very empty block in their portion of the block.
but the street that would be impacted the most was Lena Street their block captain came
their community support came and our committee person off of the rear came to the point that
she even came to my house because she doesn't have zoom so I just like y'all to know we had
this meeting and he hit every point he hit every point that we were asking about
He asked, and when it came to the roof deck, the neighbors didn't have a problem.
Now, I want to clarify, where they say there was no's and objected, yes, Lena Street neighbors were hoping that if they said no, it would change the parking for the street because there is no parking on Worcester Street all the way from Germantown Avenue to Chew Avenue.
There is no street parking. And we explained to them that the parking wasn't part of the refusal
and saying no would not get any more parking on the street. So the owner said, we'll come back
with parking on property. We will change, take out seven apartments. We will put in parking in
the rear. We will put in handicapped parking. We were talking about greenery and how we're trying
to go green. The 23 runs one block away, and we're trying to save the train, so we encourage
you, Susceptor. They said there's 11 parking spaces. They have bike racks, a bike room.
We said elderly people will come. They said, okay, some of the apartments we take out this
space, we'll put in elevators. The neighbors, I said, if we take parking out of the issue,
what do you say about this project? And all three neighbors said absolutely yes.
And we said and promised that we're going to work with city council and city council persons for
possibly like time parking on their block that's down the street, Lena Street, and try and find
out why there is no street parking for almost five blocks on Worcester Street. That being said,
if people would look for the neighbor input the neighbors said absolutely yes they were happy
with the effect we even had a man that was there visiting and he knows history and he asked about
could the rocks be repurposed they said yes can you take the brick facade all the way around the
side they said yes the neighbors on Lena Street asked about double parking because they didn't
want any blocking when people want to get in and out of the apartment, especially if there's a fire
or emergency. So he put in two-way parking. When it came to a question about the children, we were
almost out of time. And we understand we cannot encourage or make community-based agreements with
a playground, but the safety or questions about the roof, we said, would be addressed possibly at
the zoning board. But the neighbors had no question more about the roof. The thing we're
asking is that when the RCOs come, that they listen to the neighbors, live in the neighborhood,
and be associated with the neighbors that are trying to send their block captain and representative
to our meeting. So the RCOs that were there, Faith, 12th Ward, myself, we voted at the meeting
And we asked repeatedly twice if Solo would.
And we asked repeatedly twice if Solo was going to vote at the meeting because they bring representatives and at least two people that don't live within even a mile of the place.
And one man, he was quite confused.
He didn't know what we meant about RCO meetings.
And another person, Ms. Ponson, was there.
And she has West Central.
She said she was just observing and offered any support if I needed it.
So I hope you take away from this the provisos that are on there.
They even said they would put cameras, lighting.
I'm going to cut this short now saying that if we would stay to what the community is asking and the people and worry more about rocks, worry more about them than rocks and trees, the neighborhood, we got everything we asked for.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for giving us a call.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, Chair.
I see no more hands at this time.
Alan, do you have anything to say?
I don't think I have anything to add.
Planning Commission.
Afternoon, Chairman and members of the Board.
Dave Defecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5,
residential single-family zoning at this location. The appellant could divide this lot into seven
house lots by right. The majority of homes on this block face are single-family. The appellant has
signed an agreement to pay $24,000 in lieu of replacing the six heritage trees that will be
removed, so the appellant has shown that the proposed removal of heritage trees will have
no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected. However, the proposed multi-family
building is out of character with the homes on this block face the city planning commission
recommends the board grant a proposed special exception for removing six heritage trees but
deny all other proposed use and dimensional thank you um i just want for record keeping
purposes i just want to have the opportunity to respond sure oh uh yeah so um not out of character
to have multifamily. On that same block across the street at 3755 East Worcester Street,
there's a 47-unit senior living facility. And I believe my presentation materials has another
instance of multifamily use on that block. And the fact is there is CMX 2.5 RM1 and RM2
zoning on that block and we're near a commercial corridor on Germantown Avenue from a planning
perspective, I would think that you would want that increased density on a block that's rather
empty to help support the commercial corridor. Thank you. Thank you. So we're going to hold
the vote on this until we get that correction. Am I correct, Hillary? Yes, Mr. Chair. The record
is otherwise closed. We can do that in two weeks? We will do our best, Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you
very much. Well, Alan, we'll let you know when we're ready to vote, okay?
Thank you.
Take a little
break. MI 2024-004-887-3222
Frankfurt Avenue. Henry Clinton is the attorney.
No RCO letter or summary, but
notice was sent to neighbors with a proof of a mailing. Meeting was held
October 3rd, 2024.
Letter of opposition from one neighbor.
Henry Clinton will be rejoining us as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
I'm Mr. Clinton.
Could you please state your name
as spelled for the court stenographer?
Sure, Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client in the relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Luan, L-U-A-N, Lu Pasholi, P-A-S-H-O-L-L-I, and he's the principal of Pasholi Holdings.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
And, Mr. Chairman, before we get to that, I didn't hear what you said. I was in transition coming in about the-
Oh, I'm sorry. So I said there was, we don't have an RCO letter, but there was a meeting held on October 3rd.
And there was, we do receive one letter from one individual who states he's opposed to the project.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
The letter, but I don't know what happened.
It was an overwhelming vote in support.
All right.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to a guy person?
I do, Mr. Shahid, just to make sure it's an amended refusal that we have.
I do, Mr. Shahid, just to make sure it's an amended refusal that we have.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case, Bob?
These in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
It is.
It is.
Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Henry Clinton for Pasoli Holdings, LLC.
And Mr. Pasholi is on the call and will be a witness briefly at the end of my presentation.
This table of contents, A1 through A10, which I ask to be admitted.
This is a request for relief to allow a solid fence around a vacant lot.
And we have refusals for height, which I will get to shortly.
This is the refusal.
this is an rm1 zoning district again it's a vacant lot uh and my client has owned it for several
years he had a six foot high cyclone fence around the property and i'll show you an aerial photograph
of that uh but because of what's happening in the neighborhood we're only about three blocks from
kensington and allegheny what's happening in the neighborhood and with this lot it was just a
constant source of people dumping, throwing things over the cyclone fence. And it just got
to the point where he had to put up a solid fence higher than a cyclone fence. And that's what he's
done. And he's gotten a refusal because a fence facing on Frankfurt Avenue, which is considered
the front, should be no more than four feet, according to the code, and should be at least
50% transparent. Our fence is 11 feet high and is not transparent. That's on Frankfurt Avenue.
On the other three sides, the fence is supposed to be no higher than six feet,
and our fence is nine feet. And I have photographs to show everyone.
The RCO letter, you know, we just met with them October 3rd. I was at the meeting after the
meeting was over, I left the room and I found out from people who were at the meeting that
apparently it was a 10-0 vote in favor, but I don't know why we don't have a letter yet.
I think it's because of a short time frame, frankly, just a short turnaround.
So this is the photograph of the vacant lot right now. It's rather large, about 100 feet long,
almost a square. K&A is where my cursor is, a couple blocks to the east.
This is a ground level view of the lot with the cyclone fence. You can see there's some trash on
the front. And typically, as my client will testify, the lot itself was trash strewn and
difficult to monitor. So he went ahead and he put up a solid fence. This is Frankfurt Avenue.
The height of this fence is 11 feet.
Again, another photograph from Frankfurt Avenue.
And this is the fence at night, which was well-received.
The lighting was well-received by the RCO and the folks at the meeting.
Let me just reduce this so you can get an idea.
Of the site plan. So this is Frankfurt Avenue where my cursor is. Again, as I said, this fence is 11 feet, nine feet along the side street, Madison Street, nine feet on the rear and nine feet adjacent to the property next door at 3320.
Just another view of the site plan.
This was a zoning permit that my client got when he acquired the property, consolidating the four lots.
That's what this plan is.
Once it was four lots, he consolidated it into one lot.
So that's really the only zoning records I could find.
The remaining documents are the documents you would typically see in a presentation like this with our application for appeal,
our project information form
our tax clearance
our zoning map
again this is the corner RM1
surrounded by RM1 and RSA 5
the deed indicating ownership
our notice letter
our notice letter and 118 mailers went out.
and 118
Thank you.
We have a certification from the post office indicating that we did conduct those mailings.
So we have a situation where it's kind of an unusual circumstance or unusual situation where it is a vacant lot.
it's been basically in a hazardous condition or dirty condition or overgrown condition for
several years. My client goes by the property, as he will testify every day. He cleans it himself,
but it got to the point where people are climbing over the fence. I think he'll testify they were
camping out the fence, leaving needles, trash, everything else you can imagine. Everybody in
the neighborhood was upset about it. So he decided to put up a fence that's basically
insurmountable, frankly. And that situation has ceased. It's now well lit. It's well received by
the neighbors, was well received by the community group. As I said, you know, I didn't hear any
negativity at the meeting. I understand, Mr. Chairman, you have one letter of opposition, but
Hopefully, the RCO will get that letter in if the board is unable to vote today.
We are not impacting the development of any adjacent lot.
We're not impacting the light and air of any adjacent property.
We do have what we consider an unusual circumstance where we have to safeguard the property.
And the only way to do it is to take some unusual measures, which is to exceed the height on the sides,
the three sides by three feet and we just think it's unreasonable to suggest that you have a
four foot high fence on frankfurt avenue when we had a six foot high fence and that was being
breached breached on a regular occasion so i'd like my client to unmute himself
to adopt my testimony mr chairman i do want to ask him a few questions about what he's had to
do to clean the property, to give you his position, not
necessarily my words. Mr. Pasholi,
can you raise your hand and unmute yourself?
Mr. Pasholi?
How are you today? Good. Could you please state your
name and spell for the stenographer? Luan Pasholi,
L-U-A-N
P-A-S-H-O-L-L-I
How are you today?
I'm good. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, Mr. Bisholi.
Were you on the call
when I testified about your project?
And if you had the opportunity to testify,
would you adopt my testimony as your own
and as true and correct?
Now, do you go buy this, your property, often?
I drive by there daily.
And over the years that you've owned it, you've owned it for more than five years,
can you just describe to the board the type of situation you're facing there with the lot being basically full of debris and individuals or anything else you want to say?
Well, I'm going to start when I purchase the property.
I purchased the property with, I don't know if any of you guys know,
there were the uh kensington mansions that's what they were called two of them there
unfortunately i was not able to uh repair them since my uh structural engineers said they're
not repairable uh and the intention is to actually move into them myself so uh plans changed i had
to take the property down and it became a vacant lot at that point i i put a six foot uh cyclone
fence up all around the perimeter okay and i would cut the grass once you know twice three
times a month on average okay depending on the season obviously uh it just it's been a nightmare
honestly keeping it clean uh i've had probably about two three hundred tires dumped in there at
once you know the fence cut open numerous times trash constantly uh you know you would clean it
up today it's like it's like if you drive by kensington allegheny at seven o'clock in the
morning it's dirty at nine it's clean it's 12 it's disgusting again so i mean you know the only
thing that i could think of at the time is just put a fence up high enough so nobody can throw
anything in there and uh that's pretty much what i did and has have your efforts been successful
yes yes extremely successful and you continue to pass by the property on a regular basis daily
And have you installed lighting around the perimeter of the property?
Lighting and cameras.
And cameras also?
And cameras also.
I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not as if kind, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the board.
Sorry, Mr. Chair.
I'm sorry.
No, no, you don't have to be sorry.
I was on mute.
I'm sorry.
No, no, no, it's fine.
All right.
a question um when when you did this did you explore some of the uh opaque versions of fencing
i mean you you just went to solid fencing dude like i understand you don't want people to
throw things in but are did you explore any other options in terms of the um opacity yes we did i
actually installed a six foot uh i would say chain link fencing okay which is pretty hard to
cut but it was just constantly being cut by either homeless people or you know the kensington issues
right but i i'm not talking about that i'm talking about when you decided to put up this
new fencing did what what options did you explore did you ever look at the code and what they were
asking for, and did you look at versions or options that included something even close to
the 50% opaque versions that are asked for by the coach? I did not. Unfortunately, I was under
the impression that the property was zoned for, I think, 38-foot building. So, you know, you would
build a building like that i'm guessing right on the property line on frankfurt avenue so i never
even went any further so i figured if there could be a 38 foot building there we could put a 11 foot
fence without having to get zoning so that's completely my fault to be quite honest with you
i should have known better in other words all right but again i i get the height but you know
there's still the whole issue of the um the see-through fencing that's what you're saying
are there options where you can still um keep the trash from being thrown in or prevent
well never mind okay thank you i didn't i honestly didn't i i did not i just figured
this would be the best option to not have anything go in at all so it would be the cleaner
you know best option i didn't even look into any other kind of fencing to put up
gassing can i just take a shot at that sure yeah so some of the fencing i'm i think i know what
you're speaking about is maybe shadow box fencing or maybe post and rail fencing yeah and you know
again those types of fences you're still going to be able to get debris and individuals to get into
those areas unless you make the opening so narrow which then it almost defeats the idea of having
some opacity that's the only way i could answer that all right okay thank you just for comments
from the virtual audience yes chair i have a hand up by the name of valinda last name starting with
the X, they had been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Hello?
Hello?
Hi, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is B-E-L-I-N-D-A-B-A-J,
Benolda Jeppens.
Could you do that one more time, please?
Benelda Jepay
And could you spell it for the stenographer?
P-E-L-I-N-D-A
E-P-A-J
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Please proceed.
all right i live on 32 30 frankfurt avenue across the street across from the lots so the
mr pasholi he did an amazing job they broke in before he had the regular fencing on the six foot
fencing they broke into my house white from the window side every morning i had to see
i'm sorry for my language junkies getting high um you know throwing trashes and everything
um you know throwing trashes and everything every morning it was morning afternoon every time I
every morning it was more
I would come from work I would see that they would sit on my steps every single day um
currently since he put the fence in there I feel much safer I had nobody hiding behind of my the
building or anyone coming coming towards me like I had had incidents before the building is much
safer, has lighting at the night, has cameras. If anything happens, we have approached Mr.
Pachole for the cameras recording. He has done an amazing job. And I was at the meeting on the
3rd. We all voted yes. There was no against it because all the people that were on the meeting
there with our neighbors.
They were all the neighbors.
Thank you very much.
So I am a yes for this going on
and keeping the phantom.
Saves my life.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Sergi Pulevi has been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
sir do you please unmute yourself
j okay chair they did not unmute they may be having technical issues i think i think we do
have a letter from him if i'm not mistaken okay is there anyone else in the virtual audience
there are no more hands at this time to play any commission thank you chairman and good
afternoon david fecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rm1 residential multifamily zoning at this location
the appellant applied for permits in 2017 and 2018 for demolition of all structures and
consolidation of four house lots. They erected a fence along their property lines without the
benefit of permits. The appellant has not shown that an economic detriment will accrue if they
are forced to comply with the height and opacity standards in the zoning code. The City Planning
Commission recommends the board deny their proposed dimensional variances for fence height and fence
opacity. So Mr. Clinton we're not going to take a position on that we're not going to vote on this
until we hear, if we can get something from the RCL.
Understood.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We'll give it a few weeks.
And if we don't have something, we're going to vote then, okay?
All right.
Yeah, and I'll follow up.
We try to get it.
Oh, absolutely.
Absolutely.
Thank you very much.
All right.
All right.
Number 12, MI 2024-004-949-141 East Sharpneck Street.
Alan Nockmson is the attorney.
Mr. Nockamson?
Sorry about that.
No, no, that's okay.
You've already been sworn.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, Alan Nockamson.
Could you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Yeah, my client is 14143 East Sharpneck STLLC.
And there's a letter of unanimous support from East Mount Airy Neighbors Association, 33 votes.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the readout or refuse or stipulate to his accuracy?
had an email then all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing uh yes i have thank you council please proceed and share
all right so i'm here to percent uh 141-43 east sharp neck street uh we're taking uh three lots
and, oh, excuse me, you're taking two lots
and then subdividing into three.
This is another project which has a long history,
but a positive history in that originally
there was a request for multifamily use
for these properties.
My clients went back to the drawing board
based on community input
and has now had unanimous support.
It was asked that, you know, to respect the fact that this is a single-family portion of the neighborhood, and in addition, to provide side yards for the extreme left and extreme right parts of the property, as well as, you know.
uh the extreme left and extreme right parts of the property as well as you know creating porches and
and creating bay windows and bricks facades which are more in character with the neighborhood which
they did everything and that's why i think they got unanimous support uh the first uh item that
we're going to review is the notice of refusal so these are rsa5 uh properties um and you know
We're only receiving one refusal for the size of lot two, you know, saying that the minimum lot requirement is 960 and ours is 868.5.
I'm not 100 percent sure if that refusal is correct, because I think that the lot size that we should be going under is 1440 by deferred to Ms. Emerson in that respect.
But either way, the size of the lots mimic what is in the neighborhood.
It's not out of character.
And to have, you know, these lots the way they are from a with perspective and a single family perspective is in character with the neighborhoods.
And that's why I think we received a letter of non-opposition from the East Mount Airy neighbors and community support where it was 33 to zip.
So usually you don't have that type of support, you know, at all.
And so I think it was because we worked really hard and diligently to change our plans based on community input for a previous type of project that the community did not want and instead have a single family.
We did do analysis on the 100 block of East Sharp Neck Street, showing properties of a similar lot width.
And the reason why we're saying that is all of our lots are 16, essentially the building structures are 16 feet, eight inches, which is in character to what you would see in the neighborhood.
We have side yards for lot one and lot three, which are five feet each.
And that was at the request of the community.
We have maps of the area, photographs of the properties around the area, our plans and drawings.
Logan Dry did a great job, I think, with the architectural plans to mimic what's in the neighborhood.
We had a well-attended meeting.
We had proof of that, not just a notice to that meeting, but proof of mailing of that notice to the meeting.
Our application for appeal, our deeds to the property, showing that my client, the corporate owner, owns it.
And we have certificates of tax clearance.
And we also have Joe Parker in the virtual audience, who is the owner's rep, who will adopt my testimony as his own.
So the notice of refusal. Again, these are two RSA 5 properties. We're consolidating them to make three single family homes.
and, again, in character to the size of other lots nearby.
The only refusal that's here is that the lot two is only 868.5 square feet,
while 960 square feet is required.
Not 100% sure if it should be 960 versus 1440, but that's where we are with that.
A letter of non-opposition.
Again, you know, the hardship is that this, you know, property has been vacant forever.
And, you know, in order to for this property and this project to be, you know, to hit the ground running and to activate this property, you know, we need to have this additional essential unit.
It would be out of character, like 141 is 1,598 square feet, while 143 is 1,606 square feet.
Those lot sizes are out of character with the neighborhood from a single-family perspective for these RSA5 properties.
It's more in line with the three proposed lot sizes that we're proposing for this project.
Again, if you look at here, we just gave examples of the widths of the building structures,
which kind of mimic what we're proposing as well.
We also took some of that architecture with the roof lines.
This used to be, I would assume, some type of porch at one point.
Same thing here, the porch, again, mimicking the brick facade.
And again, the widths are kind of similar to what we're proposing here.
Maps of the area, no dispute that this is a single-family portion of the neighborhood, and that's what we're proposing.
Photographs of the property, again, these are all vacant lots.
Proof of posting for today's hearing, of the hearing notice.
This is East Sharpneck Street to the right of the property.
You can see there's porches in the neighborhood, bay windows, which we try to mimic.
Each sharp-necked street to the left of the property, again, porches, brick facades, interesting sharp-edged roof lines.
sharp-edged roof lines. Architectural plans and drawings. You can see how our roof lines mimic,
Architectural plans are drawing.
our bay windows mimic, our porches mimic what's in the neighborhood from an architectural
standpoint. And again, these are all single-family homes. So, but, you know, we try to, you know,
again, lay out these properties, you know, with furniture. So you can see in the first floor,
you you walk in there's a living room a dining room in the kitchen you go down the flight of
steps uh there's a home office and there's also like i guess a guest room of some sort or or maybe
an entertainment room there is a bathroom down there so someone doesn't have to go all the way
to the second floor to go to the bathroom instead of going on the first floor down the flight of
steps you go up a flight of steps and there's two bedrooms in the bathroom and then in a laundry
room as well and then what you would expect is the third floor is a master suite
we send notice of this community meeting a few days longer than we usually do so it was the
community meeting was september 24th we usually try to do two weeks in advance i think maybe it
was asked for of us to do additional notice so we did september 5th we emailed that notice along
Proof of that notice to the coordinating RCOs or coordinating RCO and other RCOs.
109 addresses were notified at the community meeting list of those addresses.
Proof of mailing to those addresses are application for appeal that we filed with the ZBA along with the notice of refusal and the project information form.
Deeds to the property showing that my client, the corporate owner, owns the properties.
And the certificates of tax clearance.
I would ask that Mr. Parker virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Mr. Parker, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Joseph Parker has been allowed to speak.
Mr. Parker, could you state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Joseph Parker, J-O-S-E-P-H-P-A-R-K-E-R.
where or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes please proceed counsel yes mr parker you heard everything i had to state today about
your zoning matter yes and is it true and correct yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony
yes specifically you know part of this process of community input you originally
had a different, you had multifamily, right?
And it was at the request of the community
to go single family, is that right?
Can you repeat that?
It was at the request of the community
to have single family use instead, right?
And then even the design aspects,
you took into account what they wanted to see
from a design standpoint, is that right?
yes thank you questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes chair i have a hand up by the name of charles richardson they have been allowed to cease
Richardson, just state your name, please.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N,
Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass,
Room 508 City Hall.
Councilman has no objection to granting the variance.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone else in the VRCS audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of
Sergi Pavala.
They have been allowed to speak.
This is the last case.
oh hello uh i'm kind of like hello sir sir sir sir that that case is over
uh we had i was blocked but but i can't we can't take the testimony now
because the people involved are no longer here yes you can continue chair
anyone else in the virtual audience for sharp neck street no chair i see no more hands at this time
okay planning commission thank you chairman and good afternoon or good evening david effecta with
the city planning commission chairman and board members will start by confirming the appellant's
assertion that the minimum lot size for rsa 5 properties in the eighth council district
that the minimum lot size for RSA 5 properties in the 8th Council District is still 1,440 square
feet. Then we'll proceed with our testimony. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
RSA 5 residential single-family zoning at this location. The appellant requests a dimensional
variance for lot size for the three proposed lots. The proposed lots are in keeping with the
size of the lots within this block, which range from approximately 900 to 1,500 square feet,
the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant dimensional variance for lot size.
MI 2024-004-949-141 East Sharp, Mack Street, I vote yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Nockmson, you're on one more time.
You have your votes.
MI2024-004-951-907-South-10th Street.
Mr. Nockmson.
Yeah, so, Allen Nockmson still.
Just for a point of information, Alan, we no longer see you.
I noticed that.
Yeah, I was actually going to mention that.
I just noticed that.
I don't know why.
You disappeared.
No comment.
But, yeah, I don't know what happened.
I don't know why I'm black.
Are you going to be able to show your documents?
Yeah, I can.
I noticed that during the last presentation all of a sudden.
I'm good.
All right.
All right. Could you identify your client, please, and the relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Chris Brewer, the owner of the property.
We have a letter of non-opposition from Bella Vista Neighbors and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squiller.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Council, do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to, needed and required five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed, please.
Thank you. I think I figured out my camera situation.
All right, so this is really a straightforward project.
All we're trying to do is legalize a parking spot that's in the rear.
This property goes street to street from 10th Street to Delhi. There's no parking allowed on the street in front of our property. And we're near the Italian market. So it only makes sense to allow for the legalization of this off-street parking that's been there forever.
So we're going to review the notice of refusal.
Again, we have a letter of non-opposition from Bella Vista Neighbors Association, as well as a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Not out of character to have off-street accessory parking nearby, maps of the area, photographs of the property.
Just, again, a site plan, you know, showing the off-street parking.
and the RCO meeting notice,
it was a well-attended meeting
or application for appeal
or deeds of property
showing that Chris owns the property
and the Certificate of Tax Clearance.
Chris is a consumer.
This is where he lives.
He's not trying to develop it.
He's just trying to legalize his parking
and it's rather large rear yards back there.
Notice the refusal here.
It's a surface parking lot.
That's one refusal.
It's off-street parking.
It's not considered a rear street.
That is the second refusal.
Letter of non-opposition, again, very well attended meeting.
You had 17 people show up.
Overwhelming support.
There were two board members who were opposed to it.
Probably just on like, again, conceptually, they're probably opposed to any off-street parking.
But it makes sense here because you're taking a car off the street and not affecting public parking at all.
uh well explained it just like that in the letter of non-opposition and you know council member
scroller also is not opposing this variance request not uncommon to have off-street parking
on new delhi or south delhi uh is 908 it's on our block uh then around the corner 939 montrose
935-37 Montrose Street. Maps of the area, this goes street to street, single-family use,
not changing the density. Again, we're near the Italian market, so it makes sense to
lessen the burden of the Italian market by taking as many cars off the street without
affecting public parks. So this is a net positive one for the community.
So this is a net positive one for the community. Photographs of the property, newer construction. My client didn't do that, but you can see it's well-maintained in the front. This is the front of the property as well.
posting. So I wanted to show you that we posted both on the 10th Street side and the Deli Street
sides for today's hearing. Again, this is the rear. I think it's almost like 30 feet deep.
So there's much, much room, not just from a legal standpoint for service parking,
which is 18 feet deep. You have another 11 feet on top of that. For the rear yard,
I think that was referenced in the letter of non-opposition by the coordinating RCO.
and this has been like that forever. We have a picture in 2017. The only difference is I guess
they took away the fence, but it's the same thing. Again, you can see here, no parking allowed. This
is an aerial view kind of showing that this has been like this for the longest period of time.
This is South 10th Street to the right of the property, to the left of the property,
South Delhi Street to the right and left. As you can see, no parking is allowed, but there is
off-street parking, you know, on Deli Street.
Plants and drawings, you can see it's a pretty
16-foot wide property, 30 feet deep, more than
enough room for one car. Meeting notice,
we met with the community on September 3rd.
We emailed that notice to the community two weeks prior to the
meeting. We showed them that
169 addresses were
sent to a community notice
along proof of mailing of that
community notice, our application for
appeal that we filed on Mr.
Brewer's behalf,
along with the deeds of property,
showing that he owns the property,
and our certificate of tax credits.
I would
say, I would ask Chris to virtually
raise his hand and be sworn in.
Christopher, could you
please state your name and spell for the
stenographer?
can you hear me yes yeah please state your name is spelled for the court stenographer
christopher brewer chris t-o-p-h-e-r b as in boy r-e-w-e-r you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed counsel yes chris you heard
everything i had to state today about yours any matter yes is it true and correct yes
and do you adopt this your own testimony i do all right thank you questions or comments from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair cleaning commission good evening chairman and board
members david fecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa5 residential single family zoning at this
location the appellant wishes to legalize a parking space built without the benefit of permits
within the required rear yard.
The proposed legalization will have no detrimental impacts
on the surrounding properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
their variances for off-street accessory parking.
Thank you.
MI 2024-004-951-907 South 10th Street, I vote yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowen, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Alan.
Thank you.
Number 14, MI 2020, hi, MI 2024, 004-954-710-North 42nd Street.
Meredith Verliger is the attorney.
She's coming in now as a panelist chair.
Evening.
Counsel, could you please state your name? You've already been sworn.
sure meredith berlger f-e-r l-e-g-e-r do you identify your client a relationship
Do you identify your client in relationship to the property?
to the property certainly my client
Certainly.
My client is 710 North 42nd LLC, which is the owner of the property.
We have a request from Council Member Gauthier's office to hold a vote on this.
There's some extraordinary circumstances with the RCL leader.
I'll address it in my presentation.
We certainly understand if the board makes that decision, but I will address that.
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, 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's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. You already shared your screen.
Thank you. Good evening, board members. Again, Meredith Ferliger of Delworth-Paxson.
on behalf of 710 North 42nd Street, LLC, the owner of the property at 710 North 42nd Street.
With me today, I have Salam Barr, who is a member of the LLC and owner of this property.
As you know, the case in front of you this evening concerns 710 North 42nd Street in the city's
West Belmont neighborhood. As the board listens to the presentation today, a critical piece of
information for you to consider is that my client purchased this property as an RM1 lot and
structure that would have permitted the application before you today. A short time after his purchase
and having already invested significant financial dollars into making the dilapidated structure safe
in preparation for his planned redevelopment and with no knowledge of what had transpired,
the lot was rezoned along with many others in the area to RSA 5. I'll bring up the exhibit packet
which I do have up on the screen which contains 16 total exhibits with one exception. A brief
note about the RCO. We did have a meeting with West Belmont Civic Association which is led by
David Pickett. Shortly after the leader of the organization was injured in a fire at his home
And to our understanding, he has not yet returned to his home or has not yet left the hospital or rehabilitation center.
As an officer of the court, I can represent to the board that the vote that was taken the evening of the meeting was in support.
But as the councilwoman's office indicated, both her office and myself have not been able to connect with anybody from the West Belmont Civic Organization to secure proof of that vote.
But as I stated, the vote that evening was in support. Tax clearance is included at Exhibit 2, and the deed is included at Exhibit 3, where you will see that my client purchased this property on August 29, 2022.
Unfortunately, this property had fallen into significant disrepair, as you'll see in the photographs, and Ellen and I eventually declared this structure unsafe.
I have included some of those records here at Exhibit 9, where you can see the structure was declared unsafe shortly after my client purchased it.
Salam quickly worked to secure the appropriate permits to render the property safe, still expecting at that point that he would be able to bring his vision for this property to life.
As you'll see on the zoning map that I've shown up on the screen at Exhibit 7, although the property was rezoned to RSA 5, the property sits on a block that serves as a point of division between the new RSA 5 and the retained RM1 and CMX2 zoning.
The west side of the street was switched to RSA 5, while the east side retained its more dense zoning classifications.
By way of context, I have included aerials at Exhibit 8, which you can see up on the screen.
710 North 42nd Street is this bookend structure here that sits in a residential area about one block off of Lancaster Avenue.
You'll notice that a vast majority of this particular block face is still undeveloped and is predominantly owned by the Housing Authority.
On the opposite side of the street, looking from a northwest view, you'll notice a mix of uses, including residential, automotive, and other commercial that fronts on Lancaster Avenue that extends back to Warren Street and connecting with North 42nd Street.
I've included quite a few photographs at Exhibit 16.
You'll note that this is an existing three-story structure that matches the character of the other older residential structures that still exist.
that matches the character of the other older residential structures that still remain on this block.
Next door, you'll notice that a new three-family dwelling was recently completed.
From the time that he purchased the property, Salam felt it was critically important to preserve
the existing structure if at all feasible, and this image is post his efforts at making it safe.
So you can see, as you'll see in some of the later photographs, this front porch area was
brought up into a current condition that doesn't pose any hazard to passers-by.
So this next photograph here is facing Fairmont Avenue. We're again off in the distance here,
you'll see the start of the 161 family development that's just across Fairmont Avenue.
Looking across the street, you'll notice another new construction project that was just built,
and this one actually contains four units, which is denser than what the applicant is asking for
today. Flipping in the opposite direction, looking towards Aspen Street, you can see the auto repair
garage that's directly across the street from this property. Finally, I've provided another
current view of the existing structure here from the side, and again, this is looking up towards
Fairmont Avenue, where you'll see again that most of this block face is undeveloped. Presumably,
these vehicles are probably being stored by the auto repair garage across the street,
but, you know, ultimately that is truly just an assumption.
And again, zoning posters were posted on September 19, 2024.
I want to walk you through some interior photographs so you can get a sense of the
pretty extraordinary condition of this property that Salam purchased. So the first set of
photographs that you can see here is during the time that he and his team were cleaning up the
property and working towards making the property even safe for anybody to be anywhere near it.
And again, so this is on the first floor. These next two photographs were at that same time
during the make safe uh and this is a view from the second floor so you can see the structure
was really in a in a quite unfortunate condition i've also included some photographs of the front
of the property again back when uh salam was making efforts towards making the property safe
and you can really see uh fairly clearly in this photograph the condition that he found it in when
he purchased it. I have also included some photographs of the current condition, post-cleanup
and post-make-safe, just to give you a sense of really what exists there today. Quite obviously,
it is still uninhabitable without considerable investment. These first few photographs here are
on the first floor, looking towards the front in this first photograph, and looking towards the
back in the second photograph. And again, this is another view of that first floor looking towards
the front underneath the existing stairs. The second floor is in some ways in slightly worse
condition, which you can see here. And again, this is looking towards the front and looking towards
that stairwell. And then an image of the partial third floor is also shown where, again, this is
looking out towards the back. You can see that this is only a partial third story. This is
looking out essentially onto the roof of the second floor. And we did also include a few
photographs showing the condition of the rear of the property. So again, you know, this property
has fairly clearly seen better days and Salam is looking to bring it back to life. So in that
regard, the zoning plans are shown at Exhibit 5. This application proposes to renovate the existing
structure and add a rear addition to create three dwelling units, one unit per floor.
On the first and second floor, you can see that the addition will extend back 11 feet. And you
know what, let me actually bring up the next view because I think you can see it a little bit more
clearly here. All right, so this is showing the framing plan, so you can really get a sense of
where this addition will be. So again, on the first and second floor, there's a slight addition in the
back. And then on the third floor, which currently only exists as a half floor, which you can see
here, that addition will extend back to meet the first and second floor addition. So this will be
a total of a 30-foot addition, and you can see that here in this framing plan.
From the front, the proposal is to keep the existing structure in its historical character, with the addition being entirely in line with this existing structure.
From the front, the proposal is to keep the existing structure in
So that addition will be invisible from the front.
Even with the addition, the rear yard will retain 16 feet, and you can see that on the zoning plan here, in the back here.
It will retain a 16-foot rear yard, which does lead back to a four-foot-wide alley that leads out to Fairmount Avenue.
We have also included floor plans in the exhibit packet at Exhibit 6.
The basement will be exclusively used for mechanicals for the first floor unit.
Each of the units in this new proposal will be a two-bedroom unit of identical 749 square feet each.
So really nicely sized units.
The rear of the building, really the side of the building steps in a little bit, which will allow for significant light and air into all of these new units.
That obviously allows for many more windows than would be allowed if it extended property line to property line.
You can also see the impact of the slight addition here visually, particularly on the third floor.
So you can see really where this addition allows for an extra bedroom in each of the first and second floor units and really allows for any form of a livable unit on that third floor here.
So you can see that these units are nicely laid out, they're quite large, and there's ample storage space in the units themselves to allow for trash storage in the units.
Now, with respect to the application, we received one refusal for the proposed three-dwelling unit use in the now RSA 5 zone district.
As I referenced, this case presents a dual hardship.
Actually, really, three hardships.
Most importantly, as I mentioned earlier on, the applicant purchased this property in 2022
with the specific goal of developing the project that is in front of you today.
He made a considerable financial investment in making the necessary improvements to secure the
property and render it safe instead of just demolishing it, which I suspect is what many
would have done given the condition that they found it in. Again, this was done with the goal
that the investment would be justified by the three units that were permitted for this lot.
The remapping bill is included in the exhibits at Exhibit 11. And you can see here that the
property was originally RM1 and was rezoned to RSA5. And you can see where the properties across
the street were not rezoned with this effort. As the board is probably aware, when a remapping
is introduced, no advance notice is provided to affected property owners. Accordingly, it was not
until this bill became effective around February of 2023 that the applicant even caught wind of
what had transpired, fundamentally frustrating its investment in this property without any form
of a recourse other than seeking the relief requested before this board today. Furthermore,
mark. Despite the rezoning, the area surrounding this property remains a mixed compilation of
single-family, multifamily, and even some commercial uses. The fact that the rezoning
line was drawn essentially down this street accentuates the hardship that faces this
particular property. At Exhibit 10, which I have brought up on the screen now, I've included a map
illustrating that the property is surrounded on all sides by a mix of multifamily densities.
This map was derived from records provided by the city on Atlas. I did point out some of these uses
earlier in the photographs, but you can see that immediately next door at 708, ignore Google's
addresses. This is actually 708. Directly across the street and even behind this property are all
multifamily uses of identical or higher densities. You can also see that at the other end of this
block along Fairmount, there are also two structures with either two or three dwelling
units in them. I wasn't able to confirm whether the corner is two or three. But you can see here
that there's new construction that has been approved right backing up on Brooklyn Street
for three-family dwellings. Right next door is a three-family dwelling. Across the street is a
four-family, and a three-family was just approved right next to the auto repair garage.
Additionally, I've also included evidence of zoning permits for 660 North 42nd Street,
evidence of zoning permits for 660 North 42nd Street, which is just on the next block across
which is just
Fairmount Avenue. It's just out of view of this image. The board actually heard and granted that
applicant similar relief just back in January, and that was even for a vacant lot. Finally,
as you'll hear from the applicant himself, the condition of this structure would make it
economically not feasible to return this property to a single-family use, particularly in light of
the other challenges that the board has heard today. The level of investment that would be
required to bring this structure up to a habitable condition, even for a single-family dwelling,
would be far more than this property is worth. Just by way of example, Zillow shows that a duplex
on this block just sold for $100,000, rendering it completely impossible to justify the cost to
renovate this structure for a single-family dwelling, given that the renovation cost would
be more than even a duplex sold on this very block. The applicant further submits the proposal
represents the lease modification to provide relief from the requirements of the code,
given that the entirety of this proposal would have been permitted by Wright at the time that
the applicant purchased the property under the prior RM1 zoning. This application simply seeks
approval for the exact development that was contemplated and designed as a then-by Wright
proposal. Furthermore, as you can see from this map, the density is well in line with the character
of this surrounding block, which includes predominantly three family dwellings.
The proposal will not contribute to congestion in the area. As you may have noticed as I walked
through the photographs, this block still has ample parking on each side of the street.
In addition, the property is a mere block from Lancaster Avenue, and as a result, the property
benefits from significant public transportation in close proximity. We also submit the variances
will not impair light and air or harm the neighbors. No dimensional variances are requested
and the proposed structure will retain its historical character that was set upon its
original construction back in the 1920s. This proposal will fulfill the intended goal for
the reactivation of the property that was set in motion when the applicant purchased it in 2022.
In addition to these reasons, we submit that the application complies in full with the standards
outlined in the Zoning Code at 14303 AE, as is more thoroughly established in the Memorandum
of Law submitted to the Board at Exhibit 12.
At this point, I would ask if the Administrator could look for Salam Barr to unmute him.
Do we see his hand?
yes sir salam bar has been allowed to speak salam could you please state your name and
spell for the corpse stenographer good morning everyone my name is salam bar that's s-a-l-a-a-m
b-a-r-r you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I affirm.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Salaam, just very briefly, can you just briefly explain to the board why you purchased this property and your original vision for this redevelopment?
I was doing some other developments in the area, and I was doing marketing, and I came across the property in really bad shape.
I got in contact with Miss Janice, who I now call Mom Janice, put the property under contract
for $50,000. Then when I did some final numbers, I realized I felt like I was cheating her. So then
I increased it to $70,000 or $75,000. So we redid that contract. And that's how I actually
put the property. That's how I purchased it. And Salam, that purchase price was based on
your assumption based on your research at the time that this property was zoned RM1 to allow
for multifamily? Yes. And there was a developer who tried to, while I had it in running through
title, he offered me 110,000. He was going to tear it down. And this is when I had it
under contract for 50,000. And that's when I called her, increased it to 75,000 because
I felt like I was you know getting over on her but my whole intention was to put three families
there because of the zoning and he had planned on tearing the property down and then building
a triplex up and when you found out that it was re-zoned at some point in
And when you found out that it was rezoned at some point in likely 2023, did you at that point consider restoring it to a single family home?
And why did you determine that you had to proceed with this instant proposal?
Well, one, I never thought of going to a single because of the out of pocket money that I already spent from plans, the make safe, the clean out and things of that nature.
So at this point, I never well, even when I found out something, I think something that happened with my architect where he had got under the weather or and it took a little bit more time than it normally does for me to get my plans.
But once we got them and then he sent them in and I was denied based on the zoning change, you know, I was floored based on if I would have known that that had happened, I would not have done nearly as much as if I had done before based on what I was trying to do, thinking that it would be a triplex, if that makes sense.
thank you salam and have you heard all the other testimony and evidence that was offered in front
of the board today yes i have and would you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you
adopt it as if it were your own yes i would thank you happy to answer any questions the board has
questions from the board uh yes what is on the other side of the property uh meredith is that
vacant lots on the other side it is yeah let me bring up the photographs you can see it more
clearly so it's it's a very large swath of vacant land it looks like most of the most of this land
is owned by pha okay all right thank you any other questions questions or comments from our attorney
None at this time, Mr. Chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience
Yes, Chair
I have a hand up by the name of
Hakim Mohamed
They have been allowed to speak
Could you please state your name
and spell it for the court stenographer
Hakim Mohamed
Please unmute yourself so you can speak
okay chair they're still on mute maybe they are having technical difficulties
is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes chair i have a hand up by the name of anna weasel
they have been allowed to speak hi could you please state your name and spell for the course
stenographer anna weisel a nna w e i s e l you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do are you a neighbor yes sir please proceed i live across the street
from the property that is in question for this variance hearing uh i did have a quick question
actually can i believe the attorney mentioned it can you please remind us the date that the
rezoning occurred for your side of the street sure the rezoning the bill itself was passed
april 25th 2023 but it became effective earlier than that based on the city's rules so it would
have been effective february of 2023 understood thank you and can you respond again with when
i believe it's salam purchased the building he purchased it in august of 2022 so prior to that
occurring understood um i have questions about the actual extension into that rear
area um that house has been vacant for quite some time um and i believe that it was actually myself
who put in a petition to the city to have the building boarded up uh there were people who
were using it for probably ill-gotten reasons um and so in terms of an investment in the building
i feel like that is a little misleading um the building previous tenant had the house in a
different situation i understand uh until salam took presence of the building but the building
has sat vacant. The windows have been blown out. The building is secured from a first floor
standpoint, but it is falling into disrepair as shown in the photos. Converting this to a three
unit building, in my opinion, is against what the zoning shows of RSA 5. I understand that you
mentioned the building just south of you, which is 708, sorry, they were granted.
south of you, which is 708, sorry, they were granted a special variance to have the three
units, which is against their zoning. They changed their zoning for their building.
I will admit from the zoning ordinance that I saw after it occurred, I did not realize that it was
not also in that area to not have that. So the 708 address, as you stated, is the only one more
recently in the last few years that has been approved to have changed to a three-tenant
building. The area you pointed to the north of your site is actually owned partially by the
housing authority, but there are also multiple lots that are owned privately. The use, as is
shown in the photos, does not represent the ownership of those lots. In terms of proximity
to Lancaster Avenue. It is clear in terms of the zoning map that areas that are abutting Lancaster
Avenue show the CMX2 designation. And as it goes further away from the very commercial district,
it goes to a more standard single-family home style, which is found in the vicinity of these
buildings i i don't see how your three three unit building will necessarily improve what is there
today uh i if with that logic of the entire street and opposing side turning into more of an rm1
designation there would be much more tenants to the parking as stated as being very ample
uh i am a long-term owner of my home across the street and most other tenants in this area also
are of a single family origin
i apologize i was not i i guess the point what could we you're saying you're against this project
yes sir i was not able to be at the community hearing i apologize i was actually at a different
hearing for a very different project but okay thank you all right well well thank you for
taking the time to close um is there anyone else in the virtual audience
no chair i see no more hands at this time mr chairman may i briefly respond or would you
prefer that i wait until after the planning commission oh i maybe should go before the
planning commission thank you mr chairman with with all due respect um to the the neighbor i
I think her testimony actually made really supported why this variance is
warranted. You know, as Salam mentioned,
he purchases property with a full plan in mind of redeveloping it.
And due to factors entirely outside of his control,
he was not able to do that.
And that is ultimately why the property has continued to sit in the
condition that he found it in. He didn't put it in that condition.
And he certainly took steps that were required by the city to at least render it safe for it to continue to sit.
So, you know, ultimately, you know, I think that that her testimony really provides additional support for for why this variance truly is extraordinary for this property in light of the timing and everything that occurred here.
And in addition, she also mentioned the fact that the structure next door also was granted a variance for this exact kind of development.
So we certainly appreciate the concerns, but, you know, those concerns really do not, in this case, take away from the true hardships that face this property.
Planning Commission.
Hi, this is Meg Kavanaugh for Planning Commission staff.
I'm subbing in for 2PM staff.
Could you spell, state your name again and spell for the court stenographer?
Yeah, it's Meg, M-E-G, Cavanaugh, C-A-V-A-N-A-G-H.
Where are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The city changed the zoning in Belmont in 2023 during a community-initiated map change.
there is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would
prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code the city planning commission
recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for three dwelling units um council
i'm going to hold this and it has nothing to do about like you being an officer of the court
i understand that and i i know you i know you would be be honest with us the council person
asked us to do this so i'm going to wait and what we're going to do is we'll we'll make sure
we get back to this as soon as we can okay thanks mr chairman if you wouldn't mind i
Thanks, Mr. Chairman. If you wouldn't mind, I would appreciate if you could put a time limit on it, because I have no idea when the West Belmont leader is going to be back on his duties. And I would appreciate if we could at least put a time limit on so that it doesn't just sit out indefinitely.
would appreciate if you could put a time limit on it because
So, I don't want to say two weeks, because we've got quite a few things I've already put for that. About three weeks.
That would be fine. We'll bring it back in three weeks.
It's closed for now, other than what we receive, and you will get a chance.
Everything's closed, but you will get a chance to respond to the RCO letter, okay?
Sounds great.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, just to clarify for the record that that vote would be then October 30th at 2 p.m.
That's it.
Thank you very much.
Number 15, MI 2024-005-133-2901 South Hampton Street.
Stephen Pollack is the attorney.
There is unanimous support from the Parkwood Civic Association.
Vote was 77 to 0.
Letter of non-opposition from Council Member O'Neill.
And a letter of support from State Representative Martina White.
Mr. Pollack.
Do we see Mr. Pollock's hand?
Good evening, everybody.
You stole my line.
I wish the Phillies would be as prolific as a 77 to nothing score, but right now it's
Yeah, okay.
Right now it's the bottom of the second.
It's still nothing, nothing.
Okay. Could you please state your name and spell for the court's knock for Mr. Pollock?
Hey, Stephen Pollack, P.O., LLOCK, like the street in South Philadelphia.
I represent the applicant.
The owners of the property are 313 Associates, LLC.
The operational entity is BK and Sun, Inc.
I have with me Mr. Eric Kurtz, who is the principal of both entities, since it's owned by his family.
Hold on one more minute.
right? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman. Our Vice Chair has a few questions
for you. Good afternoon, Counsel. Do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy? I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed
and required to proceed with this case for our days in advance of this hearing?
I believe we have. Thank you, Counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
thank you uh again mr chairman members of the board um which is my practice since as i said
i'm technologically challenged can i have andrew slutsky advance this so he can share
the screen on my behalf today sure that'd be great are we letting andrew in i think so
All he has to do is turn the screen on.
Andrew's going to share the screen.
I think he needs to be promoted to a panelist.
Yeah, I just have it.
It is loading.
And I now have access to share screen.
And share.
Here we go.
Okay, can I get confirmation?
That's all right.
Here we go.
It's up. We are up. So we have pre-marked exhibits A1 through A19, and I will, since the hour is late, and I know you still have a 330 list, I will dispense with reading everything into the record, and I will ask that the board incorporate all my exhibit lists, and then hopefully we'll accept all our documents as introduced, as presented, so therefore we will move on.
We have all your documents. Thank you.
Okay. This is a recycling facility, which I guess, depending on how you want to style it, the city looks at it as a junk dealer and a junkyard and building.
However, this is the Kurtz family has been next door at 2819 since 2007.
Then they moved to the current building in 2013 and have conducted for 11 years and the four years prior to the six years prior to that uninterrupted until recently there was an interpretation that they had to be they were considered to be a junk dealer.
They were considered to be a junk dealer. They are a recycler of non-furrous metals. They do not accept steel, iron, aluminum cans, or catalytic converters. Non-furrous metals, they don't take steel, and these are elements that are compounds found in the ground.
They are a recycler of non-furists.
So here's the building, as Exhibit 1, as Andrew shows you.
Then we'll go to 2.
This is in the Southampton Industrial Park up near the boulevard and Southampton Road where the armory is,
and a little bit north of where my favorite Nabisco used to be.
Here's a side yard with our adjacent property.
Another shot of the front of the building with a big setback.
Let's just rotate these.
Yeah, here we go.
And that shows that we will come clean. Martina White happens to be with her political, her state legislative office as a tenant in the front.
Go ahead, go back. And then what we do is we have scanners, cameras that take, go ahead, keep going, that take the, from contractors.
We have union contractors come. Because of our proximity to the industrial park, keep going through, we also have, we take the bullet butts from the police training facility that's right on Woodhaven Road.
We get from the glaziers who are in the park, as well as the tapers and painters, as well as from the apprentice program of the Steamfitters Local 420.
We get their waste materials that we can recycle.
So what we do is we do everything inside.
We're getting back to the rear where the property is, where the location of the business is, where those two doors are, the loading bays.
keep going just to show you
and you're going through all our
photos we're asking they'd be admitted
that's looking back towards Southampton
keep going
yeah keep going
that's another view of
the rear of the property we're
showing the loading bays keep going
here's the two loading
bays so the trucks come in the contractors
this is the fourth picture of the loading
bays yeah I know just we'll keep
going because we keep going we can go
just to show you how they come in, go back, keep going. We'll show you what goes on on the interior.
We don't use torches. We don't melt down anything. We've in a year, we've taken in 2 million pounds
worth of material. Hold on a second. This is one of the cameras. So we put everything on camera
so that we know who's there. We give everybody, we take a picture of their driver's license. We
take a picture and give them a receipt. So it's well documented. Keep going. This is just interior
shots to show you what we do with one of the lifts, trucks, an interior view, keep going.
And the kind of material we have, keep going. That's keep going. Keep going. Well, just to
give you a sense of what's going on in here, that's one of the compressors that we use.
So we don't store anything on the outside. This is the rear of the property. You can see that
There's nothing stored on the outside. So one of the specific standards that's involved with regard to this kind of a use is that you don't store any, you don't compress, you don't package, you don't shred, and we don't do any of those things or cut on the outside.
In fact, we'd be willing to, since we don't do those things, we have no problem with a proviso condition that would say no cutting, shredding, compressing, or packaging outside.
We are also sited because we're within 150 feet of a residential district.
Let's go to the map of the residential district.
I mean, of the district, the zoning map.
The board, I think, has seen enough of that.
It's at A12.
Here's the zoning map.
We're down here in this blue, the blue sort of, keep going over to the left, the blue rectangle here.
And right across the street from us is zoned residential.
But if you go look at it, go to the aerial photos that we have next at 13 and 14.
Here, yeah.
a 13 a and b can you zoom in a little all right here yeah here can you zoom in a little bit here's
where we are right across the street from us which is the zoned residential property is the wood haven
facility center that's been there for many many years but it's not residential zone it's not
residential properties it's been used by temple university over the years as a mental health
It's been used by Temple University over the years as a mental health facility and that kind of thing.
facility
We are close. We are more than 300 feet away from the residential property.
If you zoom out a little bit, you can see them to the lower right portion.
And they're more than 300 feet away.
So we believe that we fit the criteria for spacing from a use that is being zoned residential.
Behind us is the Elliott Lewis yard for their contracting company.
We believe that we've been here at this location for 13 years next door at 2819 for an additional six years, putting us at about 17 years.
We've not created any environmental overflows.
We haven't done anything that's detrimental to the community.
We don't allow we're not going to alter the essential characteristics of this neighborhood and allowing us to do what we've been doing all these years.
And we feel this is the least minimum variance that would allow us to relieve the hardship, given that we are existing in this building for and in this in this industrial park for over 17, about 17 years.
And we are existing and not have altered or essentially polluted anything in this neighborhood nor have had any complaints about what we how we've operated.
And we keep everything inside the building.
So with that, I would ask that all our records be accepted and exhibits be accepted.
I would like to call Eric Kurtz to come be raised as a panelist so we can have Eric.
I know he's there somewhere.
Do we see his hand?
Yes, I'm here.
Okay, there he is.
sir could you state your name and spell for the court's demography sure my name is eric
kurtz e-r-i-c-k-u-r-t-z you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i absolutely do please proceed mr pollack eric uh you were attentive and listened to
everything that was stated on the record so far uh yes i have and uh do you agree that what has
been stated is true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Yes, I do. And do you adopt that
as your testimony as if it had come out of your mouth today? Correct. Yes, I do. Okay. With that,
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, we would rest. Thank you. Questions from the board?
I'm still not sure what the material is that you're doing. It's not like a regular metal.
Right. Cheryl, Mrs. Gaston, if you go to our BK and Sons price sheet, A7, we go to A7.
Here we go. This is a typical price sheet of what we do. And this was as of July 19th of 2024.
and Eric could attest to this this is what Eric was paying per pound I believe right Eric for
different copper insulated wire oil aluminum and the miscellaneous things yeah so uh our
our customers are uh like general contractors electricians plumbers uh steam fitters uh and
my company is basically the middlemen in uh the recycling business we take it from them we process
it we cut it up we box it ship it uh and we sell it to where they melt it back down again
ah okay that's our process okay any other questions from the board
question or comment from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
this is your comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time tear planning commission
Hi, Chair, Meg Cavanaugh for Planning Commission staff.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the I-1 light industrial zoning at this location.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
This section of the industrial parking running on Southampton Road is a professional business park, not a heavy industrial park.
The proposed junk and salvage yard would be out of character with the block.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for junk and salvage yards and buildings.
We would say that in light of what the Planning Commission is saying,
keep in mind that for 17 years it has existed and operated the way it's been operating.
And there has never been anything other than they have a...
And there has never been anything other than they have a physical office of a state representative.
The other office is a physical fitness center that I got approval for several years back as part of this building because the building, the industrial park, they've had difficulties getting industrial tenants.
This is a very mild use considering that it's not what I would call a junkyard, but a recycling where they keep everything inside.
And as I said, if the board wants to give us a proviso so there's no cutting, shredding, compressing, or packaging outside, we will be very happy and content with such a proviso.
Thank you.
MI 2024-005-133-2901 Southampton Road.
I vote yes, proviso, all work to be done inside.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Hi Owen, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you very much, everybody.
And still nothing, nothing.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 2 p.m. case has not been called?
i see no hands at this time chair so we're going to take a five minute break
it looks to me like we only have one case left okay five minute break
please
good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be sharing the 330 list with me is our
Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member, Taya Wynn.
Also present is our Attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Here's our virtual format.
Proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting...
Kathleen Grady, I'm sorry, CBA Executive Director at Phyllis.gov.
For the sake of our court, court sonographer, all attorneys and witnesses should 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 question.
Finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All comments should be directed to zbaexecutivedirector at phila.com.
Here's our list for this afternoon.
Number one, MI-2023-000489-4400 North A Street.
That case is continued.
Number seven, MI-2023.
Mr. Chair, for that last case, I believe we have the attorney present.
It is the fifth listing.
Mr. Griffin?
Mr. Griffin
Griffin has been allowed to speak
yes can you hear me
yes could you please state your name and spell for the courts
sure John Griffin
G-R-I-F-F-I-N
wait a minute do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do, sir. Could you give an update
on this case for us, please? Sure. We were actually prepared to move forward tonight. We
were going to ask that the board keep the record open for a second meeting with the RCO. The RCO
had actually asked if we could request a continuance for that to happen. We have a meeting
set for November the 19th. In very, very brief, short order, there was opposition to our project
primarily because of liquor sales that would have occurred at this business. We have revised that.
We have informed the community that there will be no liquor sales. The liquor license will be
transferred to another property owned by the owner. And that, I think it's fair to say, generated
And that, I think it's fair to say, generated a new round of support once that issue was cleared up.
So we have a meeting set for November the 19th at the request of the RCO.
Griffin, we're going to continue this one more time, OK?
Yes, sir. Thank you.
So MI 2023, 000489, 4400 North A Street.
Cases continued.
Mark must be heard.
Number seven, MI 2023, 007208, 212 Diamond Street.
The cases continue.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands at this time, Terry.
Number two, MI 2023-002-468-624 Dudley Street.
No exhibits, third listing.
Is Chelsea Rizek here or V2 Properties?
No, Terry.
I see no one by that name.
and I also see no hands up on this side.
So this is the third listing.
On 410-24, there was a listing.
No one appeared.
So MI 2023-002-468-624 Dudley Street,
I vote to dismiss.
Jerome Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Kaneta Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Thia Nguyen, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
number eight mi 2024 001 514 2550 east clairefield street this is the second listing
and the listing was continued on 724 724 no one appeared um there has been no contact with the
rco samuel garan and ashley navarez please i see no one with their name in the audience here
so this is the second listing last time no one appeared so mi 2024 001 514 2550 east
clearfield street i vote to dismiss cheryl gaspin my vote is to dismiss
Tanetta Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Pia Nguyen, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
And number three, MI 2023-002-478-1220-28 North Front Street.
That case has been withdrawn.
Number four, MI-2023-003-440-1624 Napaul Street, Mohamed Montaber and Habib Hussain, are they in the audience?
No, Chair. I see no one by that name.
so mr chair and i just wanted to note that we received an email um from mohammed montahar
and it was not clear from the email this was back this was about a month ago um whether there was a
request for withdrawal or a continuance um because they just indicated they were not ready to move
ahead and wanted to cancel the hearing instructions were given to request a withdrawal if that's what
they wanted and um that we have not received a request for withdrawal so i would just recommend
one final continuance for this one in case that in case the request was for continuance and not
for withdrawal thank you so mi 2023 003 440 1624 napple street cases continue mark must be heard
And then number six. No, I'm sorry. Number. Yeah. Number. Six here.
MI 2023 007 126 469 Oriana Street. This case has been withdrawn.
uh mr chair we haven't received a formal letter of withdrawal i recommend continuing this um must
be heard and so the staff can give instructions there were some emails from the attorney indicating
that it would be withdrawn but um there was not is this demarco demarco richard demarco uh yes
am i it's been it's been it's been resolved but the the attorney has not submitted a letter
withdrawal so we we just need to follow up with her mi 2023 007 126 469 arena
MI 2023-007-126-469 Arena Street.
Cases continued.
Mark must be heard.
And we come to our one case here.
MI 2023-004-627-4710 Warrington Avenue.
Alan Knopson.
There's a letter of support from Cedar Park neighbors.
ALLEN NOCHEMSON WILL BE REJOINING US AS A PANELIST.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ALLEN NOCHEMSON.
NOCHEMSON, COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOUR CLIENT RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPERTY?
YEAH, MY CLIENT IS 4710 WARRINGTON LLC, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY,
And I have with me today, Mattel, a man, its member.
Notice you're looking up.
Are you looking at the Phillies game?
I know you're a fan.
I know you're a fan, Alan.
It's first and third.
One out.
We scored.
We're doing good.
That's going up in the air, Alan.
I knew you were doing that.
Can I share that screen?
We can all agree that you support the Phillies.
Let us please handle this.
our vice sure has a few questions for you sir do you agree to wait to read another refuse or
stipulate to his accuracy i do i i do but i do have to say if i if i curse or anything like that
it's not on you guys all right uh have emailed them all the required documents and exhibits
that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
uh yes all right please proceed and share the screen let's go phillies
let's go phillies we all can agree on that as a city all right um so i'm here to present 4710
warrington avenue this is pretty straightforward uh it i have the notice of refusal here this is
an rsa3 property we're proposing to put a triplex here um you know there is use nearby actually
next door which you know has multi-family use uh we did meet with the community uh we have a letter
support from the Cedar Park neighbors, which unanimously either supported or are non-opposition
to this project. Again, nearby multifamily. I have maps of the area, photographs of the property,
simple floor plans, our RCO meeting notice. Again, my client did this herself until this point
because she owns the property as an LLC. I'm taking over here just for the hearing,
But, you know, she sent out the notice.
Our application for appeal that she filed, her deed to the property showing that she owns the property as 4710 Warrington LLC.
And then finally, the certificate of tax clearance.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mattel virtually raise her hand, be sworn in, and I have a few questions for her.
RSA 3 property, we're only looking to put a duplex here.
Again, not out of character.
Next door, there is a duplex.
Letter of support, again, based on the description, everyone was in support of this.
This is a very sophisticated part of the city, Cedar Park.
I find that this group will flesh things out.
If there's issues, they'll let us know.
So given that they unanimously either supported or non-opposition speaks volumes about the merits of this project.
And there you see the vote.
Then nearby RSA multifamily, as I said, next door, is allowed for, you know, had history for two units.
Then nearby on 48th Street, 818 South 48th Street, also multifamily, 826 South 48th Street, multifamily.
And this is 801 South 47th Street, multifamily.
Maps to the area.
Yeah. We're near commercial corridor on Baltimore Avenue. We're near like we border a lot of the multifamily or multi-unit zoning designations such as CMX2, RM1.
So it wouldn't be out of character to have like multifamily here either. And again, commercial corridor means also, you know, public transportation.
Photographs of the property, proof of note of posting the note at the orange notice poster work.
This is Warrington Avenue to the right of the property, Warrington Avenue to the left of the property.
My team made simple floor plans here based on the site conditions here.
But you walk into this porch area, this little vestibule area, you make a left.
But you walk into this porch area, this old vestibule area, you make a left, you have a living room, dining room, kitchen, open floor plan, you go and then you go up a flight of steps, there's the two bedrooms and a bath.
Instead, you go up and then you have a living room, let me just minimize this a little bit, a living room and two bedrooms as well, and then there's a third bedroom on the second floor for that unit as well.
RCO meeting notice.
The addresses that the notice was mailed to are application for appeal that my client filed along with the notice of refusal, the project information form, the deed to the property showing the 4710 Warrington LLC as the owner of the property.
And then finally, the Certificate of Tax Clarence, where it shows that she actually has a sizable balance in a positive way of credit, so she's tax compliant.
With that being said, I would ask that Mattel virtually raise her hand and be sworn in.
Hi, could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
hello hi could you please state your name and then spell it for the court stenographer
yes hi could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer
sure lipal patel d-i-p-a-l last name p-a-t-e-l
where are firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes please proceed counsel yes you heard everything i had to state today about this
zoning matter yes uh is it true and correct yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yes
thank you questions questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney
um just briefly mr knockamson is is there any parking at the property this is an rsa3
uh there is not um you know in terms of that um if there was a with the parking requirement it
would be allied character to have parking um on the property itself it's landlocked there is you
know it's not wide enough to have a drive aisle so that would be our hardship and there is a lot
across the street yeah we're just saying in terms of parking on street parking yeah on the property
yes yes okay no thank you i just wanted to clarify because it looks like that refusal was missed
thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no news at this time chair planning commission
thank you chair meg cavanaugh for planning commission staff the comprehensive plan
recommends no change the existing rsa3 residential single-family zoning at this location there is no
unique condition that prevents the property from being used in strict conformance with the zoning
code the city planning commission use variance for two family use um mr chair can i just respond
just quickly um this is a rather sizable lot almost 2500 square feet it's not out of character
to have multifamily nearby, which in fact, there's one next door, and we're near a commercial
corridor. This is a rather sophisticated neighborhood group who is in unanimous support
of this project. Thank you. MI 2023, 004-627-4710, Warrington Street, I vote yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes
Thank you, Mr. Nothamson
Thank you, go Phillies
Did they score, by the way?
They did, they're up one zip
They could have scored more, but that's okay
One zip
Is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose case has not been called?
I see no means at this time, Chair
Thanks, everybody
A lot of work done today
all right thank you all thank you good rest of the week thank you bye everyone