Thank you.
okay chair we had 30 attendees we can start when you wish thank you very much good morning my name
is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's EVA hearings. With me is Carol
Tenere, our Vice Chair. Present, Mr. Chair. Ismael Shaheed, our Board Secretary. Not here
yet, Chair. He should jump in shortly. Okay. Thomas Holliman, our Board Member. I know
he's here he is here chair yeah and it is this this is here too he was just with us and james
snell our board member present mr chairman sorry mr chairman i had problems i'm present
and also here is our executive director tanya sunkett and our board attorney hillary emerson
before we begin here's our virtual format be advised the proceedings are being recorded
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philip.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before I testify.
If you are participating in my phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548, leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Stumpkin.
We have a few announcements we want to read before we start.
Effective July 18, 2022, if a case is continued, attorney or applicant moving party, the attorney
or applicant has 90 days from the date the case is to continue to either request a new
hearing date, ask for an extension of moving party status, or withdraw the case.
If the ZBA staff is not contacted by the end of the 90-day period, the case will be automatically
and elicited for a new hearing. Please note, extensions for moving party status must be sent
to the Executive Director, Tanya Sunket, with the Board Attorney, Hillary Emerson, copied.
Two, the ZBA staff is currently sending out letters to listed applicants on appeals filed
prior to 2019. If the case has been pending at a whole status, if an applicant or their attorney
does not contact the ZBA staff to discuss the next steps for their case within the time period
stated in the letter, the case will be considered abandoned administratively closed. Questions about
either of these policies should be directed to the Executive Director Tanya Sunkett and the Board
Attorney Hillary Emerson. I'm going to go over continuances, but Pauline, will you try to contact
Ishmael? He's having a hard time. He keeps getting kicked out. Sure, Tara. Will do.
Let's look at our continuances for today.
Number eight, MI-2022-002-559-2238 North 4th Street.
That case is continued.
And number nine, MI 2021-004-829-5604-06 Utah Street.
That case is continued attorney moving parties.
Does anybody have in the virtual audience have comments or statements relative to those two cases?
Good morning again, Chair.
good morning again chair i see no hands at this time thank you very much
I see no hearing.
and number three mi 2022
002 233 5607 to 13 germantown avenue request from the can from the council woman bass's office for
continuing because of the coordinating rco needs another meeting is attorney brickland
in the audience
miss brickland can you please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hello hi good morning counsel do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do all right there's a request for continuing
for this case to have another rco meeting uh yes we understand that we did have an rco meeting
but none of the near neighbors um were present however mr chair this is a commercial area the
near neighbors um are all businesses uh the rco members are not um anywhere the rcos are not near
there and and just one last thing if you will indulge me the applicant is here and he did
get a petition signed which he's uh prepared to offer from the near neighbors from the actual
businesses supporting so it's a certificate of a special counsel counsel listen we're going to
continue this will be marked must be tried the next time okay and what is the date that that
i'm sorry i'm sorry this is tanya chair may we please have for the spelling of her full name
sure spell your full name please counsel s-h-o-s-h-a-n-a uh b-r-i-c-k-l-i-n
all right thank you and you you so you understand this case is being continued
will be marked must be tried if you have any issues about when it will be listed you'll have
to contact the office okay okay thank you thank you are there any other requests for continuing
which is for the this morning's cases chair we have a jessica khali miss khali can you please
unmute yourself or wait for the chair hi i'm new to this i i i good morning could you state your
name and spell for the court reporter please jessica kaylee k-a-h-l-e right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth always yes oh and what case
do you have um i don't have a case i'm uh i live on a street that has a case and i i'm new to this
but the zoning hearing with i was told is at 9 30 this morning i'll say so you're when we call that
case you will have an opportunity to uh make comment okay oh so i have to stay on the zoom
all day stay on the zoom call until until we call the case you don't have a listing of when they
will come up um can we continue ma'am ma'am you're gonna have to we don't have we have a listing of
this morning's cases when that's called you will have an opportunity thank you are there any other
requests for continuances? There are no hands at this time, Chair. Any requests for withdrawal?
I see no hands at this time, Chair. Thank you very much. We're going to go
to our add-on list. MI 2022-004-977-2600 Hagrid Street. This is a request for reconsideration.
i vote no carol tanari my vote is no mr chair um sorry can we use uh no to reconsideration
and rehearing i'm sorry i forgot to put the full language on there okay for request for
reconsideration and rehearing i vote no carol tanari my vote is no thomas holliman my vote
no to reconsideration and rehearing. James Snell, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing. Mr. Chair, do you want me to
revote that as no to reconsideration and rehearing? Thank you, that's fine. Thank you.
Our number two case on this list, MI-2022-003-345-6995 Heachan Street, that's a resumption hearing. Here's an update. Due to the delay in the receipt of the hearing transcripts, the closing statements...
Due to the delay in the receipt of the hearing transcripts, the closing statements for each party are now due by Wednesday, September 14th at 5 p.m.
At this time, the Board is still planning to vote on this matter on Wednesday, September 28th at 9.30 a.m.
Going to our regular list, MI-2022-002-561-2705, Black Lake Place.
Raymond Derizio is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from Parkwood Civic Association and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Brian O'Neill.
Mr. DiRizio, can you please raise your hand?
Chair, Mr. DiRizio is coming back in as a panelist now. Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Raymond Dorizio, R-A-Y-M-O-N-D-D-O-R-I-Z-I-O.
My address is 2 Penn Center, Suite 520-19102.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Joe Ritchie.
He runs Ritchie Transport.
where he is the owner of that business
and he leases the property.
And our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning, Mr. DiRizio.
Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet
with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO,
and do you have a letter?
Yes, and we have, and I believe it's attached to that packet that was sent in.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you. Spare with me one moment. I'm going off my iPad here. Sorry.
okay so 2705 black lace place it's um basically a business my client's been running
for several years he's looking to legalize the use of it uh he is in sort of an isolated spot
in the Northeast where it's a business center. Here was the refusal. He does vehicle maintenance
and repair, but it's basically to his own fleet. He's contracted by AAA to repair vehicles on the
roadside. So he has, I believe it's about eight to 10 vehicles that go out and service people's
broken down cars. So when he has his vehicles to repair, he takes them to his shop, which is suite
300 at this location and he repairs them. He has told me that once in a while when he gets calls
from some folks that are older, they usually come to his shop to do like a battery change
which takes maybe a half hour or so, but he generally does not have any cars that
need repairs that are outside on the property. So he doesn't have a
a lot of use for parking spots but he does have parking spots and they're used for his vehicles
that's proof of mailing this is my client's uh lease agreement he just recently renewed it in
august he's been at this location for several years um let's scroll through that he also
So these are plans of the location.
It's a large building.
I'm going to get to the photos, which may be a little more indicative.
Again, he got unanimous support.
So this is a photo of the property.
There's no residences around it.
It's isolated.
There's businesses.
There's other repair facilities in this location.
There's a union hall across the street.
basically open space not many residences here here's a copy of his tax clearance
so essentially he's seeking to legalize that use so that he can run his business
and do his roadside service I believe my client may be on I know he was at his uncle's funeral
this morning so he may be on but yeah I believe he would adopt my testimony if he's out there
you can get them on there, but we would submit this packet in our submissions and ask for the variants.
we would submit this packet in our submissions and ask for the variance.
Let's check the CVs in the audience.
If he's not, we'll take the attorney's testimony.
Thank you.
Mr. D'Rizzo, what's your client's name?
His name is Joe Ritchie, R-I-C-C-I.
Mr. Ritchie, can you please raise your virtual hand?
this is the first time he was using zoom there's a button on your screen
joe if you're out there and you just hit the hand button or touch the hand button please
council you're in the office of the court we'll take your testimony
thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comment questions or comments from the virtual audience
I've seen no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good morning, Chair Bergman.
This is Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
My name is spelled H-E-G-A-R-T-Y.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed.
Thank you.
Good morning, Board members.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing I-1 industrial zoning at this location.
Typically, this use is permitted in Iowan Industrial Zoning, but for an overlay that exists in this part of the city.
The proposed use is consistent with previous uses of this building and with the physical configuration of the structure.
And so the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI 2022-002561-2705, Black Lake Place, I vote yes.
Carol Tannery, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, have a good day.
Thank you.
Number two, MI 2022-002-381-5437 Woodland Avenue.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Southwest District Services.
looking for an RCO letter.
Chair, Mr. DeMarco is coming back in as a panelist now.
I'm here. Good morning, everyone, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Hi. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Richard DeMarco, D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
My client is Steve Gordon, and he's the principal of the owner entity.
Okay. Our Vice Chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just wanted to interject that we did receive a letter of support from Southwest District Services for this case.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. DeMarco. Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, yes, I can.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral,
photos, and plans five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, yes to all of the above.
Thank you.
You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Yeah, hopefully I can be brief.
We have unanimous support from the RCO.
I did want to show you the street view so you could see the challenging nature of the project
and the property. It's this lot here indicating on my screen. First of all, can everybody see my
screen? Yes. Thank you. And you can see you have a very large billboard right to the right of the
property. And then there's an open parking lot on the left, not the most desirable location. So
the two variances that we're looking for, members of the board and Mr. Chairman, are
we're just a little bit short for the third residential unit the use is otherwise permitted
it's a mixed use we have um an open uh vacant uh storefront that we're proposing along with
um three units above um show you some photos and so the relief is not uh too extreme it's
really dimensional in nature let me show you the refusal um while i'm going through this i'll ask
steve gordon to raise his hand virtually i'm just going to have him adopt my testimony in a moment
but there's your refusal you can see we have a little bit of an open area variance um again we
want to have a decent number of units and we want to have them not be too overly large uh so that
Have them not be too overly large so that they're acceptable and marketable in that particular zip code.
there um
As you can see, Woodland Avenue is a, you know, a mixed use, a lot of commercial, a lot of unusual uses, but it's a commercial location.
So the use is appropriate for the area.
Our floor plans, let me get that up.
Here we go.
so we're going to have trash storage in every unit there is actually rear yard access
for the tenants but we did put trash closets in the upper units just in case
we were unable to because we do have 100% lock coverage it's built as there's no side yard so
we can't assume that there will be future rear yard access for all the tents but we did just
in case put trash ventilated trash closets in each unit um and let's see we i guess that's about it
let me have steve raise his hand virtually here's the rco letter unanimous vote in favor this is a
this individual is a local uh individual born and raised in southwest philly and he's uh just
hoping to develop his own community uh steve are you with us and here's the unanimous vote from the
RCO. They like the idea that a young
businessman from the neighborhood
is going to be developing this property.
Mr. Gordon, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair.
He's going to swear
you in, Steve.
Y'all can hear me? Yes.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter,
please? Yes.
Stephen Gordon.
S-T-E-V-E-N
G-O-R-D-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Steve, did you hear my factual statements, and are they true and accurate, and can you adopt that as your formal testimony today?
Yes, yes, they are, and yes, I can.
And you're from the area, right?
You're born and raised in Southwest Philly?
Yes, I'm born and raised right on the same corner that I'm trying to, you know, build this new property.
And it would be very difficult for you to try and develop this with only two residential units, as I stated. Is that correct?
Yes, because of the way that, you know, the economy is going.
So I was trying to stretch it out so it would be, you know, profitable.
But it would also be conducive for, you know, people moving in.
And so it'll be fair for both sides, my side and the tenants moving in and also the people in the neighborhood.
And at the RCO meeting, you promised to work with the neighborhood on finding a good as of right commercial tenant for that space, correct?
Yes, correct.
And we will do that. All right, Mr. Chair, that's my question.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
On the commercial space, will we have trash storage?
Yes, you can see here, Mr. Shahid, there's a very large utility area.
There's actually room in the basement for trash storage for the commercial tenant.
And the commercial tenant also will have access to the rear yard as well.
But there's plenty of room.
There's a full basement area for either storage or the like.
And I don't think you're going to see a restaurant there anyway, Mr. Shahid.
But even if we did need a restaurant, I believe we would need a, I believe we might need a special exception, but don't quote me on that.
But anyway, bottom line is plenty of room for trash storage in the basement for the commercial space and rear yard access as well.
Thank you, Counselor.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from CMX2 to RM1
at this location. We agree that the proposed dimensional variance is minimal and does not
conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code. However, this is not simply a
dimensional variance case. There's also a request for an additional dwelling unit beyond what is
allowed in the cmx2 zoning district this is a use variance and the applicant's hardship claim here
is purely economic we feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there's a unique
physical condition to support a hardship claim for the proposed dwelling unit count and then we also
note for the board that the applicant is sidestepping the existing zoning bonus program
three dwelling units would be permitted as a matter of right in exchange for provision of an
affordable unit that's deeded affordable, but the applicant's asking the board to grant that
but the applicant's asking the board to grant that additional unit without providing the required
additional unit without providing the required public benefit.
public benefit. We recommend that the board grant the dimensional variance, but deny the use
variance for a permitted maximum of two dwelling units. May I in response, Mr. Chairman?
If this were going to be, I just heard, I thought I'm confused by that testimony. The Planning
Commission says that they want it to be arm one. So that would allow at least three units,
if not four i believe the the lot is big enough to have four residential units so i'm not sure
why that doesn't make a lot of sense to me but we would get three units easily with the rm1
so i'm not sure about that but anyway i think the case is clear
yeah to clarify the position is based on the refusal that's been issued by lni
this is currently zoned cmx2 which permits one uh commercial unit and two dwelling units the
The applicant has asked for an additional dwelling unit which could be achieved by participating
in the mixed income housing program.
Thank you.
MI 2022 002 381 5437 Woodland Avenue, I vote yes with proviso.
Use registration for commercial space required prior to occupancy.
carol tenary my vote is yes with proviso thomas halliman my vote is yes with proviso
james snell yes with proviso ishmael shaheed yes with proviso thank you thank you for your
number four mi 2022 002 576 2056 north bodine street henry clinton is the attorney
letter of support from the NARS Square Community Alliance.
Mr. Clinton, can you please raise your hand?
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning, Mr. Clinton.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
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?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Sure. My client is Leo Isilovich, I-O-S-I-L-E-V-I-C-H, and he is a principal of the owner's LLC.
uh may i say one thing there's three properties that were reviewed by norris square community
and i submitted all three as one entry yeah i think uh council we've talked about this before
i think we're going to hear them all separate because of the locations where they are sounds
sounds good okay okay mr chair if i could yeah if i could just jump in um mr clinton unfortunately
the other bodine street case which is right next door is on the 330 list and because of posting
requirements we couldn't move it to another list and the reese street property is a few blocks
away so we felt that that was not appropriate to hear with the bodine case on the 930 list
thank you thank you henry for looking to try to do that um our vice chair has a few questions
Good morning, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy
of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance
of this hearing and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Okay, you may proceed and show your screen.
Thank you.
Is that visible, Mr. Neri?
It is, it is.
Okay. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Henry Clinton for the owner of the property, 2020 Reese LLC. And as Mr. Chairman mentioned, this is 2054 Bodine Street. My presentation package includes two other properties, but we're going to concentrate on 2054 North Bodine Street.
My package contains exhibits AA through A10, which I ask to be admitted into evidence as we proceed.
This is my appearance statement, and this is the refusal for Bodine Street.
Basically, this is an RSA 5 zoning district, and we're asking for a two-family...
Sorry, Mr. Clinton, I'm just interrupting.
2056 North Bodine is the one that's on the 930 list, not 2054.
not 2054. Thank you. I know it's confusing. I'm sorry. I can't correct it. I'm glad you're
Thank you. I know it's confusing.
watching over my shoulder, Ms. Emerson. That's good news. So let me retrace my steps. This is
2056 North Bowdine Street, and my presentation package includes the same exhibits that I
referenced previously, and I'll ask that they be admitted into evidence in this case. We have two
refusals. One is a use refusal because this is an RSA 5 zoning district. We're asking for two
family dwelling. The other is a dimensional refusal. We're about seven percent off on the
occupied area, which I would consider de minimis as we proceed. We have a letter of support from
NARA Square Community Alliance. You can see 2056 was voted on and there was basically overwhelming
support for the project. There was no letter of explanation other than there was just a straight
vote. So this is 2054, but we're talking about 2056, which is the adjacent property in this
aerial photograph. You can see that this block is one that has many, many vacant lots. And the
feeling of the community was having some development, or perhaps spur on additional
development in this RSA 5 zoning district. Additionally, across the street, American
Street is right here to the east, but across the street, this is also an occupied lot now,
but it's all commercial, as you'll see in my next photograph. So we have a situation where
we're looking for multifamily use toward the end of this block, directly across the street
from a commercial establishment.
This is a photograph looking south.
Again, here is where the commercial establishment on American Street has expanded
and usurped the ground on the east side of Bodine Street.
2056 is right here, right before the telephone pole,
which appears in this photograph on the right-hand side.
these are the plans for
you just get the right set of plans here these are the plans for 2056 bodine street
we basically have a unit on the basement in the first floor and then we have a unit on the second
and the third floor each are three bedrooms two baths the unit in the basement in the first floor
as rear yard access for open space
and the proposed unit on the second and third floor
as access on the rooftop deck.
This is the floor plan, again,
indicating three bedrooms on the first and second floor,
excuse me, basement on the first floor,
and then the same duplication of three bedrooms
and two baths on the second and third floor
with the rooftop deck.
We have our tax certification, the additional pro forma documents that one would see in an application such as this.
I just want to point out to the board, besides the fact that half the block across the street is commercial,
as you can see, American Street is to the east. This is commercial.
The property is also a mere two vacant lots from the corner, all of which is surrounded by an RM1 designation.
So the proposed use is kind of consistent with the area, not necessarily that side of the block, but with the surrounding area.
Indeed, our notice letters to all the community.
So in summation, I would just like to argue that the dimensional variance is de minimis.
The two-family use in an RSA 5 zone is somewhat consistent with the surrounding area.
As I say, 2056 is actually two in from the corner.
2054 is the third one.
So forgive my confusion there.
But again, we have RM to the west.
We have commercial to the east, and we're a mere two lots in off the corner.
It's not an overuse of the property.
The lot is fairly large.
The community group is looking for additional development on the block to spur development.
And at future times, if future projects come before the board or before the community where they want to press for single family, they're certainly entitled to do so.
With that, I'd like to rest and ask that my client be unmuted and permit to adopt my testimony.
And I'll accept questions, obviously, from the board.
Mr. Clinton, what's your client's name?
Mr. Clinton, what's your client's name?
Leo Isilovich, I-O-S-I-L-E-V-I-C-H.
Leo Isilovich.
Mr. Isilovich, can you please raise your hand?
Mr. Isilovich, can you please unmute yourself or wait for the chair?
hi could you please state your name could you please state your name and spell for the court
reporter hi my name is uh leo islevich uh it's spelled l-e-o and my last name is i-o-s-i-l-e-v-i-c-h
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do proceed counsel mr islevich were you on the call when i just presented the case
Yes, I was.
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
And Mr. Isolovic, during the community meeting, did you advise the community that these homes would be all for sale and not for rent?
And then that was certainly a factor which led them to support this project?
I did.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience here we have sloan folks mr folks you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair please
good morning mr folks could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
good morning chairman bergman uh and cba board my name is sloan folks s-l-o-a-n-e-f-s in fire o-l-k-s
representing the Office of Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sanchez from 508 City Hall.
You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do so, sir. Thank you.
Proceed.
The applicants, having met with the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of support,
Council Member Sanchez has no opposition to this variance request. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Fuchs. Thank you very much for calling in.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I've seen all of the hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Good morning, Chair Bergman, members of the board.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia State Planning Commission.
In 2021, the zoning map was amended to RSA 5 on this block in accord with a neighborhood
remapping process.
The intent of the single-family zoning designation, as explained during that remapping process,
was to encourage single-family infill on these narrow blocks consistent with their historical
development patterns we agree that the dimensional variance is minimal and does not conflict with the
purpose and spirit of the zoning code however with regard to the use variance the applicant
has not supported the hardship claim with evidence of unique physical conditions of the property
and i'll remind the board that there's no legal distinction between ownership units and rental
units and no such restriction can be enforced city planning commission recommends that the
board deny the use variants. Thank you. MI 2022-002576-2056-Dorth Bodine Street. I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no. James Stel, my vote is yes.
Ismail Zahid, my vote is no. Thank you. You have your three votes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
members of the board number six mi 2022 002 278 314 pemberton street gregory shapiro and christian
daniello um letter of support from the queen queen village neighbors association
and letter of non-opposition from councilman member squilla mr shapiro can you please raise
raise your hand. He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair. Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Shapiro. Good morning. Could you state your name and spell it for the court
reporter, please. Gregory Shapiro, G-R-E-G-O-R-Y, Shapiro, S-H-A-P-I-R-O. Right. Do you swear
for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Our vice chair has a few
questions for you. This is an application for the erection of a roof deck and roof deck access
structure above the third floor of an existing attached building for use as a single family
for use as a single family household and there are two zoning and there are two zoning refusals
household
and there was two
the roof decks must be set back at least five feet from the extreme front of the building
line closest to the front lot line whereas the proposed roof deck has zero foot setback from
the front building line the second refusal is maximum building height allowed 38 feet proposed
is 40.167. Now I have to ask you this. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required
documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and or plans
five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
I believe all those are yes. Okay, you may proceed and share your screen.
i'm confused about a point here hang on i'm sitting here with my wife
um can i mute and stop the video for a second to have an offline chat
yeah the architect i believe is supposed to be the one presenting these
now the architect can't present you have to present now if the architect's online he can
bring up the
presentation
and you can talk off of that, but the
architect can't testify. Is that okay?
She is. Tina is in the...
Okay. And if she has the ability
to bring it up for you to testify, then
that's fine.
I believe she does. Tina Geary. I don't know
how we get her... He's coming back
in as a panelist now, Chair.
I'm allowed to share my screen.
Yes, could you just share your screen and let him testify off the screen, please.
We can't speak as the architect.
He's going to do the presentation.
Is there a reason why?
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, ma'am.
Do you have the presentation to put up?
Okay, so we're going to mute you.
and then the applicant will go forward with the presentation thank you kindly
and this is hillary i just wanted to to clarify that the architect is not the applicant in this
case the applicant is the property owner so you do not have standing to testify before the board
that is why you cannot present unless you are called as a witness by the applicant who is
testifying for their attorney. I am the applicant. No, you are the applicant maybe on the application
before L&I, but for zoning board purposes, you are not the applicant. It is only the person
who has an interest in the property, which is the owner or a tenant. Thank you.
Can I call Tina as a witness to do this on my behalf? Because I was not
I think Gregory listen to me I think what she should do she should put it up
and all you have to do is talk off the screen and we'll talk you through this
okay great okay sure just have her put it up this is Hillary if there are questions that
the board asks that you cannot answer because they're technical at that point you could call
your architect to answer but you need to give the presentation initially okay I will do my best
I apologize.
You'll do great.
Okay, so where do I see it?
Do you have it up?
Are you not seeing the refusal?
I don't see it yet.
We're actually seeing the appeals calendar right now.
I think the wrong tab is highlighted, maybe.
all right we see the refusal we're okay okay we understand that go on
so these are she has the drawings up Gregory why don't you tell us what you want to do
I mean basically what we're trying to do is create more outside livable space for our family
and so we want to put a roof deck up on top of our house that has as much usable space as possible
right okay
do you have pictures of what the property looks like now
okay so one is that your house there yes it is okay
yes it is okay so you want to go on top of that yes and we have uh somewhat of a unique layout
so you want to go
because we're kind of a we're a double wide but it doesn't have as much depth so that's why we're
having to build it the way we are because really we don't have much room to go back right okay i
got you. All right. Go back to the photos one more time.
Other places on the box have decks? Yes, there's actually a handful of them that have decks that
do come all the way to the edge. And I think probably for a very similar reason. Okay, great.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no heads at this time.
And my understanding is Queen Village Newark, Neighbors Association supported it,
and there's no opposition from the councilman, too.
Is that correct?
Yes, that is correct.
I'm sorry.
All right.
Thank you.
Perfect.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, the zoning map was amended in this area in 2016 in accord with recommendations
from the comprehensive plan, but this lot was not changed.
The property, as the applicant has noted, is unusually shallow, and so strict compliance
with the dimensional requirements would not be practical.
we recommend that the board grant these variances. Thank you. MI 2022 002278 314
Pemberton Street. I vote yes. Carl Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes. Thank you, Gregory. Thank you very much.
number seven mi 2022 002 211 24 2142 east sesquihanna avenue martina reich is the owner applicant
she's coming back in as a panelist now sheriff okay one minute let's see a letter of opposition
from Councilman Squilla, and letter of opposition from the Fishtown Neighbors Association.
I'm unmuting myself. I'm starting my video. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning.
Hi. Our vice chair has a few questions for you. Sure. Good morning. Good morning. First,
have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, or referral,
photos and your plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with
the rco and do you have a letter yes to all of the above with one clarification we were asked
after the receipt of the packet to that the that the original submission to ellen i um receive
comments of the of the changes that the current proposed um plans were received and all of the
rest of the supporting document was received five days excuse me chair pardon me chair this is the
court reporter uh was the witness sworn i don't believe i was i thought she was but i'll we'll do
it again that's not a problem state your name and spell for the court reporter martina research my
last name is spelled r-i-s like in sam e-c-h do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes proceed okay martina this is an application for the creation
of a surface of surface parking on an existing vacant lot for the erection of a fence wall
greater than four feet along the front lot line for two non-accessory off-street surface parking
spaces size and location is shown on the plan there are three use refusals one is the non-accessory
off-street parking is prohibited in the rsa5 residential zoning district two where off-street
parking is provided accessible parking spaces complying with icc slash ansi a117.1 shall be
provided. It's the first time I've come across all of that. Three, whereas non-accessory
it's the first time i've come across all of that um three whereas non-accessory parking two spaces
must meet required drive aisle requirements and no drive aisle is proposed there is one zoning
refusal any fence located nearer to the lot line than the required building setback or the actual
distance of the building from the lot line paren whichever is greater end of paren shall be no more
than four feet in height and no more than 50% opaque and a solid 10-foot fence wall is proposed.
So now you may proceed. Okay so let me share my screen so I can show you guys what the plans are.
Let me do this one and let me minimize the presentation for you guys. All right so
So, this is the existing plans that have been submitted.
Let me address in reverse order, let me start with the fence.
So we had originally proposed a taller fence and upon comments and concerns from the RCO,
we have shrunk the fence down.
This is in line with the existing cinder block wall that exists on the property.
I own the adjacent property of 2140, and these two lots have existed together since the construction of the home on this lot.
It has always been an accessory lot for this property.
However, they've been deeded separately.
So we have shrunk the lot.
Another concern from the RCO was that this may pose a risk to pedestrians.
we've included now here a pedestrian alert system. In addition, my concern about a four-foot wall is
that it will create security risk because this is our yard and our privacy and safety concerns
for the property really precludes us from creating a four-foot translucent, 50% translucent wall here.
trying to be mindful of the neighborhood which i love and the aesthetics and and beautification of
the neighborhood we would like to have it mostly opaque with a trifold door that would open again
with safety pedestrians in mind and an alert system and we're proposing that we put planters
on top to to give us a tiny bit of extra height without um compromising um security but this would
be trans um obviously not opaque um so that's the first concern the second concern if you look over
here is that there's no dry bile the reason why these zoning my understanding is that the reason
why these zoning um uh refusals are here is because these lots are deeded separately they
are considered to be this is considered to be almost commercial use and so for commercial use
you would need a dry vial but this would be personal parking for myself and my fiancee soon
to be husband on sunday um for us to to park on the street as the density is increasing in the
neighborhood um and then the final one was that accessory parking is not allowed um in this zoning
However, I believe that if these two were deeded together, which would be very complicated
with my existing mortgage, that this would perhaps be a buy right accessory parking.
I think that those are the three biggies.
Could you show us the photos of what it looks like now?
yes sure let me close this one and
apologies
not that one please
Where did they go? Did I close it? Uh-oh. Oh, I know where it is. Here we go.
Sorry, I accidentally closed the browser.
this one nope the next one
this all pulled up i apologize
here all right so this is looking at the property this cinder block wall here is the wall in
question this is it more front on so this is the this is my home that i'm currently and you're
going to make a part you're going to park two cars there too right that that would be the idea it
take two you would need a curb cut yes which which was approved by streets however it was
denied by zoning because this is being treated as a separate um a separate lot and here's it from
an angle here's it uh here this is my home and another parking um accessory parking that is
on the same block and then here again is is the lot and the final photo here
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the board, in 2015, this block was rezoned from I-2 industrial to RSA 5 residential in accord with the recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use of this lot for off-street parking conflicts with the comprehensive plan's proposed residential land use at this location.
the use also displaces housing and decreases pedestrian safety while offering no benefit to
car owners other than the applicants as at least two on-street parking spaces would need to be
removed to accommodate the standard curb cut being proposed lastly parking access on this street
frontage is prohibited regardless of how the property is deeded because parking must be from
a shared drive aisle or rear street in this zoning district city planning commission recommends that
board deny the variance. If the board's inclined to grant, we would recommend that the board add
a condition limiting the term of the variance to three years. MI 2022 002211 2142 East Susquehanna.
I vote yes with proviso, revised plans, three pages, stamped by ZBA on August 31st, and this would go until October 1st of 2025.
Carol Tenneri, yes with provisos.
Thomas Holman, yes with provisos.
James Snell, yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes, we're provisional.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2022, 002215, 15035 Payton Street, Cyril and Tina Costello,
letter of support from Somerton
Civic Association
a letter of
non-opposition from Councilman
Brian O'Neill
Mr. Evers coming back
in as a panelist now Chair
Thank you
Thank you
Thank you.
We're going to be starting.
He should be popping back up as a panelist now, chair.
dpz zoom i keep trying to promote mr everett's a panelist but he's not moving
okay i will give it a give him a try so mr let's see his name just disappeared paulie
so maybe he's coming back in now okay thank you yeah sure i'll keep an eye out for him
okay actually we should only have the person who's going to present for this case
raise your hand only if you are the applicant who will present for this case all other hands go down
please no okay now we have an alexandra costello is that the person who should be presenting
can you hear me guys
hello can you hear me
yes okay i don't know why i came up my daughter's name i'm sorry but my name is
sarah costello i will be presenting for the property 15035 payton street
okay can we pause for one second please yes
hi carol yes um vice chair i'm sorry i meant to say vice chair
can you um resume the session um chair bergman had to step away okay are we um did he swear
no we didn't do anything yet we just need to make sure that the person
who should be presenting has come forward okay so i'm looking for cyril and tina costello
yes yes um go ahead yes please clarify who you are
Yes, this is Sarah Costello. For some reason, it came up my daughter's name on here. I'm sorry for that.
i see i see alexandria that's okay yeah um calendar number mi2022-002215 the address is
15035 peyton street this is an application for the erection of an addition at the side and above
an existing detached structure and the alteration of two existing off-street garage parking spaces
to living space for no change of use from single family household living one use refusal is
surface parking spaces are prohibited in required side yards and two such parking spaces are
proposed there is a note here also the property is zoned rsd-1 and one parking space is required
I now have additional questions. I'm sorry. Vice Chair, could you please, could you please have
them put their name on a record and swear them in? Sure. That was, I was doing that next. Can
you put your name on the record and spell it for the court reporter? Yes, my name is Cyril Costello
and it's spelled C-Y-R-I-L-C-O-S-T-E-L-L-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Okay, you may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
Okay, can my brother-in-law, Gene Caputo,
please share his screen on my behalf?
He has all the paperwork.
Yes, as long as you present it.
And Mr. Costello, this is Hillary Emerson.
Can you please turn on your camera so that we can see you?
Oh, yeah, let me see how you do that.
Oh yeah, let me see how you do that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, Jean, can you share your screen?
Okay, you're back.
I'm back.
okay there's your notices up okay so um what we're trying to do here is my my
father-in-law passed away about four years ago uh my mother-in-law is is older and feels unsafe
living in our house by herself so we're trying to add on a second floor to the garage which would
create a bedroom and then make a garage like a little little living space for her as you can see
the garage is to the left currently we do not use the garage for any parking it's just their storage
we use a two-car driveway as you can see it for our parking for parking our vehicles
we went up into in front of the summer and civic association and we got unanimous approval about
raising the roof on the garage and creating a second floor we feel this is the most aesthetic
um pleasing way to do this addition uh all the neighbors we sent out letters to all the neighbors
there has been no refusal to it um you know and that's about it
he let me ask you do you have what it's going to look like uh yes gene do you have that
So I know the issue right now is the garage, but like I said, we don't use the garage as
parking.
There, there, there it is, okay.
how many square feet is that that's only adding on 400 more square foot to the house
okay questions from the board no mr chair no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments
from the virtual audience.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location.
You can see from the photos, the property does have an existing driveway leading to
the garage, and the existing driveway will be designated as the location for the required
accessory parking space.
um driveways are commonly used as off-street parking spaces in the surrounding neighborhood
and throughout the city so the city planning commission has no objection to the granting of
the variance thank you mi 2022 002 215 15035 peyton street i vote yes carol tennery my vote is yes
thomas holland my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
good luck thank you okay thank you chair all right number 11 mi 2022 002 944 1909 south
third street robert daly is the owner letter of non-opposition from the pennsport civic association
He's coming back in as a panelist now chair.
Mr. Daly
Good morning Mr. Chairman
Hi good morning
Could you state your name please
and spell for the court reporter
Yes Robert Daly
R-O-B-E-R-T
D-A-L-Y.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions for you, please.
Mr. Daly, have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes. This is an application for the erection of an addition with a roof deck and roof deck access structure to an existing attached building for the use as a single family household living. There's one zoning refusal.
This is an application for the erection of an addition with.
If abutting lots on both sides of an attached building contain only two stories of the enclosed area, the stories above the second story of the attached house shall be set back an additional eight feet from the minimum distance between the required front facades and the front lot line, whereas the proposed has no eight feet setback from the minimum distance between the required front facades and the front lot line.
You may proceed now and share your screen.
One more.
How do you do the screen screen more?
And, Sarah, if you hover around the bottom of your screen with your mouse, you'll see the share screen button.
You click that and then click on the document that you're sharing.
where stop it says oh share content okay screen got it
you're up
did it share the screen yes we see could you make it just a little bit bigger if possible yes
Is that better?
I see Pennsport Civic Association.
Yes, this is my letter from the RCO.
I have full support and no one from the community opposed.
Next is my refusal letter from L&I.
Here is a street view of my proposed plan to go straight up for the variance, but no setback.
like the property goes straight up with the roof deck
here is the current image from the north view of the house my house is the one with the awning
here goes the straight on view and here goes a view facing south with also my house the green
awning you can see no addition there here is uh some plans some floor plans for the property
In my appeal letter that I submitted on April 20th, my mailing receipts, a few of these.
The list that I sent all the addresses, all the addresses I mailed to everybody to.
Here goes my tax clearance letter.
A copy of my deed.
I didn't mean to go so fast, sorry, copy of the deed, tax transfer cert, there's a street
plan review, this is the checklet, the building, the building permit plan review, the notice
for today, there's a continued hearing that we are here today on August 31st, and then
And next, I have some images of properties that are three stories straight up with no setback, right within walking distance, actually on the street.
I have a few pictures that I took of everybody in the area.
And that's my images for today.
Mr. Daly, explain why you want to do this.
I just wanted to have more living space for my house.
I don't want to lose the setback of eight foot.
All right, thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see their heads at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the City Planning Commission. Members of the board, the comprehensive plan – sorry, getting a lot of background noise.
Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
We don't think that the proposal meets the requirements for dimensional variances.
First, denying the variance doesn't appear to create a significant financial burden for the applicant.
And second, the proposal conflicts with characteristics of the block.
And second, the proposal conflicts with characteristics of the block.
There's only three buildings.
There's only three buildings with three stories on this entire block face, and they're at the opposite end of the block.
So we have to recommend that the board deny the variance.
Thank you. MI 2022, 002-944-1909 South 3rd Street, I vote yes.
Carol Cineri, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
My will is no.
Thank you.
Number 12, MI 2022-002-556-1928-30, North 2nd Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Norris Square Civic Association.
he's coming back in as a panelist now chair
good morning mr chairman good morning counsel could you state your name please and spell it
for the court reporter sure it's verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o 2016 spruce philadelphia
19103 right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do, sir.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is the leasehold agreement holder, Mr. George Hernandez.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Anastasio. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes we met with the rco twice
and secured a letter of support nearly unanimous okay great you may proceed and begin by sharing
your screen thank you this is a 1928 north 2nd street uh it is uh body arts is is what we're
looking uh to do here also known as a tattoo shop uh and it is this is the refusal that we
that we received it is zoned rm1 residential multi-family as you can see though on the street
The use is both industrial, some of it's commercial, there's many garages on the block,
so it's a nice mix. There's still some vacant lots. On the block here, right down the street
from us, is a large parking garage. Here's the front of our building. It's surrounded by
and on top of multifamily and new multifamily dwellings
that is adjacent to what was a commercial space
here on the first floor to my left.
Here's an aerial view of the block in question.
As you can see, there is significant number of vacant lots still.
And let's get to some interior.
The interior layout of the property has already been laid out
for commercial space my client had signed the lease and started to to work there only to find
out that he needed to go through this process so he has stopped working there and trying to get
through this process now for over a year of course the pandemic delays with city government and just
with everybody it just happened to be that way so nevertheless there's the
interior the property here is the intersection of Berks it's a large as
you can see large street there's proof of posting of both posters here are the
plans I'll zoom in a little bit so you can see them a little better which is
basically a reception area and a salon space and a place to store the hazardous materials.
When we met with the community, they wanted a comprehensive trash plan, which has been
provided to them. And it's in the letter that was sent over that we would have a regular trash
pickup, not only for traditional trash, but for the hazardous, the needles, basically. Also
included in my packet is a copy of the appeal as I submitted on Eclipse. This is a very well
This is a very well-regarded place.
regarded place. My client actually
My client actually has a reputation
of being one of the best body arts studios in the city.
And you can see here five-star reviews
all throughout Google and Yelp
and known for its cleanliness
and customer satisfaction.
Most of these are by appointment only.
So there is not a whole lot of coming and going or folks coming off the street looking for, you know, just a tattoo on his arm because he got drunk or something.
That's not the kind of place that this is.
And we have a letter of, again, almost unanimous support, not opposition, but support from the RCO with all but one person in attendance voting to support us.
Here's proof of the two meetings, both mailed to 98 individual households, and here is the tax certification that shows that he's compliant.
And with that, I'd like to ask Mr. George Hernandez to raise his virtual hand.
i'm mr hernandez please state your name and spell it for the court reporter
counsel you're an officer of the court we will take your testimony
questions from the board no mr chairman mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments
from the virtual audience
planning commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
board members in 2021 the zoning map was amended to rm1 on this block in accord with a neighborhood
remapping process however this existing building and the commercial space within it was constructed
pursuant to a valid zoning permit issued under the previous cmx2 zoning this proposed use is
consistent with the physical configuration of the building and the city planning commission
recommends that the board grant the variance thank you mi 2022 002556 1928 the 30th north
2nd Street, I vote yes. Harold Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Hollum, my vote is yes.
Gaines Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you all.
All right. Number 13, MI 2022-002-221, 2113 South 15th Street, Henry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Chair.
It appears as though there's a bit of a problem, but we have witnesses for the previous case.
Okay, no one answered when I called.
I understand.
I think the staff might have been at a lag or something.
Okay, that's okay.
How many witnesses do you have?
I mean, we've already voted.
We do have a representative from the Councilwoman's Office, Mr. Folks.
Mr. Folks, we're going to unmute you.
You can speak.
Thank you Ms. Sunke. Can you hear me? We can and as you know you've already been sworn just state
your name and give us your comments all to the list. Thank you uh Chairman Brinkman. I thought
it was my uh connection to the uh to to the to the webinar but thank you Ms. Sunke for recognizing me.
Again Sloan Folks, Office of Councilman Maria Keona Sanchez. The applicant having met uh with
the coordinating RCO, North Square Community Alliance, and receiving a letter of support
to the Councilwoman, offers no opposition to this variant surprise.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Folks.
Tanya, anybody else in the audience?
That would be good, Chair.
Thank you kindly.
Thank you, everybody.
That's passed.
Okay, so MI 2022-002-221-2113 South 15th Street, Henry Clinton is the attorney.
There is a letter of opposition from South Broad Street Neighborhood Association attached.
He's coming in now as a panelist.
Morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Quinton. As you know, you've already been sworn in. Could you identify your
client and the relationship to the property? Sure. My client is Jackson Duncan, J.A.
And the relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Jackson Duncan, J-A-C-K-S-O-N, Duncan, D-U-N-C-A-N.
He is one of the principals of the LLC, which owns this property, and he is on the call.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Hi, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to waive the reading of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, all of the above.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Is that large enough, Ms. Neri there?
is that good mr bergman oh that's that's fine all right good afternoon or good morning mr
chair members of the board henry clinton uh for the applicant llc and its principal
jackson duncan at the outset mr chairman you did note that there was a letter of opposition
from the rco and i'm hoping after you hear the presentation that it would be strong and
compelling reasons to grant my client's request for a three-family dwelling. And I'll run through
the exhibits. This is my table of contents containing exhibits AA through A11, which I
ask to be admitted into evidence, admission statement. And here's the key document, the
refusal. There's one refusal. It's for use. This is an RSA 5 zoning district, and the two-family
dwelling is prohibited. Here's the RCO letter of opposition, which was previously submitted,
as well as a letter of rationale. So before I get into the overwhelming local and near neighbor
support, I just wanted to point out a few things, and I'll show the board as I walk through this
presentation. This property was a three-family dwelling, as the photographs will prove,
when my client bought it. It was a dilapidated, partly squatter building in deplorable condition
and a nuisance to every neighbor on the block. And that's probably why over 24 neighbors or
rather 24 neighbors are supporting this proposal because the property has been cleaned up,
the inhabitants removed, and my client started to demo it. I think his mistake was he started
to demo the property and then went and applied for the zoning because it was a three-family
dwelling at one time.
And when we presented this to the community group, and hopefully Anthony Brutani is on
the call, but they basically said, well, if you hadn't done anything and not affected
the three-family existence, we might have looked on this application differently.
But since you started to demo it, you basically got rid of the three-family use, and we want
to have it as a single family. So we have 24 neighbors supporting the project. What's key
about this property is to its immediate north, it's a triplex. And there are 14 multifamily
properties on this block, some four family, the majority three family, and some two family. And
I'll show the zoning board those records as I walk through this presentation. The other thing
that's important, this is 15th Street. We're literally one block away from Broad and Snyder,
which is a major transportation hub. It's a major area where apartment dwellers on this block
get on the subway, are able to commute to Center City, down to the Stadium District for employment
and for jobs. And if we read recently, not only in the Philadelphia Inquirer, but other publications,
there's a lack of affordable rental units in the City of Philadelphia. Here's a view of the
property from the rear. You can see that it's not an overbuilt property. You can see some of the
properties on the block are built out above the second floor. My client is not going to make any
change to the footprints of this building. He's not going to add to it. He's going to remain and
keep what it was, or hopefully keep what it was, that is a three-family dwelling. This is a photograph
of the block looking north. The property is right here with the awning. All the properties are three
stories on the block. They're very large properties. You can see next door is a triplex.
And this is what I showed the community group. This is the first floor kitchen. This is the
rear yard. And you can see there's where the sink and this is where the cabinets were,
both base and upper cabinets. And then this was the second floor. You can see it's basically
a shambles and the third floor kitchen. So I tried to present to the community group that this
really is a three family dwelling. And even in negotiations, we even said that, look,
And even in negotiations, we even said that, look, if you don't want to restore it to what it was, my client certainly would accept a two-family dwelling because it was multifamily for many, many years.
These are the very direct and simple plans.
The basement will just be mechanicals and washer and dryer.
First floor will have two bedrooms and one full bath.
Second floor proposal is two bedrooms, one bath.
And then on the third floor, as I said, we're not building out over the second floor, would simply be one bedroom.
So we're proposing five bedrooms.
If this were a single-family home, you would also have five and possibly six bedrooms.
rooms so we're asking the board to look at what this building once was what the neighbors on the
block support and want now were they you know voting in favor of this because they were happy
that my client rid this property of of the nuisance that was there possibly is their support
due to the fact that there's already many many many multi-family units on the block perhaps i
I mean, I can't really read into everybody's mind, but I understand a number of the neighbors were on this call at 930,
and hopefully they still are on the call and they can express their sentiments directly to the board.
One final thing I wanted to point out, in addition to the pro forma documents that the board sees,
tax certification, notices to the block, our application, and the zoning map,
So we're really off of Snyder Avenue. We're just two houses, one of which is a triplex, and then on Snyder Avenue, the CMX2.
My client lives on the 1100 block of Snyder Avenue. He's a resident of South Philadelphia.
He'll be on top of the maintenance and do all the maintenance himself.
So my perusal of the zoning documents indicates there's 14 multifamily units on this block.
There are two four-unit buildings, 10 three-unit buildings, and two duplexes, and I have supporting documentation for each property.
This is 2117, three units. 2133, three units. 2147, two units. 2104, three units. 2108, three units. 2110, three units. 2114, two units.
2120 four units, 2124 three units, 2138 three units, 2136 four units, 2143 units, 2144 three
units, 2146 three units. So one might ask, well, Mr. Clinton, you have 14 multifamily homes already
on the block. And it would make sense that those 14 homeowners would support this project. And
that is true. They all do. Most of them do. But we also have 24 signatures. So there are people
on the block who have single family homes that also support this project. So with that, I would
rest and ask that my client be unmuted. And just note for the board that the request is in harmony
with what's going on on the block. It's in harmony with what the near neighbors want. I understand
the RCO. It looks at the overhaul neighborhood, but sometimes we have to focus that view narrowly
and look at what is it that folks on the block want. It's going to be five bedrooms. We're not
going to expand the footprint. If it were a single-family property, it would be five and
possibly six bedrooms. And there is a need for affordable rental units in the city of Philadelphia
as the Census Bureau has concluded.
So with that, I open the floor for questions
and ask my client to unmute himself
and adopt my testimony.
Mr. Duncan, can you raise your hand?
Duncan, I'm here.
Hi, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court reporter?
And my name is Jackson Duncan, J-A-C-K-S-O-N, D-U-N-C-A-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I certainly do.
Proceed.
Mr. Duncan, good afternoon, or good morning, rather.
Were you on the call when I presented this, your project to the board?
Yes, sir, I was.
And I just wanted to clear up a few things.
When you purchased the property, was it three units and did it contain three kitchens?
uh was it three units and did it contain three kitchens yes three three bathrooms three kitchens
fully uh um the problem was just the um the um place was so dilapidated from the squatters and
just it was there was not really much that would be salvageable and you provided those photographs
to me you had already demoed one kitchen and by the time you came to me for representation you
had them out the other two kitchens correct yes sir unfortunately yes there was um you know a lot
of folks were there there was uh you know they had been in the kitchen they were they were
manufacturing methamphetamines um and you know just there was nothing that could be salvaged it
was really bad they had been urinating and defecating all over the home so there was uh
it was really a hazard uh to not take everything out of there to be honest with you all right and
you did the groundwork of compiling signatures from uh most of the near neighbors on the block
correct i did i did and i missed you know some uh you know i lived in 1946 south 15th for five
years so it's since in my neighborhood now i live in levington snyder so um was able to everybody
in the neighborhood you know the folks that lends cleaners across the street the neighbors
they were just really thankful there was uh there was about 15 12 to 15 people who were
squatting in that home at the time. And, you know, there was issues with them. There was
an issue with, you know, them defecating on the front steps. We had seven different break-ins
from the time that we took over to where we had it completely, put steel doors up.
We dropped about 15 to 20,000 just to solidify the place and get it cleaned out. And we had to,
they were coming in basement windows. And the only real way was to demo the place out to get
them to stop, you know, continuously breaking in. But yeah, there was, there was, you know,
issues with them exposing themselves on the porch to neighbors, just really, really bad stuff. So
I think the board has a picture of that. Just one final, two final questions. Will you
perform all the maintenance on this building yourself? Absolutely. And I have, I actually,
you know i had uh one of my young men that works for me i clean up some of the neighbors um
sweep but just sweep up the street um you know like i said i'm around the corner so
uh any issues we have i'm right there and i you know i make sure that i know we have a block
party coming up and i'm you know i've volunteered to be a part of that so i'm just i think it's a
great neighborhood i love my time in 1946 um you know i'm four blocks at 11th and snyder so yeah
we'll take care of everything, make sure that everything's swept, take care of some of the
elderly neighbors on the block, and just make sure we're really contributing to this community,
because I think it's a great block, and I think it has the potential to really, really just keep
improving. One final question. You've heard my testimony. If you had the opportunity to testify,
would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct? Absolutely, Hank. I really
appreciate you, and you've just been great to work with. Thank you, Mr. Duncan. Questions from
the board no mr chairman mr clinton one question for me for for you that third floor is not a whole
size right i mean is that going to be apartment on the third floor yeah that's going to be a
one-bedroom apartment okay all right thank you question
so it's like it's a lot smaller than the other two right absolutely yes okay all right
questions from the virtual or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have a merle friedman miss friedman you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair please
good morning miss friedman could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
uh merrill friedman m-e-r-y-l f as in frank r-e-e-d-m-a-n right do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed please
um what uh mr duncan stated was true the there was a a community of squatters living in that
building um and uh harassing people leaving needles and and empty bags of drugs outside the
house um i live a little further up the block so i wasn't aware of some of the more egregious
things he said but uh there's a few properties like that and i just was so grateful when i spoke
to mr uh duncan that he was going to take a lot of responsibility for the property that he was
He was going to screen tenants and that he had other properties in the area where he had done that.
So we had a record of that.
And, you know, I just would like to support this happening.
you know i just would like to support this happening we have a lot of duplexes and and
We have a lot of duplexes.
complex is on the block and and uh they vary some of them are wonderful and some are problematic
and the more of the good ones we can get in uh the better for all of our property values and for
our safety and i think that uh he will put in a good one so that's all thank you very much for
calling in. We appreciate your input. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have T.L. Coleman, Mr. or Ms. Coleman. Could you please unmute yourself and wait for the
chair? Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
hello my name is tamika coleman that's t-a-m-e-k-a last name coleman c-o-l-e-m-a-n
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir proceed thank you i work in housing i also happen to live
about three houses down and across the street
from the location,
I can affirm every single thing
that was said previously
about the issues with the previous tenants.
More than anything else,
because my livelihood is connected
to affordable housing,
I am extremely in favor
of adding affordable housing to South Philadelphia.
And I know the screening process inside and out, because, again, it's part of my livelihood.
And the screening process that's being put forward is comprehensive.
So there doesn't appear, at least in my opinion, both personal and professional, to be any danger of bringing in any unpleasant elements,
especially in comparison to the people that we had in there before and there are multiple
multi-family homes on the block so i do not see the um logic of resistance to it
okay thank you very much for calling in we appreciate your input is there anyone else
in the virtual audience
TRF see no other hands at this time planning commission
thank you chair Bergman Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission
members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5
zoning at this location however we do believe the applicant has supported their hardship claim
with evidence of prior use as a multi-family dwelling and consistency with existing multi-family
use on this block the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
thank you mi2022 002 221 2113 south 15th street i vote yes harold tennery my vote is yes
thomas holland my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
Thank you. Number 14, MI 2022-002-382-1246 Marlborough Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney. Letter of opposition from the Fishtown Neighbors Association.
Applicant has submitted a petition of support signed by 41 neighbors.
Mr. Zen Jin is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia
PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client owns the property. It's actually owned by the family, last name S-A-L-I-A-J. I believe the two of the family members may be present today to answer questions at the end.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning, Mr. Jin. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, plans, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all questions.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information that was previously submitted.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information that was previously submitted.
Can everyone see my exhibit?
We can.
Thank you.
So we have submitted a copy of the refusal, opposition letter from Fishtown Neighborhood Association, petition of support from some of the neighbors, photos, plans, and relay documentation.
This application is for the use of the property as a triplex in an existing structure.
However, it is located in an RSA 5 district.
The property itself at one point was abandoned and requires a lot of work at this point to
bring it back fully to its intended use.
In this case, my clients bought the property with the intent to use it as an investment,
and therefore they had brought forth a triplex use application.
The RCO essentially opposed it, although not all neighbors opposed it.
The votes did not come out all against my client.
However, the opposition basically focuses on the issue that some of the near neighbors have asserted that it was not used as a multifamily housing.
recently there was a worry about the density and property management would be done actually by my
client's daughter who is a licensed realtor and she would be managing through her realty which
actually has its own rental and management branch so while she herself's not a experienced manager
in that sense. She would be guided by experienced individuals to help manage the property. The
property itself, not all neighbors are, again, against the idea of a multifamily. The property
will be brought back to a usable condition. While it looks fine on the outside, the interior does
need a lot of work. My client actually went around the neighborhood and reached out to
neighbors and obtained a pretty substantial list of signatures, which are not against the idea of
the multifamily. However, we do agree that at the community meeting and ultimately their vote is
against a multifamily use here. So this property is located near the corner, but it's not a corner
property. On the one side, it does have a duplex. On the other side, it is a single family.
The area is zoned single-family, but there are some multifamily uses in the area as well.
However, this is not a complete block of multifamily as in some other cases.
So the use itself is not completely inconsistent with the area, but it is not the predominant use in the area.
Our proposal is very simple.
This is a decent-sized property with three floors.
And the goal here is to simply have each floor as its own individual unit.
The total number of bedrooms will be six with two bedrooms on each floor.
And that is essentially the proposal that is before the board.
I do have my client here who can verify my testimony,
and we're happy to answer any questions from the board or redirect to any exhibit.
Why don't we have one of your clients adopt your testimony?
Sure. If I can ask that, I believe it is, I don't want to mispronounce their name. It is
Morella or Liren should be here. Could either of you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
Mr. Jim, we have someone with the first name Luann. Is that one of your clients?
Yes, that is as well.
Okay. Ms. Luann, can you unmute yourself and wait for the chair, please?
Kai, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hi. Actually, my name is Adisa. I'm also one of the owners. It's spelled I-D-I-S-A, last name S-A-L-I-A-J.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Did you hear my testimony and see the presentation that was made before the zoning board?
Yes, I did.
And can you verify that the information is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Can you also verify your, is any other of your family member also present to verify the ownership?
Yes, Dad is here. His name is Luan, as stated in the Zoom meeting.
great thank you um questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman no no mr chairman no mr chairman
council is it currently uses single family home it's currently not used um uh chairman it's
actually vacant at the at the present okay all right they're in the process of uh fixing up the
property all right thank you um questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have someone by the name of robert everett mr everett you can unmute yourself and
wait for the chair please i'm here all right good morning could you state your name and spell it for
the court reporter please yes first name is robert r-o-b-e-r-t last name everett e-v-e-r-e-t-t
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed sir all right uh just for full disclosure i'm a fishtown neighbor and i am
one of the zoning committee members who reviewed this case and was okay meeting uh nothing to
dispute with his you know their testimony and i see the petition where there are a lot of
local neighbors who didn't attend the meeting that support his proposal my one concern is
I see on the multiple listing service that this house has been put up for sale since we had that
meeting so is your client actually going to if granted the variance go through with what they
want to do for the building or are they just trying to sell it sir sir we you can't you can
give us your comments about it you can't ask questions of the okay well my concern is if this
is granted it appears that perhaps they're trying to just resell the property having gained the
variance. Thank you very much for calling in. We appreciate your comments. I do not believe that's
intent here. I think it's more likely that if they were unable to get a variance and use it in
a way that would make sense for their finances to renovate the property, they were more likely to
so i wasn't aware that it was placed for sale on mls is there anyone else in the virtual audience
who has comments about this case
i see no hands at this time too planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the conference of plan recommends
no change to the existing rsa 5 single family zoning at this location which has been in place
since 1980. This is one of four similar three-story structures, all of which were built
as single-family homes and have no record of multifamily use. We don't feel the applicant
has presented evidence of unique physical conditions of the property that present a hardship,
but is instead relying on an economic hardship argument for the use variance. And so the City
Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-002-382-1246
Marlboro Street. I vote no. Carlton Aaron. My vote is no. Thomas Holman. My vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed. Yes. Ishmael Shaheed. My vote is no. Thank you counsel. Thank you.
number 15 mi 2022 002 571 2305 north re street um henry clinton is the attorney
letter of support from nars square community alliance
good morning again mr clinton um you've already been sworn could you identify your client
and the relationship to this property sure my client is leo oslovic ios i l e v i c h and he
is one of the principals of the llc which owns the property and he is on the call our vice chair has
a few questions.
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to
its accuracy? I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet
with proof of ownership, proof of
tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property,
five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with your RCO, and do you have a letter?
All to the...
Okay, you may proceed
and begin to share
your screen good morning mr. chairman
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. I'm here on 2305 Reese Street. The
presentation package before you contains two other properties, but we're going to concentrate
on 2305 North Reese Street. With my presentation package or table of contents containing exhibits
AA to A10, which I ask be admitted into the record, appearance statement, refusal. Refusal
concerns, two issues. One is a use issue and the second is a dimensional. The use is this is an
RSA 5 zoning district and we're asking for a two-family dwelling. The dimensional variance is
the minimus as the occupied area is 81% and the requirement is 75%. So we are six percentage points
off. Excuse me, I was showing you the wrong refusal, Mr. Chairman, my apologies. Because
there's three properties in this package, I was referring to the wrong property. So this property
is 2305 North 3th Street, and there's a single refusal. We do not have any dimensional refusals.
It's a refusal because the proposal is for a two-family dwelling, and this is an RSA 5 zoning
district. We did meet with Norris Square Community Alliance concerning 2305 North 3 Street and they
did issue a letter of support. What was important to them is that they believe that this may spur
some development on this particular block. As I will show you, there's many vacant lots on this
property and on this block. You can see property currently, areas currently a bit empty and it
could spur new development. The other thing is my client has committed to sell these units
and I know that may not have any impact with regard to the planning commission, but to the
neighbors it is because having homeowners in the neighborhood is a plus as opposed to having what
some neighborhoods consider renters, which will not give stability to the neighborhood. This is
the 2300 block of North Reece Street. You can see that virtually the entire western side
of the block is vacant. Some property owners are using the open lots for parking vehicles and
a small mobile home. But on this side of the street, the west side of Reece Street,
basically there's no development whatsoever.
again here is a photograph this is looking south just to give you a perspective of what's happening
on the west side of reese street there's a large building at the corner which is multi-family
but you know granted most of the properties on this side are single family but there are no
homes to compare that against on the western side of reese street i'm going to move you to
the plans. This is the plans for the property. The basement of first floor would be one unit.
Second and third floor would be another unit. It would be open space for the owner of the unit on
the basement and first floor in the yard. And the second and third floor would have access
to a rooftop deck for their open space. The front would be composed of brick,
party board siding which is compatible with the neighborhood and which was well accepted by the
neighborhood we have no dimensional variances in terms of height occupied area open space
or rear yard as there is an ample rear yard
the rest of the documents are the as i say typically at the presentations the pro forma
documents that one would see in a zoning application, our notification to the neighbors,
our applications for appeal, our tax certifications, which are intact.
And again, the zoning map for Reed Street, one of the other factors that may persuade the board
and did persuade the neighborhood is on Dauphin Street. All the homes at front Dauphin Street
are either RM1 or CMX2, and our property is literally one lot in. So when I showed you the
photographs of North Reese Street on the west side, a lot of that vacancy actually fronts on
Dauphin, but it does affect the use on Reese Street. Again, the deed and the other documents
that were previously submitted to Ms. Emerson.
So with that, I'm going to ask
that the board will kindly apply this application.
that the board look kindly upon this application. It's a long vacant lot on a block that has many,
It's a long, vacant lot.
many empty lots, which is in need of development. I think that's recognized by NARA Square.
Certainly if other projects come before NARA Square, they certainly can elect to change their
mind as to whether they want to permit additional multifamily. But sometimes you have to spur
development with not necessarily what the area is owned for. So with that, I would rest and
ask that Leo please raise your hand and be unmuted last name is Isilovich Mr. Isilovich you can unmute
yourself or wait for the chair please Leo just state your name is spelled again you've already
been sworn hey my name is Leo Isilovich uh it's spelled l-e-o for the first name and last name is
I-O-S-I-L-E-V-I-C-H.
Good to see you, Mr. Clinton.
Mr. Solovich, were you on the call when I presented your project to the board?
Yes, I was.
And just one question, is this property, this project going to be developed for sale for residents of the community?
That is correct.
and you also have one member of your llc who has agreed to assist with helping individuals become
qualified to acquire property like this yes and if you had the opportunity to testify would you
adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct i do thank you thank you questions from
the board questions from the board no mr chair and mr chairman questions or comments from the
virtual audience chairman we have sloan folks with his hand up mr folks you can unmute yourself or
Wait for the chair, please.
Good morning again, Sloan Folks, Office of Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez.
Good morning, Mr. Folks, you've already been sworn.
Yes, sir.
Thank you, sir.
The applicant, accordingly, in having met with the coordinating RCO, NSCA,
and receiving a letter of support from them.
Councilwoman offers no opposition to this request.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no other hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2021, the zoning map was amended to RSA 5 on this block
in accord with the neighborhood remapping process
led by the Council Member's Office.
the intent of the single family zoning designation is to encourage single family infill
on narrow blocks such as this consistent with their historical development patterns
the applicant has not supported the hardship claim with evidence of unique physical conditions of
the property which is their charge the city planning commission recommends that the board
deny the use variants. Thank you, Anne. MI-2022-002571-2305 North Free Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tennery, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ismail Shaheed, my vote is yes. Sorry about that, Bill.
I... That's okay. That's okay. My vote is yes. Sorry about that. Thank you. Thank you,
everybody. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Number 16, Henry, stay on, please. MI 2022-002-226-3849
Fairmount Avenue. Support from the Mantua Civic Association. No explanation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm here on behalf of Lefter, Dima, D-H-I-M-A. His daughter,
Clea, K-L-E-A, is on the call because he has some language issues, but she's here on his
behalf. That's his daughter. All right. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to avoid the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the
refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this
hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
I ask to all of the above.
Okay, great.
You may proceed and begin by sharing your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Derry.
Mr. Chairman, is that visible?
Mr. Chairman, is that visible?
Yes, it is.
Yes, it is.
But Aaron,
Good afternoon.
Still good morning, rather.
Henry Clinton, on behalf of Lefter Dima, whose daughter here, will testify on his behalf.
Her name is Clea, K-L-E-A, Dima, D-H-I-M-A.
This property is at 3849 Framont Avenue, and I'm going to walk through the presentation
package, which contains exhibits AA through A11, which I asked to be admitted into the
record.
My appearance statement, this is the refusal, obviously the key document.
This area is zoned, this block is zoned, RSA 5.
We have refusal because the request is for a two-family dwelling.
And there's also an issue with regard to the open air, open space, excuse me.
Again, I argue that this is the minimus because the requirement is 75%
and our request is 6% in excess of that at 81%.
The other refusal concerns the front facade of the building.
The front facade of the building is brought out to the property line.
There are other properties on the block that have porches,
and because there's porches, the L&I examiner determined that this house should also be set back.
we do have an rco letter of uh of support uh from mantua civic association and we met with them
there was no letter of rationale but there is a letter of support i wanted to show the board
some photographs of the block this is a view looking north again we have a situation where
the block has a number of homes but there's also a number of vacant properties
This is the vacant property at 3849 here in between two existing properties.
And then as you move west on Fairmount Avenue, there's additional vacancies.
And then across the street, directly from this property, there are additional vacancies.
So I don't know how long this vacant lot has been here.
Could not discern that from the zoning records.
And during the community meeting, folks really didn't know how long it's been vacant.
but they know it's vacant and in need of development just trying to give you a closer
view to show you that there are some porches on the fronts of some of the properties that are
there some of the porches are actually closed in i don't know if they're living quarters
sometimes they're made into tv rooms or vestibules and there's a couple open porches
this is a view looking east on fairmount avenue you can see the street is not all residential
There's what appears to be some type of a commercial structure here.
Could not discern what that is.
There's roll-top gates on the front of the building and a cyclone enclosure out front for some trash storage.
But again, you can see the vacant lots on both sides of the street.
Here's a close-up of the existing lot.
And as I say, the refusal is generated.
One of the refusals was generated because the proposal was to bring the building out to the front of the property line.
in line with the porch, not out to where the fence is on these properties, but out to the edge
of the porch, and it would just go basically straight up.
This is a very large lot. It's over 75 feet deep. It would be a very, very large single-family home
if you were to have the proper occupancy
in terms of lot coverage.
And that's why when my client looked at this situation,
looked at the vacant lots on the block,
looked how long this lot had been vacant,
he decided to propose a two-family dwelling
and the community group was certainly in support of it
and was happy to see some development
occurring on the block.
In keeping with the brick nature
of most of the homes in Philadelphia
and in West Philadelphia,
and my client's going to have red brick on the front
and with hardy board siding on the second and third floor
and the rear of the property will have exit to the yard
as well as hardy board plank siding on the rear
rather than any type of vinyl product.
The floor plan is rather simple.
The basement in first floor will be one living unit.
The second floor and third floor will be another living unit
and in keeping with the other
homes on the block and in that
neighborhood, rooftop decks
are not looked upon kindly
so my client was not including
and does not want to include a rooftop
deck. The remaining
documents are... Mr. Clinton, can I ask a question?
What I'm reading here is three dwelling
units.
Hillary, is that what our comment?
Let me go back to
refusal because
you're because you're saying two i i see three here no that is my that is my error because
you're because you're saying two i i see three here no that is my
of what preceded uh
yeah that that's my error so i'd like to change my testimony and indicate that this is a three
family dwelling uh excuse my confusion because i got confused with the reese street and bodine
Street, both of which were presented earlier, and they were two-family. So all of my arguments with
regard to a two-family also apply to the three-family that we're asking for in this particular
photograph. We don't have any issues. Did you show the drawings of the property again? I thought
that the drawings showed two. Maybe I'm wrong. No, that was my error there.
so we have basically
one unit is the basement of first floor
the second unit
is the second floor
and then the third unit
is on the third floor
let me do one thing
I want to go back
okay i just wanted to reread the letter uh from norris square
so again the remaining documents or the pro forma documents one would see
uh in an application such as this and i'm going to ask to have my client uh unmute themselves and
could you could you like where where where that sits so in fair amount could you tell me the
other multi-families on the block sure
i just want to go to the end of the presentation okay uh so we have a triplex already at 38 36
36 tram on avenue i did include a photograph indicating there's three meters actually the
fourth meter would be for the common area and that's that's directly across the street
on either side of single homes yes okay
okay so with that i would rest and would ask my client clear dma d-h-i-m to unmute herself
please unmute yourself or wait for the chair
hello hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
Sure. My name is Clea Dima, first name K-L-E-A, last name D-H-I-M-A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Clea, you attended the community meeting with me?
Okay. And the testimony that I gave today was basically what we told the community group that evening?
Yes, absolutely.
And they were in support of this project because there were many vacant and empty lots on this block, and they were looking to spur development?
Mm-hmm, yep.
Right.
And were you on the call when I presented the project?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and true and correct?
Yes, absolutely.
Thank you, Ms. Dima.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission thank you chair bergman members
of the board this is ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
in 2017 the zoning map was amended in mantua according to a community-led remapping plan
This block was rezoned RSA 5 in accord with community recommendations to encourage single-family infill.
This proposed variance is clearly in conflict with this adopted planning goal and the amended zoning map.
The applicant has not shown evidence of unique physical conditions that compel three-family use of this property.
Furthermore, with respect to the front yard setback refusal, the zoning code carries a clear intent to prevent newly constructed buildings
from standing forward of a well-established street wall line on any given block if the lot
were unusually shallow a variance might be justified but the applicant has not provided evidence
that the proposed zero setback is either economically necessary
or consistent with the surrounding neighborhood we recommend that the board deny these variances
we recommend that the board deny these variances mi 2022-002-226-3849 fairmont avenue i vote now
MI 2022.
carol tenary my vote is no thomas hollow
james snell my vote is no
well i heard at least three knows henry so it's understood thank you mr chairman appreciate it
sure um we're going to go back number five mi 2022 002 544 2641 east madison street
joseph consul is the attorney there's a letter of support from the port richmond
on patrol and civic association mr consul's coming back in as a panelist now chair
good morning good morning mr consul could you please state your name and spell for the court
reporter yes it's joseph consul that's c-o-n-s-o-l-e right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do but do you identify your client in
relationship to the property yes my client is james kaufman and he is one of the owners of the
property okay and our vice chair has a few questions hi do you agree to wait the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof
of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos under plans of the property five days
in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all
Okay, great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Is my packet up?
It sure is.
All right. Good almost afternoon board, Joe Consul. Property is 2641 East Madison Street.
This property is in Port Richmond. I've got James Kaufman, one of the owners, along with Diana Fox.
As a preliminary matter, in 2007, you'll see on my screen that a use permit was pulled and approved to convert this property into a two-family dwelling with no commercial uses.
The property was then built and occupied as a two-family dwelling since that time. However, they, I believe, failed to get the required CO at that time that would have cemented that use.
My clients purchased the property in 2021 as what they believe to be a legal duplex and found out shortly thereafter that when looking to pull rental licenses that it had not been approved.
So we received this refusal and filed an appeal seeking approval to use it as a two-family dwelling.
Property is zoned CMX1.
I'm not certain if there was a variance in 2007 or if it was just approved by Wright at that time and got rezoned.
Perhaps planning can weigh in on that.
But we're here to just reinstate the two-unit approval from 2007.
So in my packet, I've got included the PROPAC letter of support.
It was a nice meeting.
The takeaway was it's always been a two-unit since it got constructed.
Proof of mailing.
Photos and plans of the property.
Packet, all the interiors.
Still in good shape.
And then here's some old layouts that we included from the old zoning archive of when they did the conversion.
So I just thought I'd include that in there, as well as our other required documents and project information form.
And then there's the deed from April of 2021 to my client and Diana Fox.
And the tax clearance certificate.
it uh so i'll uh if if uh there's no questions or any concerns i might climb to dot my testimony
mr kaufman state your name and spell for the court reporter please
james kaufman j-a-m-e-s k-a-u-f-m-a-n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes we see counsel hello james uh did you hear my testimony
yes we see counsel hello james uh did you hear my testimony right now regarding your property at
2641 east madison street yes it is clearly accurate all right and you would adopt it as
your own yep okay uh questions from the questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
good morning chair uh nicole ozdemir for planning commission staff n-i-c-o-l-e-o-z-d-e-m-i-r
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed please the comprehensive plan recommend a zoning change from cmx1
to RSA 5 at this location however the proposed use is consistent with the physical configuration
of the existing building the city planning commission recommends that the board grant
this variance thank you MI 2022 002 544 2641 East Madison Street I vote yes
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you, counsel.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not yet been called?
I see no hands at this time, chair.
Thanks, everyone. See everyone at 2 o'clock.
All right.
Tanya, we're ready to go.
Yes, Chair, we're all ready as you wish.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, and she'll be on very shortly, Ismael Shahid, he should be
on very shortly, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, here is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit, our board attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Before we begin, here's our virtual format.
We advise the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tanyasunkit at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you participated by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To an interference statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
Finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be referred to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit.
I have a few announcements before we look at our continued cases.
Effective July 18, 2022, if the case is continued, attorney or applicant moving party,
the attorney or applicant has 90 days from the date the case is continuing to either request
a new hearing, ask for an extension of moving party status, or withdraw the case. If ZBA staff
is not contacted by the end of the 90-day period, the case will automatically be listed for a
hearing date. Please note that extensions for moving party status must be sent to the Executive
Director, Tanya Sunkett, with Board Attorney Hillary Emerson Copy. ZBA staff is currently
sending out letters to enlisted applicants on appeals filed prior to 2019 if the case has been
pending in a holding status. If an applicant or their attorney does not contact the ZBA staff
to discuss the next steps for the case within the time period in the letter, the case will be
considered abandoned and administratively closed. Questions about either of these policies should be
directed to the Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, and the Board Attorney, Hillary Anderson.
Now let's look at our continuations for this afternoon. Number seven, MI 2022-002-949-2111
East Dolphin Street. Number eight, MI 2022.
Number 8, MI 2022-003-825-3929 North 7th Street.
Number 11, MI 2022-003-147-208 East Mount Erie Avenue, Parcel D.
And number 15, MI-2022-003-146-208 East Mount Erie Avenue, Parcel C.
All four of those cases are continued.
Is there anyone in the audience that has a comment relative to those four cases?
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
Regarding numbers 11 and 15, those were requests for continuances from the coordinating RCO.
Can we please see if anybody on behalf of the applicant is present?
Is the attorney for either one present?
Chair, we have Michael Phillips with his hand up.
Mr. Phillips, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair, please.
Good afternoon.
this is tanya spell it please for the court reporter michael phillips with claire harrison
that's m-i-c-h-a-e-l-p-h-i-l-l-i-p-s uh attorney where a firm tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do those two cases that i talked about 11 and 15 are continuations of
request of the RCO. And we share the RCO's request. We'll join in the request. I'll note
that the matter for Parcel D is currently on remand for the issuance of an amended refusal
to L&I. Parcel C is a companion case that's being continued so that they can be aligned.
Thank you so much, sir. Thank you.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary again on number 14, where we didn't receive exhibits.
I just got a request for continuance for that one.
And that can, the project needs to undergo CDR.
You can read that one into the record as well.
Okay. MI 2022-002-904-1000-1010 North Delaware Avenue. That case is continued.
Any other requests for continuances?
Chair, we have Ronald Patterson with his hand up. Mr. Patterson, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair, please.
Mr. Patterson, how are you? Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon.
Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
Claire Harrison.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Yeah, I have my hand raised on 1000 North Delaware.
Apologize for that.
We thought we were going to have a CDR at hand before the hearing date, but the CDR scheduling is a little behind, so we didn't make it.
Okay, sir.
Fine. We'll continue that.
Thank you.
okay thank you are there any other requests for continuances chair we have ken wood with his hand
up mr wood you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair please good afternoon my name is west
could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter kenneth wood k-e-n-n-e-t-h
w-o-o-d 2564 street all right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but
the truth yes i know are you an attorney no what case do you want to talk about protestant 2507
allen street okay so we're gonna call we're gonna we'll call that case sir
okay you'll you'll you'll have a chance to get on when i call that case
he's been muted chair okay is there anyone else with a continuance
i see no other hands at this time chair and i also have
case number three there's no exhibits mi 2022 003 307 711 west montgomery avenue
christina osborne is listed as the owner
do we see any hands
Mr. Chairman I see no hands and I also see no one by that name listed under the attendees
what were you going to say Hillary
it was me it was Carol what number are you talking about number number three
MI 2022-003-307-711-West Montgomery.
MI 2022 003 307 711
There's no exhibits.
First listing.
Why do I have, oh, geez.
I have number three is North 19th Street.
Oh, God.
That's in the ad ones, Carol?
You're on the regular list.
We'll get to that.
I'm going to get right to that.
Okay, Osborne has not raised their hand.
I see it.
Okay, thank you.
There's no one in the audience by that name, Chair.
That case is continued.
And number five, MI 2022-002-945-1400 Englewood Street, no exhibits first listed.
Kenneth Young is the attorney.
any hands raised there's no hands raised at this time chair that case is continued
are there any other requests for continuing which is or are there any withdrawals
i see no hands at this time thank you very much we're going to go to our add-ons
Chair, this is Tanya.
I just would like to ask that we put on a record that all board members are available today.
Thank you, Chair.
All board members are here.
Number one on the add-on, MI 2022-003-095-5757 North 5th Street.
I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman.
My vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Right.
Ishmael Schahe, my vote is yes.
Number two, MI 2022-002-162-3145 Jefferson Street.
We're voting this again without a proviso.
I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Number three, 3,300 to 3,400 block of North 19th Street.
This case was closed last week with waiting to hear from the Councilwoman Bass's office.
We have an email from Councilwoman Bass.
She has non-opposition to all these properties.
This will be nine cases and we will do nine votes. Number one, MI 2022 003164, 3405 North 19th Street. I vote yes.
I was not here for that case last week.
Thomas?
Mr. Chairman, I do not vote. I've accused myself.
Okay, thank you.
On all cases.
okay jim my vote is yes my vote is yes number two mi2022-003-160-3403 north 19th street i vote yes
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Harold Tenere.
Yes, Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes.
Right.
Number three, MI2022-003159-3401 North 19th Street, I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, yes.
I'm sorry, Ms. Tenere, you're not going to vote for any of these.
Thank you.
That's confusing.
Thank you, Tanya.
Go ahead, Ishmael Shaheed.
My vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
MI 2022-003-508-3345 North 19th Street, with proviso.
Revised plan, one page, stamped by ZBA on August 31st, 2022.
James Snell, yes, with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes, with provisos.
MI 2022-002-176-3413 North 19th Street.
I vote yes, with provisos.
Revised plan, one page, stamped by ZBA on August 31st, 2022.
two, maximum six units. James Snell, my vote is yes for provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.
MI 2022-002-276-3415 North 19th Street, I vote yes with revised plan, one page, stamped by the ZBA on August 31st, 2022, maximum six units.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.
M-I-2022-002-819-3349 North 19th Street. I vote yes. Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA, August 31st, 2022.
James Snell, my vote is yes for provisors.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes for provisors.
MI 2022-003-507-3351 North 19th Street. I vote yes. Revised plans, one page, stamped by the ZBA
on August 31st, 2022. James Snell, my vote is yes for Proviso. Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes for
provisos. And the last parcel MI 2022 002 902 3347 North 19th Street. I vote yes with revised plans
one page stamped by the ZBA on August 31st 2022. James Snell my vote is yes for provisos.
Thank you, everyone.
We go to our regular list.
MI 2022-003-081-643 North 11th Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the 14th Ward Executive Committee.
A letter and photos were also sent from the RCO.
Mr. Clinton is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Mr. Clinton, you've already been sworn.
Mr. Chairman, Henry Clinton for the applicants.
And could you identify the applicant and his relationship, his or her relationship to the property?
Sure. The applicant is Ron, R-O-N-G Chen, C-H-E-N, and his wife, B-Rong Chen. They're being helped by their niece, Celina, C-E-L-I-N-A, Don, D-O-N-G, who is on the call.
Right. Our vice chair has a few questions for you, Mr. Clinton.
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
rco and do you have a letter yes to all the above okay great you may proceed with
the sharing of your screen thank you thank you
is that visible mr chairman it is all right good afternoon mr chairman
members of the board. I'm Henry Clinton here on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Chen, who are being
assisted by their niece, Selena Dong, D-O-N-G. This concerns a legalization of a parking space
that has been in existence for over nine years. So at the end, I'm going to ask the board to weigh
the equities versus what the community wants versus what my client has been through and
hopefully grant this variance. These are the table of contents AA through A12. For Ms. Hemerson's
knowledge, I added A11 and A12. I just reorganized some things so that may appear new
with regard to the table of contents that I sent her five days ago.
Appearance statement, this is the refusal. So the refusal is basically
that there's a parking space at the rear of this two-family dwelling, which is illegal.
In fact, the reason we're before the board is because Elle and I issued a violation to
my client in January, and then my client began the process of trying to legalize this space,
which they thought was legal when they purchased the property back in 2013.
And I'll go through a chronology, if I may, after I go through the RCO letter.
So the RCO, and Ms. Monroe in particular, is very ardent about this situation.
situation. I believe in part because, and I'll show you from the aerial photograph,
I believe in part because, and I'll show you from the...
the neighbor next door added a parking space within the year. And I can't help but think
that somehow the addition of another parking space by someone else prompted a relook at my
client's situation and then result in the issuance of a violation. But anyway, the letter is one of
opposition, and there's a rationale letter that accompanies it. Very articulate and very
specific. Some of the reasons that the RCO opposed the project was because when they checked with
L&I, the L&I inspector told them that the property, the parking spot, wasn't built according to the
plans. And we agree with that because we got the violation. We didn't know it. Once we got the
violation, my client took steps to make it illegal. She didn't create the parking lot,
the parking space. He or she did not create the curb cut. When they bought the property,
it was represented by the builder. That parking spot was included. And again, I'll show you
photographs to try to persuade the board. So that's one reason. Second reason the community
group opposed the parking space is because they felt that it's going to take away parking from
people in the neighborhood. Well, if you have an off-street parking spot and you have a curb cut,
your curb cut is taking up one space. So it's really a one-for-one swap. The other reason
the RCO voiced their objection was because there was trash in and around the rear yard.
And we've cured that issue with the plans that I'll show you. We've installed, will install,
if the board looks kindly upon this, a trash container to retain any trash that is in the
rear yard. And these are photographs from the RCO depicting the trash, depicting the car,
depicting the curb cut. And this is the adjacent property owner who within a year put this parking
spot in here. As to whether it's legal or not, you know, I'm not here to cast shadows on anyone
else. But when this parking space was installed, somehow I believe that that then negatively
reflected upon my client. And when Ellen and I came out and checked the records, it was noted
that this parking spot was not part of the plans apparently in 2013 when my client purchased the
property. So again, here are some more photographs, current photographs. This is at the corner of 11th
on Wallace Street. This is a two-family dwelling. And my clients don't occupy the property. And if
you read between the lines of the RCO letter, you'll see that that was brought up twice,
that my clients are not owner-occupants. But I don't really think that's a valid reason
to suggest that you can't try to legalize something that was in position since 2013.
Here's a closer view with the curb cut. Again, my clients did not install the curb cut,
did not install the parking space. It was there. This is one photograph from 2015,
but I have other photographs at the end of the presentation I think will be better suited
to explain what happened. So these are the plans that Harman-Douage prepared,
and we initially presented to the zoning, excuse me, to the zoning committee and the community
group. And this is the parking space, and then here was part of the rear yard. So what we've
done since that time. We had trash cans installed here, trash bins, but upon further comment from
the RCO, we have depicted a trash container, a storage with a lid that you will not see the
trash cans or the trash. Hopefully that will rectify the situation at the property.
uh the remaining uh documents are what you would typically see in my presentation
uh which are the notifications you know let me back up a little bit so again just to show
the board that the parking space does have the turning radius for a car to be accepted
into this space as it has been for the last nine years the rest of the documents are tax
certification, our appeal, our PIF filing, the zoning map, the deed indicating that my client
purchased a property in September of 2013. All right, so then this is what I want to show the
board. So here's your chronology. Zoning permit issued September of 2012. Building permit issued
October 2012. My clients buy the property September 2013. So here's the
My clients buy the property, September 2013.
So here's the zoning permit and the building permit, which include the dates I just referenced.
And then I thought it was good to have some aerial photographs to give you an historical perspective of what happened at this corner.
So here's the corner property of 11th and Wallace.
In 2010, they're all vacant lots in that area.
2012, same thing, a couple more structures, but basically vacant.
This is 2014.
When you go to the Atlas maps, they have photographs from 2012, and then they jumped to 2015.
So I searched Google and was able to find a photograph from September, and I'll blow that up.
From September of 2014, and again, my clients purchased the property September of 2013,
and you can see there's clearly a curb cut, clearly there's a car,
and there is no parking next door.
2015, you can again see a parking spot.
My client has, excuse me, a parking spot here,
and one of the tenants has a car there.
2016 is the same, and so on and so forth
up until the present day,
where my client still has a parking space there.
So I guess we have a situation where my client,
in legal terms is a bona fide purchaser for value she paid market value for a property
was represented to her that would be two family which it was and have a parking spot which it did
and has since the building was completed in september of 2013 the parking space obviously
does concern the neighbors not everyone gets to have a parking space we all know how difficult
it is they'll have a parking space in the city, but simply because folks are upset that they may
not have a spot, and that's not the only reason they opposed the request. The parking space is
really taking up one off-street parking spot. It's in harmony with what's been going on for
the last nine years. No one has been impacted in the sense of the development of adjacent properties
or any properties in the neighborhood.
It has an increased congestion.
It's a swap one-for-one parking space.
And again, it's been in continuous use for over nine years.
And again, I'm really between the lines.
Perhaps there's some concern that now that there's a parking space
adjacent to my client's parking space,
which may not have been done per the rules.
Again, I'm not commenting on that.
That's what brought my client's parking space to light.
Had the parking spot next to it not been installed, we may not even be here in front of the board.
And my client would continue having the parking space used, you know, for eternity.
So I'm just asking the board to look at the equities of the situation.
My client really didn't do anything wrong.
The builder probably puffed a little bit or maybe even misrepresented for beyond any statute of limitations where I could pursue the builder.
And we're going to ask that the board look at the total package and look kindly upon this request for a variance to maintain this parking space.
Mr. Clinton, do you want the representative of your client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Dong, can you raise your hand?
Ms. Dong, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Selena Dong, C-E-L-I-N-A-D-O-N-G.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Stong, you heard my testimony today?
Okay. And was my testimony true that when your aunt and uncle purchased the property,
it came with a parking space?
And did your aunt and uncle install this parking space?
And had they used this parking space for a tenant continuously since 2013 when they acquired the
property?
Okay. And if you had the opportunity to testify more fully, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Thank you, Ms. Dahn.
Is that your case, Mr. Glenn?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. I rest and ask that my exhibits be part of the record.
part of the record yes they are thank you uh questions from the board no mr chairman mr
Yes, they are. Thank you.
Questions from the board?
chair no mr chairman no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience chair we have
diane monroe with her hand up miss monroe please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
yes it's diane monroe d-i-a-n-e monroe m-o-n-r-o-e you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do proceed okay um good afternoon um this has been
a problem parking space there on the left the the the 100 block of Wallace Street for many years
arguments the tenant I mean the residents will park in front of that parking space
they have always been complaining and calling in about that parking space
And they were very unsuccessful. And they, I did do some research with this and when
I contacted and went down to LNI, they said that in 2012 that property was built according
to the permit that was given which indicated a yard and the the current owners purchased that
in 2013. Elinon went out there and did that final inspection signed off in 2012.
this is ironic you know and then uh later on that parking space pops up after 20 it appears
after the purchase in 2013 now um when I pull cameras uh pictures of that area you can see
in 2020 it was marked um no parking the yellow spot I don't have the pictures like you have
I don't know how to do that and um exactly right there right there image number two
that they had a ex put there back there in 2020 to prevent the residents from parking there
the residents on that block had gotten permit parking before I think they told me about over
10 years ago they had gotten permit parking on that block and this the owner there put the x
there if you look at the pictures that I sent you yesterday it would show a faint one not as
prominent as that one you just seen and what they did um um there's a sign at that corner
that says permit parking no parking with the arrow showing down it did not skip over 643
It did not come in. That pole, that yellow pole was recently put in by the owner of 643. And as I said, it's been an ongoing thorn in those neighbors' side.
And if you could look at the picture that I sent to you guys with the 643 with the trash, not that one, but another one, yeah, that one.
If you look at that one, if you can see the zoning notification, it's not in an area that the neighbors on that block would be able to see when there's the zoning hearing.
It is placed in an area that they will have to come, they have to trespass on the property so they can see it. So you may not have, I don't think there will be any residents here to testify.
It is placed in an area that they will have to come, that the trust.
I know the block captain, unfortunately, her daughter is in a hospital, and she told me that she will not be able to attend.
Her daughter is in the ICU.
But if you can see the trash, this has been going on for a very long time.
They say rats be running in and out of there, jumping on that trash, turn the raccoons and the possums.
That's another problem with the neighbors, especially the long-time residents who've been there for years that they have been having with this property.
The property next to it, if you could show that picture, the property next to it, which is 1027 Wallace Street, the current owner of 643, they own 1037 Wallace Street.
street they just sold it and you see another parking area there the the owners of 643 north
11th street one time owned the 1037 wallace street and there's another all of a sudden there's another
parking that's coming up yeah you just showed it if you could go back you just showed that
Right. And they own that. They at one time own that 1030s. I'm sorry, 1027s. The address is 1027.
We want to concentrate on this property. Okay. So let's concentrate on this property.
Okay. And I take it you're against it. I hear you. I hear you and I appreciate that. But that's
going to be another one that'll be coming to you guys soon, I know. But the 643 Levin Street
has been an ongoing issue. It's not owner lived in, it's tenant lives in, and those tenants
are in and out, in and out. That's a good salesman marketing for the current, the owners of 643.
So we ask, and that community wish that you would deny that. There's plenty of parking on
on 11th street where this building faced the main entrance is on 11th street there's plenty
of parking on 11th street between fairmount avenue and um green street there's no permanent
parking on that on 11th street so they do have um i can't see a hardship on this the this owner
of 643 they will not experience any hardship of not having parking there it's easy for them to
put a fence up like it used to be there um as all you know to contain the trash so i hope that you
guys will hear what that community is requesting thank you very much for calling in is there anyone
else in the virtual audience? Chair, we have Regina Farrell. Ms. Farrell, you can unmute yourself and
wait for the chair, please. Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Regina Farrell, R-E-G-I-N-A, F as in Frank, A-R-R-E-L-L. Do you swear for him to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes okay proceed okay um just to give a further
explanation as to why there's a concern about them not living in a property the fact is they're not
even vested in a neighborhood so you have long-time residents who have to look for parking
every day who's been there 20 30 years so why should people leasing and renting have access
to available parking every day, number one. Number two, I am actually in my car. I just drove past
there. They said they created a space for trash. There is a silver trash can there now, over flooded
over flooded with trash with no can and a recycling bin out there okay so that's not true
with trash, with no can, and a
okay thank you thank thank you for calling in is there anyone else
chair i see no hands at this time plenty plenty commission can i address some of the comments
real quickly you you could henry okay first of all this parking space to the right of my clients
is owned by the owner of 645 North 11th Street.
So whether who owns this, I don't know.
But this area here, this parking space,
you can see it's a flag lot.
It's owned by this property, number one.
The curb cut, my clients did not install a curb cut.
They don't have the wherewithal to install a curb cut.
L&I issued a CO back in 2013.
Now, if people from the neighborhood
aren't getting any action from L&I for nine years,
I find that hard to believe. All you have to do is pick up the phone, call your council person,
and Ellen and I will be out there. Next, the fact that it's tenant occupied, as I said earlier in
the presentation, should have no bearing on any decision rendered today. And I didn't say that
we have a trash container there now. I said that a trash container will be installed if we are
successful. And frankly, even if we're not successful, there's going to have to be some
type of trash receptacle put there. Thank you, Henry. Appreciate it. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
Hi. Could you spell your name for the court reporter, Peter?
Yes. My name is spelled P-E-T-E-R. B as in boy. A as in apple. R as in Roger. N as in Nancy. A as in
apple arson roger diaz and dog right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth i do chair we see the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5
single family zoning at this location the off-street parking spot represents a privatization
of a public parking space and creates a hazard for pedestrians accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board deny the variance thank you uh we've had a lot of testimony about this
I want to run this by the group in an executive session.
Tanya, are we back next Wednesday?
Yes, Chair, we are.
Oh, no, this is Hillary.
We're not here next Wednesday, the 7th.
It's the 14th that we'll be back.
That's right.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Thanks, Hillary.
That's what I thought.
But that's okay.
Thank you.
We will take this an executive session and vote publicly on it on the 14th at 2 p.m.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. MI 2022-002-947-340 Domino Lane. We have exhibits.
I believe people were looking for an attorney to represent them.
Is there anyone in the audience for this case?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Okay. This case will be continued. Mark must be tried.
Number four, MI-2022-002-922-3415 Haverford Avenue.
Jarrett Klein is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
Mr. Klein is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
good afternoon mr chair members of the board hi mr klein could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter please certainly it's jared klein j-a-r-e-d last name is k-l-e-i-n
from blank rome 130 north 18th street philadelphia right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client in relationship to the
property. Yes, my client's the equitable owner, 3415 Haverford LLC, and Dan Iacovella should be
joining me on the line today. Our vice chair has a few questions, Mr. Klein. Mr. Klein, do you agree
to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do, Madam Vice Chair.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal
or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have
you met with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to all of the above. Okay great you may proceed
by sharing your screen. Thank you very much. Thank you. So we're here for 3415 Haverford and this is
So we're here for 3415 Haverford, and this is what I hope is a relatively uncomplicated application.
The property is zoned CMX2 and is already permitted and is under construction for seven residential units with a ground floor commercial space as required in CMX2.
What we're seeking to do is replace the ground floor commercial space with a single additional residential unit, so a total of eight in the building, and we're seeking to do so because commercial viability at this location is not strong.
There's a lot of vacancy in the area, and this section of Haverford Avenue is not a commercial corridor, and we think the best use of the property would be as a residential dwelling unit on that ground floor.
Just to orient the board to the property, this is the location of the property here.
There's an existing large apartment complex here.
There's a firehouse across the street here.
Zoning, as you can see, is CMX2 with a lot of RM1 multifamily surrounding us on the adjacent blocks.
Photos of posting of the zoning notice in the window of the property.
And this is the surrounding area.
This is the building here.
It used to be a church.
What my client is doing is some adaptive reuse of the existing church building.
They're attempting to preserve as much of it as possible because of this mural that's on the outside, a mural that was important to the surrounding area.
And so we're doing as much as we can to reuse the existing building.
This is a view of Haverford.
This is the firehouse that I mentioned earlier.
And then there's additional residential and a lot of vacant commercial down at this end of the block.
This is the new apartment structure that I mentioned previously.
And these are some apartment buildings that are on the sandblock of Haverford across the street.
This is the site plan of the building.
The proposed new unit is going to be a bi-level between the basement and ground floor.
There are no bedrooms in the basement.
We're showing bedrooms on the ground floor level and a den slash living space area in the basement.
We met with the Mantua Civic Association, actually met with them on the sidewalk out in front of the property, and their note of support is indicated here.
They did not give a letter of explanation, but the attendees generally agreed that residential use in the ground floor here was appropriate, given the surrounding community.
I'd like now to ask if Dan Iacovella can raise his virtual hand so that he might adopt my testimony.
Dan, are you out there?
Chair, I see no one by their name at this time.
Mr. Klein, you are an officer of the court. We will take your testimony.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I don't have anything further, but I'm happy to answer any questions the board may have.
Questions from the board?
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change the cmx2 commercial mixed use at this location
and the zoning was supported by the community during a remapping in 2017.
However, this section of Haverford Avenue is not a major commercial corridor
and does not currently have high commercial activity.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission has no objection to the Board granting experience.
Thank you.
MI 2022-002-922-3415 Haverford Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you all very much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number six, MI 2022-003-125, 6410 Rising Senate Avenue.
So, Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from the Longcrest Community Association with proviso listed.
And a petition signed by 14 neighbors, most of who live on that block.
And then four letters of support from neighbors.
Mr. Nockamson is coming back in now as a panelist chair.
Good afternoon, members.
Hi, Mr. Nockamson. How are you, sir?
could you stay now i'm sorry good go a-l-a-n last name knockinson n-o-c-h-u
good go a-l-a-n last name knockinson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n one two three south broad street
suite 1600 Philadelphia Pennsylvania one nine one zero right do you do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do could you identify your client the relationship
to the property yes my client is the property owner design lab rentals LLC and with me in the
virtual audience is Kristen and Dante Gibbons, the owners of the property. Okay, our Vice Chair
has a few questions. Hi, Mr. Nockamson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership,
tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property,
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects. Okay, great. You may proceed by sharing your screen. Thank you very much. Thank
you. Hi, so today I'm presenting 6410 Rising Sun Avenue. This property is owned by Design Lab
Rentals LLC. And with me in the virtual audience is Kristen and Dante Givens. Kristen is the
member of the LLC and they will adopt my testimony at the conclusion of my presentation. And at the
conclusion, we can answer any questions the board may have about this project. In my presentation
packet, we have the notice of refusal. So this is a CMX1 property on a commercial corridor.
uh it's it's strange that it's cmx1 uh because uh there is much cmx2 use um on that block and
it's very random that there's cmx1 in the middle of the block if this was a cmx uh two property
this would be a special exception we're seeking rather uh than a variance but either way we are
confident that we've met our burden for variance a letter of non-opposition from the long crest
community association actually it was a well-attended meeting of over 40 of 45 individuals
each one of them voted in non-opposition to the project with certain provisos which we'll share
with the board a petition of nearby neighbors uh to 6410 rising center avenue a full letter
a full page of signatures in support of this project as well as letters of support by nearby
neighbors maps of the area photographs of the property that surround the area floor plans
showing you uh you know the design of this proposed event planning space our rco meeting notice showing
that we sent uh notice of this of the community meeting uh to nearby property owners and the
proof of mailing our application for appeal to the zoning board of adjustments our deeds of
property showing that design lab rentals llc's the owner of the property and their certificate of tax
clearance showing they're in good standing with the state Philadelphia again to conclusion my
presentation. We will have Kristen Gibbons adopt my desk.
All right, our notice of refusal. So this is a CMX1 property. The proposed uses for an assembly and
entertainment at first floor in the same building with all other uses as previously approved. No
sign in this application. And we're being refused because this is a CMX1 property. Again, if this
was a CMX2 property, this would be a notice of referral, not a notice of refusal.
and then the letter of non-opposition uh from the long crest community association again we're in the
long crest section of philadelphia as you can see here 45 people attended the meeting 45 people were
in non-opposition that typically doesn't happen so i was glad that the community was in non-opposition
to this project on this project and then here's the letter of non-opposition as well
that's indicating that they do not oppose the granting of this variance.
And then here are the provisos.
Some of them are enforceable that we have no objection to
as part of any type of notice of decision granting the requested variance
if the board is so inclined.
Others are not ones that the board usually puts as part of our proviso.
So, the ones that, you know, A, mentioned just that Alex Hamilton, Alex Holberg presented the case and that this was an application for a special assembly license in CMX1.
The second one, capacity will admit to 50 persons.
We would, you know, gladly accept that as a proviso.
No cooking permitted on the premises.
I think that's something that could, I don't know if that's an enforceable one.
i don't know if that's an enforceable one but if so we would you know be amenable to that
But if so, we would be amenable to that.
no alcohol served or permitted again not an enforceable proviso uh they mentioned that
there was a petition that we showed the same one that we showed you today at the community meeting
people in support uh they mentioned that uh kristen and dante gibbons were you know present
at the meeting uh mentioned about security lights and cameras installed at the property that we
promise that's not enforceable proviso but actually obviously we wouldn't do that and that
goes you know more towards like the standards for a referral rather than the refusal uh we're
going to obviously sprinkler the property uh we're going to store our garbage at the rear of the
property outside so that would be an enforceable proviso um and that we would remove uh we would
have commercial pickup twice a week which is also an enforceable proviso um we we noted our hours
that we anticipated at the beginning would be friday saturday and sunday um but you know again
that was just noting what we're planning to do at the beginning um and that the hours of operation
would be from 10 a.m to 11 p.m with the building vacated by midnight we again anticipate that we
would have seven days a week availability from 10 a.m. to midnight. And if the board is inclined
to put hours of operation as a proviso, we would ask that it would be seven days a week, 10 a.m.
to midnight. In here, we propose on-site security will be provided after 9 p.m. I don't know if
that's an enforceable proviso, but that's what we're planning to do. Parking is available across
the street there's a philadelphia parking authority and you'll see a photograph has a lot
across the street which kind of goes to the fact that we're not making a detrimental impact to the
community in terms of traffic congestion or parking um also there's a bus line as well
because we're on a commercial corridor um and that the owners uh offer to use the property
for community events if available again not enforceable proviso but something that we're
willing to do. By way of a motion, 45 people then voted in non-opposition to this project.
Then before the meeting, we made a concerted effort to meet with our nearby neighbors,
including the person we have. And again, as you can see from this map, we really focused our
attention primarily on our block, the individuals or the businesses that would be most directly
impacted by our proposed use and as you can see uh there was overwhelming support uh we have 17
properties other than ours that signed signatures in support of our project including our next door
neighbor and then you know here are the backup data here's the petition that was signed by
those individuals here are separate letters to support and then the maps of the area again we
We are on Rising Sun Air Avenue, which is a commercial quarter, as you can see.
Again, here on this side of the block is CMX2.
Here next to us is CMX2.
Then CMX2 is over here.
But there's an infill of CMX1 properties, which is highly irregular.
Typically, you know, mid-block, if you're in a commercial quarter, it would not be CMX1,
especially if you were surrounded by CMX2 throughout.
out. And if this was a CMX2 property, this would be by way of special exception, not by way of
variance. And then you can see here just from Google Maps perspective showing that we are
part of the commercial board. And the photographs of the property, this is our building structure.
This is the entrance to the event planning space. Here's a separate staircase and entrance for the
upper uh floor that's where our office is and then you can see from here across the street is the
parking authority parking lot so there's ample parking on this street plus the public transportation
as well and then here's rising sun avenue to the right of the property rising sun avenue till
left of the property and then my client um kristen gibbons has been in the bed planning
business for some time. And that's why she wanted to open up an event planning space
that's dedicated, you know, to her events and as well as obviously events within the community.
But here's an example of some of her work projects for some of her events.
And then here are plans and drawings. Pretty straightforward. It's all on the first floor.
again you know the commercial space does have availability for the lower level
the basement level but there will be no use it's just merely for storage of the business
but here are the two doors door to the left and the door to the right the door to the left go
and the door to the right the door to the left goes straight up to the office the door to the
straight up to the office the door to the right
right you come into a main lobby area there's two bathrooms a cooking a kitchen area a kitchenette
no cooking allowed oops no kitchen allowed here and then here's the hallway to the event planning
space again it's just an open floor plan and that's basically it so and then our rco meeting
notice we met with the community on august 18th at 6 30 pm it was 73 addresses were notified of
the meeting but 45 people uh voted so this was a very well attended meeting
and here are the list of the addresses
and then proof of mailing to those addresses
And there are applications for PLW file to the zoning board of adjustment, along with
our notice of refusal and project information form, our detailed property showing that Design
Lab Rentals LLC is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax clearance.
So with that being said, I'm going to share my screen for a moment.
I would ask that Ms. Gibbons virtually raise her hand, and then she, you know, take the oath.
Could you state your name and spell it, please?
Ms. Gibbons, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yes, my name is Christian.
Sorry, it's better.
It's okay.
Could you state your name and spell it, please?
Kristen, K-R-I-S-T-I-N, Givens, G-I-V-E-N-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes, Mrs. Givens, you heard everything I had to say to that.
And is it doing correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right, thank you.
That's your case, Mr. Knackamson?
That is correct, Mr. Knackamson.
Okay. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Dylan Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney, can you unmute yourself or wait for the chair, please?
Good afternoon.
Hi, good afternoon, Mr. Mahoney.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, sir.
Dylan Mahoney, D-I-L-L-O-N-M-A-H-O-N-E-Y.
Do you swear or for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Again, Dylan Mahoney from the Office of Councilwoman Sherelle Parker.
Our office received the letter of non-opposition from LCA, and our office would join in the
requests for the various provisos, in particular those related to hours of operation.
It's also our office's typical policy to request a temporary permission with respect
to event spaces to allow um community members uh future input um and with that we are not
opposed to the project thank you uh any anyone else in the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair yeah mr chair can i just make one clarification because i know
the hours of operation were discussed in the letter um we would ask again from 10 a.m to midnight
night we've indicated during our presentation to the community that we would be open to um the
events at 11 but we need to actually you know clean up as well so that's why we're saying
to midnight yep i understand um anyone else in the planning commission i'm sorry
planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing cmx1 commercial mixed use at this
location we feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate a sufficient hardship accordingly
the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance um hillary um should we set a timeline
on this if we if when we approve it um we can mr chair that that is fine to do okay um how about
three years just so three years three is fine mr knockamson do you have any um comments related to
a proviso for a temporary variant we have no objection mr chair i would ask for five this
We have no objection, Mr. Chair. I would ask for five. This is a very long process, especially nowadays. And, you know, it's not a cheap endeavor either. So if the board feels inclined, I would ask for five.
This is a very long process.
Okay. So MI 2022-003-125-6410, Rising Sun Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Hours of operation, 10-8 at midnight. Trash stored in the rear. And a timeline would be October 1st, 2027.
um that's five years right yes that's correct right yep
that would be five years mr chair yes that's fine carol tennari my vote is yes with proviso
thomas halliman my vote is yes with proviso james snell yes with proviso
yes with proviso
thank you mr knockerson thank you have a great day
MI 2022-002-920-4717 Stenton Avenue.
Recommendation of support from coordinating RCO, 12th Democratic Board, no explanation.
Letter of non-opposition from RCO, Solo Germantown.
Chair Brandon Saverin is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, could you state the court report, Brandon, please?
Yes. Brandon Saverin, B-R-A-N-D-O-N. S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes. So my clients are 4717 Stenton Holdings, LLC. That's the title owner. They are under contract to sell to 4717 Stenton, LLC. Same name without the word holdings in it. They are the buyer under contract. They are also represented by us in this process and will be here to adopt my testimony today.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Brandon. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do, Madam Vice Chair.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of your questions.
Okay, great. You may proceed by sharing your screen.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Okay, so what should be on your screen, members of the board, is the zoning refusal for this matter.
This property, 4717 Stanton Avenue, is a 47,000 square foot parcel in what is zoned ICMX, Industrial Commercial Mixed Use, on its side of the block, but is on somewhat of a mixed use block, as I'll show you in a moment.
So just to real quickly show you the subject property, it is this multi-story former manufacturing building with a sort of lower level portion in the back there.
And what we are proposing to do is convert this into residential use.
As the refusal says, we're not proposing any additions.
So there's no proposed increase in height or occupied area, as it says in the scope statement there.
What we are proposing to do is take the surrounding parking areas, repave them, restripe them, and add landscaping.
That's also provided for you here on the refusal.
And then we originally proposed to convert the interior of that building to 80 dwelling units.
We've reduced that a bit in our revised zoning plan, which is one page.
And I'll show you our proviso change form in a moment.
We will also have 40 off-street accessory parking spaces rather than the 47 stated here.
What remains accurate is all of the sort of special types of spaces.
We'll have two van-accessible parking spaces, three electric car charging parking spaces, and 27 indoor bicycle parking spaces.
The only refusal generated by this proposal is a use refusal because residential use is prohibited in a blanket manner, regardless of how many dwelling units there are in the ICMX district.
in the icmx district there's no dimensional refusals pertaining to the parking lot we're
There's no dimensional refusals pertaining to.
proposing the existing building etc so here's our proviso change form real quickly as i mentioned
we're we're down to 78 units on our revised plan we're down to 40 parking spaces but still have 27
than bike parking spaces indoors.
The reason we went down to 78 units
is actually because the coordinating RCO
wanted to see a trash storage facility
inside the building, not outside,
as was originally proposed.
So we made space for that.
And there's some other small changes that were made.
The location of the bike parking was moved
and there was the enlargement
of what I think will be some very nice common spaces.
And I'll show you that in a moment.
So here's the subject property.
We're in what I'll call Lower Germantown here.
Where my cursor is, is the Wayne Junction bus and rail depot.
There's a large sort of purple mass here of industrially zoned properties,
most of which are not served by city streets and are accessible from driveways off of Windrum Avenue down here.
But we are part of a strip of smaller properties.
keep in mind still a 47,000 square foot property so not that small but a strip of smaller properties
on Stanton Avenue that are directly accessed from Stanton Avenue and as you'll see on the zoning map
and on screen in a moment there are some residential uses nearby as well
so this is the letter of support from the coordinating RCO the 12th Ward Democratic
Committee. There is no rationale provided in this letter, but they do have a vote count,
which shows that it was an even vote with near neighbors, as they describe sort of forming the
supportive party, which I think was a part of their decision. They also coordinated with us
on those revisions I mentioned. There is also a letter of non-opposition from an RCO that actually
has its limit across the street. So this RCO governs the other side of Stanton Avenue. It's
called Solo Germantown. There is a rationale provided here. I'm not going to run through it
in full, but it talks about how the developer has developed other properties in its jurisdiction and
has taken care of them appropriately. That sort of forms the basis of their non-opposition,
and they have their own vote count which is very similar. I think they total seven people instead
of six but pretty much the same thing. So I'm going to just give you a brief tour of the building
and the area using Google. I like this because it's three-dimensional but there are extensive
photos of the building and the street in our exhibit packet. So just to say that you can find
these images in the exhibits as well. As I mentioned, here's the building, and there's sort of
two bases of hardship here for using it for industrial or commercial purposes. One is that
the back portion, which is quite lengthy, actually larger than this front portion of the building,
formerly, we believe, had windows, and they were filled in with stucco. You can see that more
closely as it also happened on the first floor of the taller portion of the building. This is
really quite unfortunate and needs to be remedied. I'm going to show you the final sort of third side
here because what it does to the lower floor of almost the entire building going way back there
is it makes it sort of like a cave. There's very poor lighting. There's almost no natural light
And as a result, even for the commercial non-industrial uses that the code does allow in this district, it's just not a pleasant space to occupy.
And it's going to take extensive funding to restore windows to this space.
Again, I'm going to take you back to this is the best view I think I have of it.
You can see sort of the tremendous length of building here that is just served by no natural light.
So we're going to remedy that. It's all going to have windows, big windows. But to sort of secure the investment to do that, the sort of most surefire way we can guarantee that folks will move into this building is to renovate it for residential use.
So that's one of our hardships. The other is that if you look on the zoning plan here, this is not a building that has one large parking lot. Instead, it has two small, narrow parking lots on both sides.
Instead, it has two small, narrow parking lots on both sides of the building, one up here and one here.
Now, this still provides adequate space, if you will, for regular passenger cars to pull in and out.
That's how we were able to fit 40 parking spaces.
But it's not the kind of space that is good for truck parking or truck turnaround.
And in fact, up here, some of this area we use through an easement agreement with our neighbor, and I don't believe the easement agreement allows truck parking necessarily.
So it just doesn't have the vehicular facilities that you would expect out of a modern industrial space.
Let's see. So I'll just real quickly show you the remainder of the block.
There's other buildings across from ours. Excuse me. This is our building on the left again.
there's other buildings of a similar sort of quality across the street in various states of
repair this one looks somewhat occupied this one has more boarded up windows here and then there's
some residential as well this is a residential building to give you a sense of the environment
so this is the one page official zoning plan but we have um a more extensive document that has
tentative floor plans and renderings. And I'll real quickly go through that. This is a color
coded version of that ground floor plan just to show you sort of how the parking works.
And this would be a landscaped area that we added here. There's actually an interesting
sort of power structure. It's like an on-site power plant that we're going to use for the
bicycle storage here and this is this elevation shows sort of what i would call the splendor of
how the stenton avenue front of the building is going to look once we restore all those windows
there are 78 proposed dwelling units 34 of them are two bedrooms that average about a thousand
square foot each these are really nicely sized units there will be 44 one-bedroom units that
average about 550 to 600 square feet. The blue units, this is the first floor plan, are the two
bedrooms. The pink are the one bedrooms. I'm not going to go drill down on a unit per unit basis
and show you layouts yet, but I can at your request. I'm absolutely happy to do so.
And what you sort of see here is this portion on the left is the tall three-story portion.
And the lower, longer portion of the building is all of this.
And that's sort of why it's so devastating to its current use that there are no windows
because almost the entire building has no windows.
This would be what we're calling the basement, but it's partially above ground.
And we'll have windows.
All of these windows.
These are upper floors here.
This is a bedroom table.
And then there are, we offered the RCO a security plan.
So this shows lighting posts to be installed, shown here, and security cameras that are going to light up the site.
And between that and the addition of windows on the ground floor, make this a safer block.
And then we have extensive renderings that total like a dozen pages.
Pretty cool stuff.
I'll sort of, I'll just show you one, for example.
This is, pardon me, one type of unit that would be in that lower portion of the building.
It's sort of a two-bedroom loft.
So I have the architect here to answer any further questions you might have about the project.
As I mentioned, we have some really extensive renderings available.
But for now, I'll leave it at that.
I'm happy to take any questions.
Why don't you have your client adopt your testimony?
Okay, thank you.
His name is Judah Angster, and he represents the buyer under contract.
Mr. Angster, can you please unmute yourself and wait for the chair?
What you doing?
I am now unmuted.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Judah Angster, J-U-D-A-H, last name Angster, A-N-G-S-T-E-R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Judah, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony today in this case?
Yes, I was.
Okay. Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
Would you therefore adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
do you are you an authorized representative of the buyer under contract and equitable owner of
the property yes i am and last question for you can you specifically affirm that if your firm was to
And last question for you. Can you specifically affirm that if your firm was to purchase this building, that it would restore windows to those stuccoed areas that I showed such that all of the dwelling units would have windows?
Absolutely.
Okay. Thank you. Just stay on in case the board has any questions for you.
Is that your case, Brandon?
Yes, it is, Your Honor.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have someone with the phone number ending in 5555.
Can you please unmute yourself and wait for the chair?
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Allison, A-double-L-I-S-O-N, Weiss, W-E-I-S-S, Solo Germantown Civic Association.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes. I just had a couple of questions. Thank you. Because we had discussed the potential of solar panels, and I didn't hear any mention of that, nor did I hear any mention of potential commercial space.
um alison um the solar is there anything more specific i don't think there's a plan for
commercial space in the building there's common area um certainly a lot of it but i
um i don't think there's a plan for commercial spaces can i can i answer anything more specific
about the solar yes will that be incorporated solar panels to provide solar energy i i would
have to bring on the architect to answer that i'm not i'm not positive which i can do if the board
would uh entertain that
Ms. Weiss, do you have any other
Do you have anything further?
We should consider solar as a city
and as a way of reducing our carbon footprint
and we had talked about
as we had talked about
on the property across the street
the planting of trees
improvements to the sidewalk
and a dog park
i think you had agreed at the meeting to a dog park and i wasn't able to i didn't get any of
the revised plan so i don't know if that was included in your revised plan because you didn't
mention it i i apologize let me show the revised site quickly it does we did increase see if i can
do this very quickly okay so the the this is the revised site plan um it does increase the green
area. And it may look small relative to the site, but remember this is a 47,000 square foot
property. So that is one of the reasons we went down. This here was additional parking right here.
Instead, this is going to be a landscape area with benches in the front. There's going to be
a walkway around the power plant building where the bikes are kept. And this is going to be a dog
run it says 1100 square feet i don't know if you can see dog park it's a little small i'm i'm i'm
unfortunately on the prime so i can't see anything but if you could send a copy of the revised plans
that would be yes absolutely and i apologize that you didn't get that and we also had talked about
uh across the street the need for uh maintenance and um cleaning of the area yes
i i think um that you know i don't want to take up the board's time but judah as you've seen is
happy to speak with you i know that he did replace the sidewalk up on the other side of the street
there where you're talking about um yes yes no they did a wonderful job so i'm hoping that those
same uh considerations will be given to uh 4717. yes absolutely and i think you did a good job
mentioning that in your letter which i showed the board yeah yes good thank you
is there anyone else in the virtual audience chair we have charles richardson mr richardson
please unmute yourself and wait for the chair good afternoon mr richardson state your name
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, from the Office of Councilwoman
Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall. Proceed. Oh, I'm sorry. Do you swear to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the
I do. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
variance. Thank you.
Thank you very much for calling in. Anyone else?
Chair, we have a Raymond Rolla. Mr. Rolla, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Raymond Rolla, R-O-L-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Yes, I just had raised my hand in reference when Brandon had mentioned that the architect would know about the solar panels.
So all I can say is that if the owner will find it cost-effective and economically advantageous to put in the solar panels, I'm sure they will consider it.
And the roof certainly does have a configuration that would lend itself to it.
I think it's just an economic consideration.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Thanks, Ray. Raise the project architect.
Is there anyone else?
I see no other hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change to industrial residential mixed use, or IRMX.
RMX and has not yet been re-zoned. The proposal for adaptive reuse of the legacy industrial
building for residential is consistent with the recommended zoning, but we feel the project
could be further enhanced by the incorporation of industrial commercial use. Additionally,
accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the variance.
Thank you very much. MI 2022-002-920-4717 Stenton Avenue, I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plan, one page, stamped by CBA on August 31st, 2022. Maximum 78 units.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell.
Yes, for proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes, for proviso.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2022-000455-4147 West Drive Avenue.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
Letter of support from Centennial Parkside CDC.
Mr. DeMarco is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
sorry my uh connection was a little slow there good afternoon mr chairman hi you've already
been sworn um could you identify your client in relationship to the property yeah the client that
will testify is justin trout too and he's the representative of the owner llc of property
All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. DeMarco. Do you agree to waive the read of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes. Yes to all questions.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin sharing your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, this is a request for a variance.
This is, while it might seem to be an unusually high-density use, when I go through some of these documents, you'll understand why that's not the case.
uh this property has a long-standing uh history of six units uh in our packet uh is the
archive for this property and you can see here if i could just show you on the refusal itself
there is reference to the over-the-counter permit at the time this property had a long history of
multi-family zoning and it was a six-family dwelling legally as far back as you can see here
1957. The property then of course was empty for a long period of time and resulted in significant
deterioration. Let me show you some photos because I can show you exactly what we're dealing with
here uh and why we were able to get the support of of the neighborhood um this is a derelict property
um this is a derelict property it had all sorts of entry points within it um it's in it was in
it had also
extremely poor condition when it was purchased my clients have been struggling to secure it since
then uh there have been some uh instances where people have still gotten in but you can see uh
the property is in extremely poor condition. What I'm going to show you here is the evidence
that there was long-standing multi-family use for six units. You can see the hot water heaters here
and I'm going to show you the here are the junction boxes for the utilities. You can see here
you've got seven meters which would indicate one for the common area and then the six units.
um so here's the rear let me show you the front so so what we'll do uh with this is and by the
way mr chairman if i could just show you i looked at all of the other properties on this block
and each of them is multi-family uh some as high as six units you see this is a
a property on the same block six units three units five units excuse me six units um
The block has a long history of multifamily.
You can see here on the zoning map, we're actually very close to current RM1.
But all of these properties here have long histories of multifamily use, as you can see from these permits.
All right.
So back to the floor plan. As far as trash storage, we do actually have a permit for the neighboring property.
This company is going to develop both. That was over the counter, but we're here for 4147.
We have walked through, and this is the way, by the way, the property is currently configured.
Even though it's a derelict property, there are multiple kitchens or the remnants thereof.
There is a walkthrough all the way back to the rear yard, so there'll be trash storage for every tenant.
And here's our poster.
There's going to be an immense amount of work cleaning up the property.
We did meet with the RCO.
There were some concerns at the first meeting, but by the second meeting, I believe it's fair to say we resolved those concerns.
The community voted unanimously to approve it.
My clients did go to some of the residents on the block, and I'll have my client verify this, Mr. Chairman,
but they were very happy to hear someone do something with the property.
The problem has been the property, excuse me, has been a nuisance property in the past prior to my clients purchasing it.
And they were very relieved to hear that it was going to get fixed up.
See what else I have for you here.
We really do need the six units.
While it might seem dense, the sixth unit really makes the property allow the developer to justify the investment.
will turn a small profit uh we can't do less than six units i'll have my client
verify that um and let me just go ahead and ask justin to raise his hand virtually
um and we can let me show you some renderings we have some renderings as well
uh there is a pilot house at the top but it will very not be very visible you see this is the
property right here a nice property and by the way we're going to preserve and upgrade the facade
which has some very nice architectural elements um and there were some issues with the neighbors
about visibility of the powerhouse you can see you have to be really far across the street to
see the top of it uh so go ahead let me go ahead and ask justin to adopt uh my testimony and confirm
um some of some other items justin are you with us yes justin could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter sure justin trattou t-r-a-t-t-o-u right do you swear a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir proceed counsel mr uh track two did you
hear my factual statements uh and testimony to the board in this case yes uh can you are they
true and accurate, and will you adopt them as your testimony? Yes. And this is an existing
structure, Justin, and you're going to be doing a full rehab of the existing structure, correct?
Correct. We're going to be leaving the facade and the actual structure itself there.
Correct. We're going to be leaving the facade and the actual structure.
We're going to be working a full interior gut renovation and obviously doing the necessary exterior as well while maintaining the character of the facade.
And did you hear my testimony about why do you need to have the original use of the six units for this?
So just the raw costs of construction, they're so high that unless you have the six units, it's just going to be not feasible to complete the project.
There's just not enough room there.
The six units makes the deal feasible.
And the interior layout of this property is for six units as well, right?
Correct.
It's the existing use being just carried forward.
Right. And there are six individual kitchens or the remnants thereof within the property already, right?
Okay. And can you verify that you spoke to some of the neighbors next door and did they express relief?
Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, it was a good experience.
So I walked down there, spent about three or four hours walking around the neighborhood,
just knocking on all the neighbors' doors, catching people going to their cars.
you know had them just you know just asking them you know person to person what do they think about
the project do they want it done and at 100 of the people i probably caught about 15 or 20 people
100 of them were in favor of doing the project there's we've had multiple we had to reboard it
up three or four times as we've owned the place people keep breaking in there doing drugs etc
and there's you know a fair amount of families on the block and you know in order to have it
fixed up and new and bring it back to life i think it's you know it's going to only help the
neighbors and help everybody whether it's six units the density i think the the benefits outweigh
the the problems there so everyone seemed to to really be in favor of the project
and um you have trash storage for all tenants in the rear right and accessible right yes through
the building and we also have the the side yard so it's accessible uh both ways and no basement
bedrooms correct correct no uh no bedrooms in the basement mr chairman that's all i have
um thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa3 single-family residential
attached at this location while the property has a long history of being used as multi-family the
condition of the property necessitating a gut renovation removes any pre-existing
hardships from the property accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance
Thank you. MI 2022-000-455-4147 West Rod Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holtman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you for your time. Have a good afternoon, everyone.
Thank you. We're going to go to number 13, MI 2022.
to 005190271 Delmar Street. Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
Yes. We should also have the attorney from the city here.
Mr. Reuter is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
brandon you've already been sworn yes yes um this is an attorney against our
i know yep i know um mr ruderon yet i'm here all right could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter please uh yes uh may have pleased the board leonard f reuter r-e-u-t-e-r
senior attorney for the city of philadelphia do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Okay. So I think Hillary sent around. So what we'll do is
have opening statements by both parties first. Brandon, you want to go first? Sure. I mean,
this is really, I'm actually going to ask Mr. Reuter if I can put him on.
I'm actually going to ask Mr. Reuter if I can put him on the spot for what the city's position is, because that will affect the degree of detail I have to go into in my presentation.
Oh, you're just asking me, what do I think about this?
Are you opposed to the appeal?
or what what's yeah so um you know i have first of all i didn't it was it the end of july that
we learned of this appeal uh i didn't um realize that it was going to be heard today we learned i
learned about it actually when i was vacation that was scheduled today not not a problem we looked
into it this because appeals against l and i are uh 90 of them are legal arguments so you know i
don't need to bring a planner or plans examiner here. I think in a lot of respects, the appeal
in question is very technical and somewhat academic in nature. And we would say that
and I have talked to a few people about this and looked into it a lot myself.
um had this permit application been approached in a different way had it been divided up into
separate applications then they would in fact be able to do what they want to do here so
our position basically is that they're just trying to avoid um extra fees for you know new permit
separate permit application fees at you know having to pay architects for separate plans
uh and all of that um because you know again and i understood we understand that's an that's a
that's a an expense it's not nothing um but the problem is is that when they submitted the
subdivision plan in conjunction with the new construction plan we had no other way up we had
no way to approach this other than to review the entire site as covered under the steep slope
protections. So, you know, it's our position, you know, that by submitting it as a single
permit, a combined permit application that put it upon city planning to review the entire site,
which nobody's disputing that taken as a whole, the original, the original site does, is bound
by the steep slope restrictions. You can take any property that has steep slopes and subdivide a
portion of that property off that doesn't have a slope, like say you have the front yard that's
flat, you could subdivide that out. And assuming that that is a developable, that's a word,
a developable parcel, that would be, you could do that subdivision and then you could submit
the application to do the new construction on that newly subdivided parcel and that would be
fine. But if you submit a permit application to just simply build on that flat portion of the
site, it doesn't matter that that portion of the site is flat. It's the fact that the entire parcel
has to be considered for steep slope protections. And we would agree, yes, if you have a huge front
yard and it's flat on its face, you're not impacting the steep slopes. But that's basically
what happened here. So had they submitted the subdivision plan first and got a subdivision
permit, which at least with respect to steep slope issues, steep slope issue, it does not
come up in subdivision plans. We're just simply looking at what the minimum parcel size, minimum
lot size and dimensions are for a given zoning classification. So presumably the lot adjustment
adjustment from one to nine lots would have been issued by Wright, and then now they've got the
smaller lots, they would then come in and say, well, each individual lot's now under 1,400 feet,
we are not bound by steep slopes provisions, and that would have been correct. I don't know how
else to put it, and I'm sure Mr. Saverin is aware of it, that is an obvious loophole,
and one which, by the way, we would like to eventually close.
But that simply can be done.
And again, I think the reason why people don't do it that way
is because of the additional fees that would be generated
by having to submit instead of one permit application to subdivide.
Leonard, could I jump in there?
So we would be happy to give them an opportunity to amend
and then do this as separate applications and separate permits, we understand that would be an additional expense.
Well, yeah, so I could give a – if the board wants a little information about the site, that's super helpful,
and I can now do it in a condensed manner.
But let me just say to Leonard's comments there, that's exactly right.
If we had subdivided this first, it would be a buy right proposal. We are not attempting to evade city fees. The city fees involved with a review of a zoning plan are really small in the development of, you know, in the grand scheme of an entire development and its costs.
If we had subdivided this first, it would be a by-right proposal.
We are not –
It's about human labor costs, the cities and hours. So we have to pay engineers to make zoning plans for eight separate building lots rather than one plant. And believe me when I say it's much more expensive for the city to digest and issue then later building permits on those eight separate zoning plans than it is one zoning plan.
So this is really, in my eyes, about eliminating waste. And that is actually why my client chose to pay a lawyer to take this appeal, because they really want to pursue this thing with one zoning plat rather than eight of them.
And further, the one thing I can add is that I actually believe the law in such a situation compels the city to issue approvals, whether or not we break it down from one to eight plots. I don't think it's at the city's discretion to deny this just because we submitted it under one plan. That's my response to Leonard. And I think if I showed the board for five minutes the property, you'd really sort of understand where we're coming from.
If I could just respond briefly, and I don't object to Mr. Saverin introducing the plans just so the board has a graphic representation of what we're actually talking about here.
We do oppose substantively the argument that they've at least preserved about there being a distinction between man-made or artificial and natural slopes.
There's nothing addressing that in the ordinance. Yes, there may be some common sense distinction somebody can make. So, for instance, if somebody just dumped a pile of debris on a property and threw dirt on top of it, that doesn't make it a steep slope.
So there have been extremely rare occasions where we have said, no, this is something different. This is literally just a pile of construction debris or something that, yes, we would agree that just because it's now a hill or a pile of dirt doesn't make it a steep slope.
But I think in this case, whether or not it was originally created as a result of human intervention, the fact that it has existed for the time that it has, it has in fact become an integral part of the natural environment.
Again, you get into too much detail there.
And again, I don't really think – so on that question, we certainly will just simply preserve the argument that we don't believe there's any distinction.
Even if we believe that there was such – that there ought to be such a distinction, there's nothing in the code that provides for that.
You know, again, except when something is just completely obvious that it's not a real slope or hill.
But that doesn't seem to be the case.
Brandon, could you show us what you want in five minutes?
Why don't you go over there?
This will help.
So let me do that.
Yeah, okay.
All right.
Here's our refusal.
Just real quickly, the only refusal here is for violation of the steep slope ordinance.
The scope of the application in the all caps says that we are taking a lot, and it's a 28,000 square foot lot.
We're going to be developing eight single family homes on it.
So here's the site. We're in the Ridge Park area of Roxborough. It has a nice frontage on Del Mar that's wide enough for eight homes and, you know, a large back.
And what we're going to do is whether we'd like to do this all in one application, you know, Leonard and the city would like to break it into multiple steps, but we're going to take this property on the left, divide it into these eight building lots with the driveway down the middle that gets to the back of the houses, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
and where most of the slopes are is are in the rear and we're not touching it and there's nothing
in our application that says that we're developing this parcel we're not so this this survey was
approved by the ninth survey district there's our stamp up there if you grant this appeal we are
compelled legally to subdivide this property prior to building it so it's not like we can get out of
subdividing it. It's just that the city wants us to subdivide it in a separate zoning application.
So we're really talking about semantics here. Here's just a slightly more, excuse me,
trying to scroll over, slightly more traditional zoning plat that shows the plan. Okay.
plat that shows the plan. Okay, why did we trigger a steep slope refusal? The parts of the property
that are below the blue line here, if they contain steep slopes, we need a variance if we're
affecting them. If this was a larger property, if we weren't breaking it down, I'll come back to this
in a moment. As far as sort of like the water department's view of the situation, we completed
the initial irsa erosion and sedimentation control review they gave us you know a thumbs up on the
plan so water department at least from the you know erosion and sedimentation standpoint has no
problem with what we're doing so what are our arguments leonard was talking about one of them
a moment ago which is whether the slopes are man-made or not i'm going to put that aside for
a second that's sort of irrelevant to the main argument the main argument is does the steep
slope ordinance applied when you're building lots are single family homes and as such they're
they're under the 1400 square feet of disturbance that the steep slope ordinance requires um
sorry you'll see here in this red underline that the steep slope ordinance only applies to lots
containing earth disturbance of greater than 1400 square feet our buildable lots do not contain that
much disturbance. And what is a lot, the zoning code defines it as a parcel that is intended to
be built on. So again, just to go back to this, these eight little lots don't have the required
earth disturbance to trigger the steep slope rule. And the last thing I'm going to say about this,
just to go back to legal argument for one moment, is that you, Mr. Chair, if you think about it in
this manner. The city never applies its zoning regulations to the existing lot. It applies them
to proposed lots. So imagine that there is a rule, let's say, for offices instead of residences,
where if you have a certain number of office units, you must have a loading dock. Well,
Now, if instead of, you know, and I'm proposing, let's say, eight small office condos, it wouldn't be appropriate for a little storefront to have to have a huge loading dock.
But if you were to apply the zoning ordinance to the pre-subdivided land, that would be required.
So it's a similar thing here.
there's this sort of well-intentioned soil control rule about the development of a large
property. But because we're building single-family homes on small lots, and Leonard has admitted
that we're permitted to do that, our sole argument here really is that the city needs to judge our
application based on what we are proposing to build. That's how zoning works. It shouldn't be
judged based on the current lot lines when we are not touching over half the lot, that whole back
area we showed you. And if I can real quickly, the sort of problematic slopes are mostly in that
back area. The ones that happen to be in the front area where we're actually building are these
little low-lying, like retaining walls that the prior owner used to build a parking lot. So you
can see images of them on the left. We are not talking about severe natural hills. Here's a
close-up. There's another one there. These are the adjacent homes. What we're building is totally in
line with what surrounds the property. So I'm going to stop there. I have engineers and
architects to run through these plans, but really the bottom line here is if the ZBA grants the
appeal, then we can proceed. We're going to be legally required to subdivide the property and
restricted through our application to only building those eight single family homes. We can't do
anything more than that if you grant the appeal. But if you deny the appeal, we can't build
anything. And instead, we have to submit a zoning application to subdivide the land and build
nothing. And only once we do that can we go back and build. So basically the city is trying to
corner us into making nine, if you will, separate zoning applications rather than one. The nine
would be first to subdivide and then eight separate zoning applications to build eight
separate homes. Instead, we have submitted one application that subdivides and sets up all eight
application that subdivides and sets up all eight of those homes it's just much more efficient for
of those homes.
the city and if the board wants to sort of review that plan with hillary and your other council
that's you know absolutely fine with us but it's why don't we do this why don't we uh leonard do
you want to respond to that no i mean i think that's basically the issue i mean i i think the
problem that we face with the city is that in this particular instance given the specific facts
that apply to this instance, I can see where it makes, you know, maybe does make sense for
the applicant to approach this the way they did. But we can't predict the number of instances where
a permit application might come in that's a combined application. And because it's combined,
it creates, like, for instance, like, let's just say, so for instance, many, I think, most zoning
classifications, you can't have more than, you know, you can't have multiple main uses or multiple
main structures on the same lot so you come in with a permit application to you know do new
construction that contains multiple properties or whatever we can't and they say well you know
we're going to subdivide this once we do this thing um but or you know you say we're going to
do that now but again i think there that that becomes actually kind of a vote of contention
let him finish sprain and let him finish one minute right so again i think you know again i
I think whatever decision the board is going to make here, I think they need to be clear that it is specific to this application and, you know, leave it to the city, to city council and to planning to look at particularly the steep slope protections here.
Because, again, in this instance, yes, we it is an artificial steep slope.
It's not much of a slope, but it still meets the definitions.
But in another case where you have a, you know, a real natural steep slope that is an environmentally sensitive situation, you know, it becomes, you know, problematic.
We want to be able to maintain control.
This is a problem where people can subdivide it into smaller pieces and therefore, you know, avoid the steep slope protections.
We're not saying that's, well, I guess it was our position that they're doing it again.
And I think they admitted they're doing this because they think this is more efficient.
We think the code requires you to do it the other way.
So, yes, it's a, you know, it's a ministerial thing.
But in another instance, it might not be, you know, a purely administrative, you know, ministerial thing.
It might be something that's more, you know, problematic for the city.
So whatever you decide here, as long as it's specific to this case, you know, how this was approached, you know, that's what we would urge.
so hillary hillary why don't we take this under advisement we'll talk about an executive session
we'll talk with you about it and we'll uh we'll vote on this on the 14th okay sounds good do any
of the members have questions before i have i have uh mr chairman mr chairman i have a question i
like to know is the steep slope man-made or natural mr holliman we don't believe there are
any natural slopes on this site at least in the building area thank you what you're saying
brandon behind the place there could be um i i have the engineer on to address that but behind the
so let me put it this way leonard appropriately mentioned the danger of making this some general
rule but the beauty about your authority is that that's that's not what you guys do you decide
specific cases and in this case we have totally showed our hands we can't build a thing here
unless we complete a subdivision first even if you approve this today and we cannot build
anything back there and we're not applying to we're applying to leave it as open area that was
a swimming pool so it's a little more I think the slopes again I would have to get the engineer on
to confirm I believe the slopes back there are largely man-made as well but they're a little
more severe as they result from this big gargantuan swimming pool because it's so screwy back there
we're not touching it we have no permission even if you grant us one more question mr chairman
can you provide can you provide a cross-section of the proposed building children cut and fill
yes i i have that mr holliman um if if the board is willing to um have me uh bring on
the architect to walk through it i i believe i have the slides
okay if we're going to do it let's do it quickly bring the architect scott woodruff would be the
name of the architect and if you could also promote brendan mccardle he's the engineer
guys if you if you could raise your um your hands
do we see hands raised yes chair please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hi could you brendan state your name and spell for the court reporter
hi my name is brendan mccardle uh b-r-e-n-d-a-n-m-c-a-r-d-l-e
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Who else is on, Brandon?
Scott Woodrum.
Excuse me.
Even if you don't go in there.
I can proceed with Brendan.
All right, go with Brendan.
Okay, so Brendan, just real fast.
You're a civil engineer.
You prepared the plans here.
Is that right, Brendan?
That is correct.
Okay, thanks.
So what I have on screen, I believe, is a cross-section of three different points on the site.
I'm going to real quickly show you, this is sort of the summary of all three.
And then on the following slides, there are individual breakdowns.
So you heard Mr. Holloman's question.
He would like you to describe, you know, how the sort of fill is going to work there.
Can you just walk through this a little bit?
I'm going to put the ball on your court, if that's okay.
sure that uh that's fine as you as you can see in the cross sections um from from the top of the
sidewalk down to the back of the site um we the maximum slope across the the entire site without
looking at localized areas is uh 15 which is lower than the threshold um you can see that the the
localized man-made steep slopes were put in there when obviously when they they tried to put in the
swimming pool um so they had to have a large level of area so they put walls and slopes into that
um a level area for a pool and a parking area so if you can see those those sections
um we'll actually be uh improving improving it and and taking away some of these man-made steep
slopes which will uh prevent sedimentation and and polluting the watershed
thank you okay thank you does anyone else from the board have a question
no mr chairman no mr chairman okay so both of you we've heard both of you we'll get together
with hillary in the next couple weeks and we'll vote on this i think it's the 14th right hillary
that is correct mr chair at 2 p.m okay and by the way thank both of you
thank you thank you all right uh may be excused yes you can sir
thank you number 16 mi 2022 003 388 2112 ridge avenue jeffrey young is the attorney
there's support from the rco and also support from the councilman um clark's office
mr young is coming back in as a panelist
hi good afternoon members of the board
all right jeffrey could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Yes, Jeffrey Young.
I am the attorney for the applicant.
My name is spelled J-E-F-F-E-R-Y, last name Young, Y-O-U-N-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And the applicant is the Philadelphia Housing Authority, Jeffrey?
Yes, that's the property owner, yes.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
This is Hillary.
I just wanted to interject briefly.
The board member, Shahid, is recusing himself from this matter.
That's right.
Thank you.
Do you agree to leave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under a plan for the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, we did email an exhibit packet with some documents in it. There is an issue with a tax clearance that I will explain further in the presentation, given that my client is a nonprofit tax entity, there seems to be an issue once certain properties were purchased. So I would explain that in the presentation.
it. Okay, you may proceed and start sharing your screen. Thank you. Thank you.
thank you thank you
again good afternoon members of the board my name is jeffrey young i'm here on behalf of the
project developer benchmark construction group and the owner of the property philadelphia housing
authority for the properties essentially the address would be 2112 ridge avenue
We're here, I guess, when I go over the presentation, it's a table of contents.
Prior to the submission of my packet, we did not have the RCO letter, but this is an email
from the RCO stating what the results of the meeting was, but subsequently we have obtained
a letter. I believe the board has that letter as well.
um here is a tax clearance for for one of the properties uh 2112 ridge avenue um again that
the these properties are owned by the philadelphia housing authority so there are about there are 10
properties uh that consist of this particular um project um and as we were trying to obtain
some tax clearances some properties we were able to obtain tax clearances for this particular
clearance as you see it didn't give us an address when we put the address in or the OPA number in
so I believe that because of the condemnation that occurred which is how PHA acquired most
to these properties, it kind of screwed up OPA system and created some issues when generating
tax clearances. Again, this is another one for a property that's included in the Project 2126
Ridge Avenue. Here's another one for this one was for 1537 Beachwood, which is included
in the site, but again, the address didn't show up once we entered the OPA address.
For 1529 Beachwood, again, same thing. We put the address in, we put the OPA number in,
and this is the clearance that showed up for us.
2118 ridge avenue we were able to obtain a tax clearance but again for for beachwood
1529 beachwood just shows that there's a zero tax balance for 2116 ridge avenue we were not
able to obtain a tax clearance but this shows a zero tax balance and again members of the board
We put in the Philadelphia property website, we typed in the addresses for 2120 Ridge Avenue, 2122, and 2124, and that told us that those properties did not exist.
So there, again, given how PHA acquired most of these properties through condemnation and consolidation, I believe that it kind of screwed up OPA system.
So again, what we're proposing is to build a four-story building with 36 residential units
and four parking spaces. We have six refusals in total stemming from the number of units,
the height of the property, as well as some dimensional variances, a parking variance and
a variance for a fence, which I will address each variance throughout the project. We're also
refused for not having 100% of commercial, 100%, excuse me, not having 30 feet of commercial space
on the first floor for one of our commercial spaces which i'll get to as well again these
are the additional varices for the height our proposed height is 45 feet where 30 is allowed
we have a fence six foot high proposed fence where four feet is allowed and a certain part of our
fence is 100 opaque which i will get to and address in further presentation here just to give the
board a sense of the zoning for the area where this arrow is that is all zoned cmx2 and across
the street is deep red is all cmx3 we're located in the shardswood neighborhood of north philadelphia
this particular property is included in the in the philadelphia housing authority
um this particular property um is included in the in the philadelphia housing authority's
um shardswood bloomberg redevelopment plan
and again this is just a map uh to show that we are on the ridge avenue commercial corridor um
directly across the street from us is a new supermarket uh the grocery outlet uh market
as well as other uh mixed-use developments along ridge avenue we're about a block and a half north
of the Philadelphia Housing Authority's headquarters.
And this is an aerial view of the property.
We are bounded by Ridge Avenue to the east,
Beechwood to the west, to the south is Bolton,
and there to the north is Oxford Street
with a few properties in between ours and Oxford Street.
And again, just give the board a sense of what the area surrounding the property looks like from all corners of our property.
I'm going to get to the zoning plan here.
Again, we're proposing a four-story commercial mixed-use multifamily building with 36 units.
By right, we're allowed to do 31 units.
However, when this plan was designed, it actually was designed for a by right project as far as the number of units go.
However, this particular area, we were able to obtain the affordable housing bonus necessary to have the additional height of 45 feet and the additional five units.
However, this particular area was taken out of the legislation, and so this did not conform to the current code.
Again, we're proposing 36 units, a height of 45 feet.
The total square footage of the building is 33,370 square feet.
the first floor consists of vacant commercial spaces and the commercial spaces which we are
refused for is this little small area here which will be used as some kind of store or of the like
possibly for for the tenants and I'll get to a floor plan later on in the in the presentation
but we're proposing to add street trees along ridge avenue and the front of the property as
well as in the rear along beechwood there is there will be an existing there will be open area
in the back for the residents to utilize again there are four parking spaces
one on beach two parking spaces on beechwood excuse me and then two parking spaces to the
south on Bolton. And to address the fence issue, so surrounding the property will be a six foot
high fence. It's a traditional black iron gate fence. However, around the trash area here is
where it's 100% opaque where you won't be able to see in the property, which I think is a benefit
to the community so they they're not seeing the uh the trash storage um in in the property
um again this is just our roof plan uh designating uh what the the roof would look like here are the
stairs and this is the elevation to showing four stories um indicating uh that we are at uh 45 feet
and again this is just more elevations for the property.
The design of the property is a mix of red brick and gray brick with some blue and white
metal paneling. It is consistent with the development style that is being developed
along the ridge avenue corridor as you can see there are interests for the retail locations
along the ridge avenue front and a separate interest here for the residents
this is just the the Bolton street elevation you can see the south view of the property
This is the rear, as I mentioned, the open area grass space, the black iron fence around the property.
um the the black iron fence around the property
and again this is the view from the the ridge avenue and bolton street corner
and again from the beechwood and bolton street uh intersection
and give the board a sense of all the views all the way around the property
here the site plan and i want to get into the first floor of the property
here in the first floor there will be a multi-purpose room for the residents
a kitchenette area for for packages office space storage and again the retail spaces
and small commercial space here so we we do not have any residential uses on the first floor
again all uses are are ancillary i guess for the the residents um and again the refusal
regarding the commercial space is because this small commercial space does not meet the 30 feet
requirement again this is the site plan of the first floor again
here's the second floor each floor will consist of 12 units the majority of the
units are one-bedroom units and there are accessible units on each floor so you can
see on the second floor there will be a handicap accessible unit.
This is the third floor with a handicap accessible unit as well as a unit for hearing and vision
impaired residents. And the third floor again consisting of 12 units and each floor also
has two two-bedroom units as well to give this the board a stint of the
elevations again for the property again we are here we are 45 feet across the
street from us is a new development being constructed now by mosaic which is
of similar use it is a commercial mixed-use with commercial on the
ground floor with three floors of residential above. Again, we are proposing to be 45 feet
in height. Again, across, so we are a little bit lower than a by right project that is in the CMX
three zoning classification of 52 feet. And again, we're about a block north of PHA's existing
headquarters, which is a total of 72 feet in height. So we are consistent and in line with
the new development and development styles in the area, as I will present here. This is the
mosaic project that I just mentioned being built directly across the street from us. Again, they
have red brick with paneling, similar style to what we are proposing to give the board to get
sense of what this new development style on Ridge Avenue consists of. Again similar pictures from
the Mosaic project in the rear. Here is a picture of our zoning notice. This is from the Beechwood
side of the property and here's another picture of the zoning notice from the Ridge Avenue side
of the property. Here's a copy of our notification that was sent to the community. This is our proof
of mailings. And we also have a petition in support from local residents regarding our
project. And with that, you know, I'll be able to answer any questions that the Board
may have.
Jeffrey, do you have anybody from PHA that you want to have your testimony adopted?
Yes, I believe it's if Nicholas Dima is on or Greg Hampson.
Yeah, whatever one.
There's no one by that name with their hand.
Oh, hold on.
We have Gregory Hampson.
Gregory, okay.
Mr. Hampson, could you state your name and your position at Fluffy Housing Authority?
Gregory Hampson, I'm the Executive Vice President of Construction and Capital Project for the Philadelphia Housing Authority.
Could you do me a favor? Could you spell your name for the court reporter?
H-A-M-P-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Thank you. Mr. Hampson, have you heard my testimony this afternoon?
yes and uh do you believe my testimony to be true and accurate
And do you believe my testimony could be true and accurate?
And do you adopt my testimony as if it were your own?
Thank you.
Jeffrey, is that your case?
Yes, yes, sir.
Is there questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
question uh planning commission please good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing cmx2 commercial mixed use
at this location the proposal conforms with the recommendations of the lower north district plan
regarding the redevelopment of the shardswood bloomberg high res accordingly the planning
commission recommends the board grant the variances thank you hillary do we want to hold the vote till
we straighten out the uh the taxes the ownership um yes mr chair um let's just hold close the
record except for um receive additional tax information and mr young i will um also check
on our end because we did have this happen um in a another case where there were some changes in
property ownership and subdivision lines and whatnot and the taxes were uh messed up in that
case too so i may need to just it may be that i just need to verify um with with revenue that
everything is fine thank you if i made so there is a cooperation agreement between uh the philadelphia
housing authority in the city of philadelphia um that essentially says that when pha takes ownership
of property um the city will automatically exempt them from paying property taxes um so i'm i'm just
assuming here at this one particular parcel, specifically 2114 Rear Devenue that the housing
authority purchased in 2020, this was not applied to. So it's an administrative issue that I think
can be clearly and quickly resolved. Yeah, we'll take care of it. All right. So
we think we can get this done in two weeks, Hillary? Oh, absolutely. Okay. All right. So
We're back on the 14th, so we'll go over this in executive session on the 14th and do the vote at 2 p.m., okay, Mr. Young?
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you for your presentation.
So, look, we have two more cases from the 2 o'clock list.
Let's take a five-minute break because the cases could go a little bit longer, and then we're going to go right through everything we have, okay?
So let's take a five-minute break, get Mr. Kelly straight for what we have to do this afternoon, and we'll come back.
So five minutes, everybody.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
hi this is tanya mr kelly are you back yes i am thank you sir is everybody else back
um chair we're ready to begin as you are okay we're going to go with number 17
mi 2022 001 494 2507 almond street adam laver is the attorney
um there's a letter from rco old richmond civic association and we've just received a letter from
councilman squill's office he's a non-opposition but reports in the letter of uh several people
calling the office to complain good afternoon chairman and members of the board could you
Can you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Adam Laver, L.A., V as in Victor, E.R.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Chairman Bergman, I do.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
Yes, Blank Rome represents L&M Real Estate Developments, LLC, and its parent entity, the River Wards Group, the equitable owner of the subject property.
Okay, our Vice Chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Labor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Hi, Mr. Laver, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Good afternoon, Mrs. Tenere. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all, and we're pleased to have a letter of support from the coordinating RCO, Old Richmond Civic Association, along with a letter of non-opposition from the district council member, Councilman Mark Squilla.
Great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you very much. I'll share in just a moment.
um i'm here this afternoon with larry mcknight who is the managing partner of the river wards
group and the entity that is under agreement to purchase the property l&m real estate developments
llc also with us is rustin oler of harman deutsch oler architecture along with walter
Hundgarter, professional engineer and vice president of RT Environmental Services, Inc.,
which is an environmental engineering consulting and remediation firm overseeing soil management
protocols, air monitoring, et cetera, at the site. I'd like to pause for a moment as I mention
the environmental piece, because this site, which you can see in the photograph, the green
triangular parcel, has environmental contamination there. And it has, for many years, it goes back
to the industrial past in the neighborhood. And I would like to acknowledge that this neighborhood
has been plagued by difficulties with its environmentally impacted sites over time.
We're very pleased in this instance that we've worked closely with the community-invested
leaders over the course of several months in order to appropriately go above and beyond
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection requirements to address the remediation
and place this property in a better position than it would be if it's allowed to remain as it is now.
The River Wards group, which is the developer, has appeared before this board before.
And as board members may recall, they specialize in re-envisioning neglected, difficult sites such as this throughout Philadelphia's River Wards in particular.
and building upon the core strengths of proud Philadelphia neighborhoods.
It's worthy of note that the principles behind the River Wards Group are engineers themselves
and bring a special sensitivity and expertise.
In this photograph, just to place the site in context,
you have the wide expanse of the commercial thoroughfare Aramango Avenue.
You know, Cumberland is here off to the left, which doesn't touch the site, but bounds it.
And the site has frontage along Almond Street. Once again, it's the Green Triangulars parcel.
Here's another photograph of the site, looking at it really from an aerial above Almond Street, looking in the other direction.
And we're looking at the proposed repurposing of an approximately 38,000 square foot unimproved land with environmental issues that are there right now.
It had been a former manufacturing site.
You'll see that we are a stone's throw from the Aramingo corridor, which is right off the screen.
here uh to place the property a little bit more in context uh you can see that triangular parcel
which doesn't look as green in this photograph but uh you see uh the busy uh aramingo avenue
and you see the residential neighborhood that sprouts well beyond here i'd also like to point
out in this photograph that across Almond Street you'll see some self-storage. You see a mix of
uses as you transition from the auto-centric commercial uses along Aramingo Avenue
beyond to the residential that is well established. Moving to the, and here's another photograph as
And here's another photograph as well, aerial photograph.
well, aerial photograph.
Moving then, if I may, to the zoning map.
Moving then, if I'm
We are zoned CA2.
That's the purple here.
Auto-oriented commercial 2.
It used to be called area shopping center.
It's a designation that is seen in strip malls,
often seen in some of the more suburban-style sections of the city, some areas of the Great
Northeast, for example. And perhaps it is more appropriate for properties fronting along Aramingo
Avenue, not the properties that have the most direct contact with the neighborhood, with the
residential neighborhood. And so respectfully, we truly believe that the zoning is inappropriate
for this site. We'll move, if I may, to a conceptual rendering. Here you can see that
the proposal calls to transform the existing parcel into a six-story multifamily residential
building to include 155 residential dwelling units, 64 automobile parking spaces, 60 bicycle
spaces, amenity and green roof space. It's also important to note that 5% of the residential units
are reserved for age-restricted affordable housing, and this is something that has also
been discussed with the Coordinating RCO. I mentioned support. The Coordinating RCO,
the Old Richmond Civic Association, submitted a letter of support. Councilman Mark Squilla
has submitted a letter of non-opposition. He also notes, as I believe I heard you say,
Chairman Bergman at the start, some of the issues he's heard from the community, primarily on the
environmental pieces that I mentioned, and we'll speak to a little bit more.
We also went through Civic Design Review, which completed its review of the project
in one meeting, and noted that the project, quote, captures the character of the neighborhood,
end quote, recognizes in the letter, quote, the proposed materials, including brick, end quote.
The refusal itself. There are two refusals before the zoning board. Number one, this commercial car-oriented district does not permit household living.
um i should state however that uh we certainly did not hear over the course of many meetings
with neighbors a uh interest in non-residential as we are close to the uh well-established
neighborhood additionally uh the second refusal the auto-oriented strip mall zoning encourages
car-centric uses, urges a suburban-style strip mall sense of lower heights and expansive
large parcels. While household living is in line with the surrounding area,
the proposed height is comparable to the transitional ICMX zoning that you see
around this site in some pockets. It's also comparable to what you might see in a CMX3
transitional zoning. This is appropriate to define the change from a busy commercial thoroughfare to
the neighborhood behind. And the proposal is reasonable in light of the necessary work
related to the environmental remediation, which River Wards Group is completely committed to doing.
And that's associated with the former lead production facility that had been at this site.
very serious materials in the ground. In addition to the support that I've mentioned,
neighborhood support attests to the appropriateness of these variances,
and several non-profit organizations that are very close to this site have reviewed the proposal
and lend their seal of support for the project. Here is one from the Storm the Heavens Fund
noting that River Wards Group provides valuable resources to the organization and more importantly
for the zoning issue before the board is a model for how existing communities can benefit from
carefully considered respectful development. In addition, the co-founder of the organization
notes that on a personal level, she's a fourth generation resident of the River Wards and
believes that the project will fill several community needs, including adding to the residential
vitality of the neighborhood and surrounding areas. These documents have been submitted
these documents have been submitted to the board. Similarly, Liguori Academy notes that the school
to the board. Similarly, Liguori Academy
is only within a few blocks of the proposed development and notes the investment of the
developers in the future of the community by providing many opportunities for students in
the local community, primarily in the vocational area, jobs, etc. The Pink Elephant, another
nonprofit, notes that they are invested in the well-being of the neighborhood and categorize
and classify the proposal as carefully considered respectful development.
Lastly, at this moment, the Samuel Falcons Boys Soccer notes that as a youth organization
that operates in and is invested in the well-being of the neighborhood, they support the proposed
redevelopment of the site. On the screen before you is a zoning chart with a zoning analysis and
site plan. As stated, there are 155 residential units proposed, 64 accessory off-street parking
spaces are proposed, whereas zero parking spaces are actually required based on the underlying
zoning district. One off-street parking space is proposed. The developer has worked very hard to
promote the livability and walkability of the street with streets on-street parking and just
a single curb cut for vehicular traffic plus one for the off-street loading. In addition to being
very much a transit-oriented development with several public transit lines close by.
There are 60 off-street bicycle parking spaces. No open area is required. The commercial car-oriented
districts really are focused on getting as many cars in for ease of the consumer, but in this
instance, the area is a bit different. Open area makes sense. Approximately 24% open area is
proposed. Here is another image showing in color the nature of what the development would look like
off the street with that single in and out for vehicular automobile traffic. Your loading space,
as I mentioned greenery both along the sidewalk but also within the property line a
positive both for residents and for neighbors and you'll notice that at the rear of the property
because the property only fronts on Almond Street they're right up against the Aramingo Avenue uses
the Cold Stone, Dunkin' Donuts, Pizza Hut Auto Zone. And again, this new development will serve
as a transition, an appropriate transition between those uses which are appropriate and needed along
Aramingo and the more concentrated residential units beyond Almond Street. Indeed, Moe and Larry
found their inspiration for their redevelopment efforts in the area in the Philadelphia City
Planning Commission River Ward's 2035 district plans and recommendations. The subject property
has been significantly underutilized. The neighborhood's industrial past has been an
albatross at this site. The site itself and several others have largely shifted with the
changing nature of the neighborhood and the expansion of residential living. Here is a
example of elevation showing the use of Philadelphia red brick, and another look at the elevations.
The floor plans. On the left you see the ground floor plan, which you saw in some of the prior
slides that i shared with you and to the right is a second floor plan and uh on the next page
you see on the left third through sixth floor typical plan and then the rooftop which is a large
green roof with a small roof deck 50 50 studio units are proposed uh from uh floors two through
six, 81 bedroom units, and 25 two-bedroom units. That comes out, Mr. Chairman and members of the
board, to approximately 32% being studios, 52% being one bedrooms, and 16% two bedrooms. Average
sizes on the studios are in the range of 450 square feet, 700 square feet approximately on
700 square feet, approximately on one bedrooms, and approximately 1050 square feet on the two-bedroom units.
one bedrooms and approximately
The CA2 use at this location is not practicable, nor is it desired by the community, which has supported this project through the coordinating RCO, the RCO chosen by the city code and the council member.
nor in the philadelphia city planning commission uh 2035 plan does this uh car centric use continue
to make sense a glance at the zoning map and the aerial photographs show that the zoning
surrounding the property is solidly residential with the smattering of icmx in fact the
The placemaking, if you will, of the structure, having the height and creating a separation between two different types of uses really makes sense and provides some benefits in terms of repositioning the site, some very positive benefits.
Common sense might dictate that the proposed multi-family use is most consistent with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood.
The authorization of variance relief will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental to the public welfare.
the proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the support of the coordinating
rco the non-opposition of the district council member uh city planning commission documentation
and the commendations of the civic design review committee the proposed variances
really represent the minimum variance necessary to afford relief and will represent the least
modification possible of the regulations at issue the grant of variance relief will not
substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire or otherwise
endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare. The incorporation of public amenities,
tree plantings, benches, bicycle racks, and more in the overall design of the development speak
to a net benefit to the community and are documented in a concrete way in the private
community benefits agreement with the coordinating RCO. The proposed development will not adversely
affect transportation or unduly burdened water so a sewer school park or other public facilities
the environmental issues although not directly zoning board issues are the are the matters that
have raised the greatest concerns among community members and uh the greatest concerns at the city
government level from our representatives at city council level and state representative level
in terms of protecting the community. RT Environmental Services is on board. We have
opened the discussion with the community in a fully transparent way. I've highlighted certain
sections of a soil management plan that recognize that lead is present in site soils, that the
property is capped currently with two feet of clean fill, but there's nothing on top, which
creates a risk of winds carrying contamination to other areas. Actually putting a development
on this site will lead to a much safer situation for all parties. You'll see here soil management
protocols include the implementation of erosion and sedimentation control, often called ENS,
to prevent impacted soil from leaving the site. All construction equipment used on the site will
be decontaminated of impacted soil prior to being moved. Windscreening materials will be used at the
perimeter of the site. Routine inspections will be conducted. Going above and beyond standard
say minimum practices, air monitoring at the perimeter of the site will be implemented during
construction activities. And RT Environmental Services will be overseeing all of this. The
Riverwards group has committed to participating in a joint environmental working group with ORCA
and will meet or exceed Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection requirements.
Walter Hungarter, professional engineer and vice president of RT Environmental Services,
is available to testify to the proposed plan to positively address environmental issues at the site for the good of the entire country.
to positively address environmental issues at the site for the good of the entire community
if desired by the board. I've tried to address in this presentation the issues that have come up
over the course of several months with those who are impacted. We have Rustin Oller again from
Harmon Deutsch, all our architects. We have our environmental consultant available. We have the
developer available. In addition, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I understand at least
at two o'clock, which I suppose was three hours ago, Samuel DeGeorge, Michael Marone, Naomi Crespo,
Rebecca White, and Mina Carroll, nearby neighbors, were tuning in to testify should the board wish
in support of the proposed development.
With that, I'll pause for a moment
and take direction from you, Mr. Chairman.
Well, first, why don't you have your testimony adopted?
Mr. Lawrence McKnight,
would you kindly raise your virtual hand?
Mr. McKnight, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair.
Hello.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Sure. Lawrence McKnight, L-A-W-R-E-N-C-E-M-C-K-N-I-G-H-T.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. McKnight.
Have you been present for the entirety of this presentation before the Zoning Board of Adjustment today?
I have.
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I have offered as your own?
Thank you, sir.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Is your own?
i guess he was on yes i guess my my question would be it is not the amount of units
how did you get to the point of going up six floors sure i mean is that is that economics
to make it work we have a contaminated site uh mr chairman and uh addressing that contamination
in an appropriate, responsible way does, we can't go down.
It does require going up.
You have uses that many residential users might not actually love being next to,
such as the auto zone and some of the takeout operations along Aramingo Avenue.
So this project requires a different level of building and sound attenuation, which will make it more enjoyable for those on the site and fills that transitional area.
So that really is what takes us up. And the last thing that I would say not to belabor the answer is if the zoning was properly where it should be, we would not have this issue. If it was ICMX 60 and we're at 72. If it was CMX 3, then it could be designed in such a way that we wouldn't even be discussing this piece.
Right, right. Okay. I know you had, you named the people that would have called in if you
asked them to, right? Yes, sir.
Oh, so I'm wondering now, questions or statements from the virtual audience?
Do we see any hands?
yes chair we have a miss hand miss hand you can unmute yourself hi could you state your name and
spell for the court reporter please joanne hand h-a-n-d do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed yes i'm a resident on the 2600 block
of East Cumberland Street, and I'm just very against this building. One, that it's being a
sixth story. I, when they had the meeting for the variants, I questioned that, and also the board
questioned the lawyer and asked if he, why he couldn't go back to the development committee
and asked them if they can go lower. And when I asked this in the zoning,
and asked them if they can go lower and when I asked this in the zoning meetings I asked if they
ever went back to the developers to ask if it can be lower because it does take up the sunlight as
you can see with the building it is doing an overcast of shadows. This is an extremely high
six-story building. The developer just built another six-story building around the corner
with 46 units in it. We have 500 homes that are being built three blocks from us, and then another
six-story, 170 apartment units that are being built 200 feet from this area. I understand that
it's contaminated, and when we were asked about why he couldn't do row homes, and more or less,
it was costing them more than $2 million to remove the contaminated soil, and it would not benefit
the developer with making three-story normal residential homes around here. Also, the three
letters that he supplied from Storm the Heavens, one from Mia Carroll. She is not from this area.
She is from Port Richmond. She does not live down here. Second, the Samuel Strikers. Also,
they're from further up Port Richmond. They are not from this area. Pink Elephant is, I would say,
maybe six blocks from here. They do not do anything in this area. They do a walk, but they
do not and have really no opinion on what goes on in this neighborhood right here. Also, this is a
high level flood zone. I lived here my whole life and I still live here. And I do get water
periodically from the floods, from high tides. It just comes through my ground. I have a pump set
in here since we've moved into this house. Also, there'd be a hardship with the community.
It's a congested area already with traffic. The building is hype. Like I said, no sunlight.
It's a toxic site. Yes, I understand that. And the public transportation would only,
because they're planning on going down on Aramingo with their dump trucks. So that's
going to hold up traffic there and with the public transportation. And also, regarding
the community benefits agreement nobody in this area like in the 100 feet 200 feet of this area
were involved on that community uh benefits agreement so so first of all we we don't
let's stay to the project we don't need to hear anything about it okay okay okay but like this is
like i said this is a residential area i and you know we don't have anything over three stories
Putting this six-story obnoxious building here with only 64 parking spots with 155 units.
We have a problem now with our parking.
We don't, I mean, and I can't say that maybe 70 of the people in there own a vehicle.
If it's a two-bedroom, there's two people that could own a vehicle.
I just think it's too big for this area to be put in a six-story, 155-unit apartment building.
Thank you. Thank you for calling in. We appreciate your comments.
Is there anyone else? And Mr. Labor, I'll get back to you when we're done.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Mr. Labor?
Thank you. I just would like to state that the proposal would be IRMX and CMX 3 compliant, that the proposed parking exceeds the 3 to 10 parking that you see in many other multifamily districts in the city,
and that the commercial auto-oriented uses
actually are intended to promote significant traffic
coming in and out of them.
With that, I respect the differing viewpoints
and I don't want to take up more.
All right, thank you.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard, Planning Commission.
go ahead peter the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the ca2 commercial auto zoning at
this location the zoning was updated to ca2 in 2017. this proposal has been presented to the
civic design review committee where it received mostly positive feedback however as the committee
members noted the proposal is more than twice the allowed height given the environmental
contamination the property is more appropriate for ca2 use than that would cap seal and limit
contact with contaminated soils than for residential or commercial mixed-use uses
we feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship that would prevent them from developing
the property in alignment with the zoning code accordingly the planning commission recommends
accordingly the planning commission recommends the board tonight thank you
since the board denied the marriages.
Thank you.
mr laver you want to respond on on the on the topic of environmental concerns we've submitted
on the record uh rt's uh report uh which goes well above and beyond pennsylvania department
of environmental protection requirements there's a reason that padep is in existence to make sure
that the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania are protected when it comes to
environmental issues. We have already had PADEP review of this property, and we are prepared and
have committed to going through additional PADEP review process and going above and beyond that
with the community benefits agreement as well.
The Scott case states that environmental remediation
is relevant to a determination of hardship.
Buried asbestos, for example, qualifies as hardship.
We have a former lead facility here,
and this property will be in a better state
once this is properly removed.
If the board would like to hear
from our environmental expert,
we would be happy to put him on but we do believe that the documentation that we've submitted
is is sufficient but we we've we've had him available to the board would like okay um
i don't think we need that what i'm going to do is i'm going to take this to the to the board
in the executive session and on the 14th we will get together and then we will vote in public
at 2 p.m. on the 14th, okay?
I would respectfully request that the record
be completely closed at this time.
It's absolutely closed, sir.
Thank you, Chairman and members.
Thank you.
Here we go.
All right, so we go back to, all right.
So Chair, this is Tanya.
In light of the late hour,
May I request that we do continuances and withdrawals for the 330 list?
We most certainly can.
Thank you, Chair.
And I'll do that before I do Millman Street, okay?
Yes, sounds great.
So the list for the 330,
we have
the continuance is number
MI 2022
002 567
1412 South 52nd
Street
that case
is continued
is there
anyone
in the audience has a comments
relative to that
chair i see someone okay the name was there but it keeps disappearing and as of this time
chair we have no hands okay thank you um three and i have number one case mi2022002679
515 to 17 West Erie no exhibits first listing AC and property management is the listed owner are
they here that case is continued must must be tried one one moment Mr. Chair this is Hillary
I think there's a delay in the Zoom.
We do have a couple people who are trying to speak.
Chair, we have someone by the name of Sharon Blaylor with her hand up.
Ms. Blaylor, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Sharon Blaylor.
I'm sorry, what did you say?
State your name and spell it, please.
Oh, sure.
Sharon Blaylor, B-L-E-I-L-E-R.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Is that your case 515-17 in West Erie?
No, no.
I'm sorry.
We're 10 Calo Hill.
I thought she, when she said my name, I thought you were moving on.
No, not yet.
I'm still waiting for the number one case.
Please only raise your hand for the case called.
Thank you kindly.
So case one, 515-17 West Erie.
Is there anyone with their hand up for that?
Chair, we have a David Garcia with his hand up.
Okay. Mr. Garcia, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Okay. Mr. Garcia, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Garcia, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. David Garcia, ID number 54351, last name G-A-R-C-I-A.
And is that your case 515 West Erie?
yes sir um we're requesting a continuance on the basis that we met with the rco and they want us
to meet i believe with a selected subgroup of that community group which we're in the process
of scheduling good good thank you that case will be continued mr chair did you swear in mr garcia
yes ma'am i thought i didn't make that in i don't think you did wait a minute wait a minute
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do so affirm.
Your case is going to be continued.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
May I be excused?
You can be.
Is there anyone else that would like to continue their cases on the 330 list?
Chair, we have a Ken Wood with his hand up.
Mr. Wood, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yes, good afternoon.
Mr. Woods, could you spell your name, state your name, and spell for the court reporter?
Kenneth Wood, K-E-N-N-E-T-H, W-O-O-D.
Do you swear a firm would tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
What case is yours, sir?
I was on here for since 2 p.m. waiting to speak about the 2507 Almond Street.
I never got called.
That case-
My hand was raised for a while.
Listen to me.
Listen to me.
That case was continued. We did take testimony from the neighbors, and that case will be decided
on the 14th of September. Chair, he's been muted. You can continue. Is there anyone else
would like to have a continuance? Chair, I see no hands at this time.
I say to Tanya, that leaves us with four cases.
that sounds wonderful chair thank you very kindly thank you all right so we go here case number
okay MI 2022 001308 8330 Millman Street this is a resumption hearing but Mr. Primavera and Bodie
both please be admitted and we'll swear them in. Mr. Primavera is coming back in now as a
panelist, Chair. Mr. Brody, I don't see his hand as of yet. Okay. Mr. Chairman, members of the
board, Carl Primavera, I am here. Hi, could you spell your name for the court reporter? Yes,
It's C-A-R-L and Primavera, P-R-I-M as in Mary, A, V as in Victor, E-R-A.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Bonney should be coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good afternoon.
Hi, Mr. Bonney.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Paul Bonney, B as in boy, O-N-I, four letters, Bonney.
Thank you.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And I think Hillary has spoken to both of you.
We're going to try to do this within an hour, right?
Correct.
I remember correctly here, we left off, and I think Mr. Boney was going to cross-examine the architect.
Is that right, Mr. Pruitt of Error?
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
So could we get the architect to come on, please?
Yes, it's going to be Donna Lyle.
She previously was sworn and testified.
Okay. Well, just for the record, we'll swear her again.
Thank you.
Ms. Lyle is coming back and is a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
Okay. Hello. I'm here now.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Donna Lyle.
And it's spelled, the last name is L, as in Larry, I, S, as in Sam, L, E.
And it's spelled the last name is L as in Larry, I, S as in Sam, L.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Boney, proceed.
Thank you.
I'd like to share my screen.
Okay, thank you.
Good afternoon, Ms. Lyle.
Afternoon. Good evening. Safe to say that you've been to the Venturi house many times, is that correct?
Yes. Okay. You've gone to all parts of the house, the first floor, the second floor, the basement?
Yes. Okay. I'd like to go over with you. Oh, I see your video. Nice to see you.
Let me move this to the side.
Members of the board in the applicant's exhibits, there aren't many, I don't think there may
not be any photos of the interior of the house.
And so I'd like to show photos of the interior of the house.
And, you know, I think Ms. Lyle's familiar with them, so she can confirm that this is, in fact, the house.
The first set of photos I'd like to show are in our Exhibit E, which is the MLS listing from 2016 that's still online and contains many photos.
So I'd like the board and the witness to take a look at these photos.
This is just the first page.
Then there's some statistical information.
And the exterior of the house, a plaque.
And then here is the first floor, a picture of the first floor.
Is that correct, Ms. Lyle?
Yes, that's looking toward the front of the house.
And this is sort of spun around a little bit, looking in a different direction?
Toward the living room.
That's a marble floor in the foreground?
It's a marble tile.
This is a little bit closer up?
Correct.
Still on the first floor?
um correct okay i'm just i'm just going to go through quickly in the interest of time
uh still you tell me if i say something wrong still on the first floor this is the fireplace
um still on the first floor a little further back looking at the fireplace um and sort of the living
room area um these are i just want to say these are old photographs it's it's not the same furniture
and being real estate photographs they've used a zoom lens. Okay well I yes thank you for
clarifying this is not the same furniture at all this is I guess the prior owner's furniture
or staging or something like that but you're saying maybe a wide angle lens or a zoom lens?
A wide angle. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. But, but otherwise it's representative of what we see.
Okay. This is the kitchen. Right. Okay. Stove, microwave, dishwasher.
Oh, I hit the wrong button. Okay. I made it bigger. This is a little closer up of the kitchen.
This is the stairway to the second floor that constricts in width as you go up. Is that correct?
That's right.
Okay. This is, I guess, looking down the stairwell.
This is the second floor bedroom?
Correct.
Okay. This is a different angle of the second floor bedroom.
um this is from the bedroom as if there was a third floor which there isn't
this this is the famous stairway to nowhere or stairs nowhere um this is the bathroom on
the second floor is that correct yes okay this is back to the first floor
This is back to the first floor.
One of the bedrooms which looks like it's being used as a home office.
This is also the first floor. Both bedrooms on the left side as you're looking at the house.
I see. Okay. Okay. Thank you. This is the bathroom on the first floor, correct? Yes.
Okay it's got cabinets to the left. Is that right? Yes. Okay and to the right you can see
just barely the tub. Yes. The shower curtain. Yes. Okay thank you. And this is from outside
I guess looking in a little open space area and then here are some exterior photos. So I'm gonna
Correct.
By the way, the MLS, I could go back a few pages, but the MLS mentioned central air.
Are you familiar with whether it has central air?
I assume that it does.
I've been there.
It's been cool.
I think it does.
And it has a washer dryer?
And it has a basement?
Is it sort of a full basement?
It's a partial basement.
I'm trying to visualize where it stops.
There's a lot of mechanical equipment.
I can't quite visualize if it extends under the whole thing.
I don't think it does.
I think it's partial.
Maybe we'll ask Mr. Lockhart when we get to him.
The MLS listed full, but the MLS is not always accurate.
I'm now going to show you, this is an article from posted on WHYY, I'm guessing you may
have seen it before, I just want to show you some other photos.
Is this at the top the entryway or the entrance to the house?
Okay. That was on page 119 of our PDF. I don't think this really shows much new here, so I'm going to continue on.
i'm going to show you one last set of photos from a book called mother's house
you're familiar with that book is that correct yes okay you i think quote from it or have a
image of it and your materials that you submitted to right maybe the rco is that correct
Mm-hmm. Okay. Do you own a copy of it?
Um, I do. It's my husband's, but I do have one. Okay, that counts. So this is, I guess,
some older photos of the Venturi House, but it shows, again, the first floor.
Again, the first floor. This is the second floor looking down the stairways. This is the
fireplace. Again, the fireplace, the stairs, and the entryway in the back. This is the bedroom,
the second floor. I guess there's a little veranda, I don't know what you call that,
on the second floor, a little outdoor seating area. Oh, and there they are at the top sitting
sitting at the outdoor uh sitting right there um okay and those are the exterior i guess this
goes down to the basement is that correct yes okay
um council just for just for a minute could could i uh could you tell me where this is going because
it's all internal i mean could you give me a sense of what you're trying to do here
yes we're talking about they want to build something a little further away right so could
you give me a sense of where we're going yes absolutely thank you and that's the i'm finished
with the interior photographs but thank you for asking so yes this application seeks to build a
separate structure uh for what they're calling an adu which is a accessory dwelling unit two bedroom
two bath, kitchenette, et cetera, separate from the house, close to my client's property.
Right. I understand that.
That's why we're here. But in order to grant a variance, the zoning code said
um but in order to grant a variance um the zoning code says that you have to show a hardship
and so one of the things that the zoning code says is that because of the physical conditions
of the property there's no there's no possibility that the property can be used in strict conformity
with the provisions of the zoning code so um and that the authorization of the variance is necessary
to enable the valuable economic use of the property.
So, you know, one of the things-
You're done with inside.
I'm done with inside.
We're showing you how beautiful the house is,
how, you know, first we're just showing how beautiful-
And I do really appreciate that.
But remember, we're trying to do this in an hour today.
And I'm not telling you not to,
but I'm just saying we appreciate the beauty
in all the rooms,
but I think we still have to move ahead.
uh thank you um i'm trying my best okay the house is not that old uh ms lyle isn't that correct it
was built in 1964 it was occupied in 1964 it finished completion in late 1963 i believe
okay thank you um it was designed by uh mr venturi for his elderly mother is that correct
I don't know how old Van Aventuri was.
Okay, but for his mother who was a widow at the time, is that correct?
He was a widow.
Okay, and his mother lived there beginning in 1964, is that correct? She moved in in 64?
In 1964.
Okay, and Robert Venturi, the architect, lived with her beginning in 1964, is that correct?
I don't have the answer to that.
The mother lived there until 1973 when it was transferred to the Hughes.
Is that correct?
Are you aware that she was 80 at that time?
I am not aware of her age.
Are you aware from looking at the house over the past year,
whether you're aware are you aware of whether she made any modifications to the house
you know for purposes of accessibility or her her advanced age I am not aware okay
although I can say that I know the plans at the house and I know that what is there is what's
always been there. So if there's a modification, it is slip me. Right. And so the next owners would
be the Hughes. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. And they lived there from 1973. And even after Mrs.
Hughes passed, Mr. Hughes continued to live there until 1985. Are you aware of that?
um i i don't know when he was alive and when he passed away i'm not aware okay um i want to um
just quickly flash to the mother's house venturi uh we we just looked up some data and apparently
She was 58 when she moved in in 1964, which put her at 69 when she moved out.
Is that right?
Well, why don't we agree or disagree for the moment?
One of this is not correct.
That's correct.
I agree with you.
So I guess we need to know when her birth date was, when she was born, and then we can
see how old she was in 1973.
So, and then you're aware that after the Hughes, then their daughter lived there for several
years.
I am not aware of the Hughes family transitions, or who lived there during their tenure.
Well, I'll show you the Mother's House book, which your husband owns here on the screen.
And it says Robert and Denise were married in 67.
I'm sorry, on the top.
And April 64, Vanna and Robert moved into the house.
And then Robert even lived there with Denise.
Denise moved in until 67.
So that's where I was coming from with that.
and then and the next page it says um that vana was very happy in the house that her son designed
venturi recalls my mother loved the house and then at the bottom it says uh the house was sold to agassi
And then at the bottom it says, the house was sold to Agatha and Thomas Hughes, who've lovingly cared for the house, lived there happily for the past 19 years.
You don't have any reason to argue with that, do you?
No, I wouldn't.
Okay, I'm going to move on.
I want to look at the building that you are proposing to build.
I've shown the updated drawing that your team submitted a few days ago, just to orient the board and you to what's going on here.
So the lot that's highlighted is your client's lot, Mr. Lockard's lot.
It's a flag lot.
Millman Street is at the bottom.
There's a long driveway, and then the Venturi house is sort of in the middle-ish of the large area in the back.
And the ADU that you're proposing is on the bottom right-hand corner of that back area.
And you can see it right where my cursor is, Mr. Chairman and Ms. Vice Chair and all the other members of the board.
My client lives right here.
You don't see her house on this sketch.
you do see her driveway and a little parking area and her shed I think that's what that square is
so that that's where we are and the distance between our property line and the building that
you're proposing I believe is 12 feet correct okay thank you so now I'm going to go to the next page
which is a larger sketch. I thought it was a larger sketch. Okay, so this is a closer
up of the dwelling unit that you're proposing. And just to orient yourself, so you're showing
two bedrooms on uh two bedrooms and two bedrooms on the right hand side no that's one bedroom and
one bathroom okay one bedroom and bath on the right hand side one bed and one bath on the left
hand side yes and then going back to the middle right there's a living area that you're showing
a piano and a table and then there's a kitchenette and then you're showing this courtyard um is it
fair to say that this is an open area open to the elements it's not an enclosed space it's an
outdoor space and that it has a tree in it it's going to have a very small tree um but it was
inspired by a japanese tree that exists on the site um we're hoping to retain it but if not it
will be a smaller version right that is an open courtyard right it's a notch it's a big it's a
notch in the building for a tree or for some nature.
This is the slide that you showed to the Historical Commission, who asked you to consider
doing without that courtyard. And this was part of the arguments that you and your colleague
put forth to retain the courtyard. And you did say that in item number four, that if you eliminated
that courtyard, you would get a reduction in the size of the building, but you didn't think it was
worth it. And here in the top, you said that it could only be decreased in size, the courtyard
could only be decreased in size by a foot and really not any more than that because
there has to be sufficient separation between the kitchenette and the piano area because
humidity damages pianos. Is that correct?
We've been told by some of the people who are playing the instrument that uncontrolled
humidity can be very damaging to pianos. The minimum size of the courtyard was reduced
and it was reduced to what would make just a barely usable kitchenette. The courtyard was
central to the design of the ADU. It's part of integrating the landscape into the building,
bringing light into the kitchenette, bringing light further into the living space. And it's
something that the client really liked about this particular scene. Right, because in number six,
Right, because in number six, you say he has a great fondness for gardening and taking care of the grounds.
you say he has a great fondness.
But correct me if I'm wrong, the Historical Commission did not tell you that you must have this courtyard.
They said it was okay when you gave them your arguments.
They said it's acceptable.
They actually liked it.
I don't know if that's in the minutes or not, but it was the impression that we got that it was, that they actually liked it at the time.
I understand they liked it.
I'm just saying it's there by your request and their acquiescence, not by their demand.
Correct.
You mentioned in, let me just go to the next page.
Okay. You mentioned in your, in many of your presentations, I think, I think last hearing at
last session, you said that the Vanna Venturi House is not ADA compliant, American with Disabilities
Act compliant. And I'd like to touch on that for a moment. But it sounds like as an architect,
you're well versed in the requirements of the ADA. So my question to you is are you aware
that the ADA applies only to places of public accommodations?
And so that the Venturi House as a private house is not covered by the ADA.
I am completely aware of that. The owner has requested that we make ADA
toilet adjacent to the bedroom in the ADU with anticipation of potentially having an elder
mother there, perhaps, you know, a personal or private reason he may have. So I would assume
that if one is going to take up that much square footage in the ADA rather than living room space,
that it's pretty important to have an ADA-compliant toilet.
Yes, I'm speaking about the Venturi House, though.
That's the one I'm talking about.
If he wants it so bad to lose space in the ADA,
then in the ADU,
then, because it does take up additional square footage,
that it would be equally as important
to have an ADA toilet in the Van Venturi House.
Okay, well, I...
And it is not compliant.
I don't dispute that he wants an ADA compliance in the Venturi House.
All I'm establishing is that that's his preference, not a legal requirement.
That is not a legal requirement.
It's civil law.
It's civil law.
It's not a legal requirement.
The House is not in violation right now of the ADA.
The ADA doesn't apply to the House.
It's a private premises.
That's right.
Okay, thank you. I want to move on to the Historical Commission process that you went through. I assume you've been there a few times in your career, is that correct?
Are you telling me to the Historic Commission?
Yes, I have.
Okay. And so you're aware, generally speaking, that the Historical Commission considers applications to alter the exterior of historic buildings, including additions to historic buildings, and does allow change in appropriate circumstances in their discretion. Is that fair to say?
Yes, they are the ones who allow it or not.
That's right.
um you went to the historical commission at the end of last year in the beginning of this year
um the commission i think as you can confirm basically in most cases of alterations or
additions or new construction basically has a two-step process where you first go to the
architectural committee which generates a non-binding recommendation and then on a later
date, you go to the full commission, which actually makes the decision. And that in this
case, you went through that two-step process twice, first with an in-concept application,
and then with a final application for a total of four public meetings. Did I get that right?
you did get that right we went to them initially because um just to do anything
because of the obvious stature of this property to do anything um was in question yes i don't
um was in question yes i don't mean any disrespect but i'm under incredible time pressure so
mean any disrespect but i'm wondering
I'll see you later.
you can elaborate on when when mr primavera has you back um i don't mean to berate you but i just
want to ask you to if you could just answer my questions and we can move on that would be great
but i understand so if you need to say something you can and all the meetings due to covet all
All these meetings that we just mentioned with the Historical Commission and its architecture
review committee were by Zoom.
Is that correct?
They were.
Would you agree with me that my clients were not invited to any of those meetings by you
or anyone on your team as far as you know?
I am not I am not aware okay but you you're you're not aware you're not aware of any invitations is
that fair I'm not that's what I said yeah I'm not aware okay thank you I'm gonna breeze through the
materials that you showed the historical commission to ask you and I'll ask you the question and then
I'll breeze through it but maybe you don't even need to see it but excuse me excuse me counselor
um was the building uh approved by the historical commission yes so what are we going through it
well the i'm not going to go through the substance here but what i'm going through
is the process and um because we're being told by the applicant and his lawyer and his witnesses
is that the historical commission made certain demands
or made certain statements that are inviolate
or that are written in stone.
And we don't think that's the case.
And so that's what we're trying to explain here.
That...
You can't...
Did they make changes?
changes did they make the changes i don't understand your question he's asking did the
historical commission tell them to make changes and did they make changes yes the they throughout
the process i'm sorry the zoom is cutting out a little bit for me you're saying what's
relevance is that the question i think he's basically saying where are you going with this
that the historical commission did whatever they did you know that where are we going with that
is what he's saying i i guess maybe i'll just ask the question and forget the slides so we can just
expedite it i mean just ask the question i mean that's fine okay i'll ask the question would you
agree with me ms lyle that in all the materials you showed the um historical commission that
that you and i don't mean to personalize it personally but you did not show any sight lines
from my client's property to the proposed project um we had photographs from up and down um millman
street um i don't know whether it was at the first meeting second or third also photographs from
navajo street i understand but that's it that's not answering we're not in her property taking
photos at that at that point no but we did have photos from in front of her house looking back in
okay uh the materials are what they are and they're in the record so um
it's also been represented to us in this hearing and to the board in this hearing that it was
the historical commission that demanded separate building um instead of a
instead of an addition to the house um what they specifically said was that it was um
highly preferable and much more unacceptable that they would likely object to an addition to the
House? Well, I think the word preferable was used or far preferable was used. I don't think
I've seen that they would object to something else. But would you agree with me that the
to something else and but would you agree with me that the um that it was your client's decision
to propose at the outset that your client's decision at the outset to propose a separate
building. That's not accurate. So this is the slide that says the second B says because of the
acceptance of ADUs and the importance of the features and feasibility of the Van Aventuri
house, the owner has decided to build a separate structure. So this is your first PowerPoint to
the Architects Committee, and you're presenting that the owner has decided to build a separate
structure. So part of the requirement for anything on this property was that it's not
visible from a public way. There's no location on the Van Aventury house that you could add on to
that is invisible from a public way.
So that is an innate part of the criteria.
And further, this follows a meeting
that we had a couple of months into the project
where we did discuss all kinds of different ways
to address the need for additional square footage for David
that we invited a host of experts in the field, Professor Emeritus from Penn, who's written support letter,
the Khan Archives curator, who's both, who's written support letters and described why.
And, you know, including lots of reading architectural historian educators who led us to,
led us to the location that it ended up being. So we brought this as a statement to the Historic
Commission. There is no way to add on to the Vandermatury House that is not visible from a
public way. I'm not saying your client didn't have reasons. I'm saying it was representing to this
board that it was the Historical Commission that made these demands. And all I'm establishing is
that it was, in fact, your client who made the application in the way he wished, which is what
it says. I think that's making some large assumptions from what you're saying about,
and there are several inaccuracies that are questionable in that. So I have to disagree.
Okay. Well, I'm just reading what you're, I'm just reading what the slide says.
These are brief orientations. Why don't we move on?
I'd like to move on. As Mr. McCrubish said, he was a member of the Architects Committee,
it might be at the preferred location or far preferred location, but there's no evidence
to suggest that it's the only approvable type of project, either addition or location for this
building. I mean, the Architect Committee didn't say anything on that. They were dealing with what
you proposed. I disagree. It was an inherent, sort of an innate assumption, and the way he
voiced it is one thing, but I disagree with the intent of the conversation
at the historic commission okay would you agree with me that on the minutes of the architectural
meeting when the staff presented the case well i'm going to object if it's in writing it speaks
for itself and then the board will be able to read all this in due time so she disagreed you'll read
what's ever in the record and that's sufficient i'll i'll read it from the i'll read it into the
record where the staff member said quote the property is bounded by Navajo Street at the rear
comma though the rear of the house is not visible from that street owing to heavy vegetation
close quote and that's in the record so I have three questions for you did the historical
commission or the architects committee ever say you can't make an alteration or an addition
to the building? Yes. I mean, they didn't say it the way you're saying it. It was more of a
discussion about what's possible and what may be approved. But I can tell you that vegetation,
But I can tell you that vegetation, I mean, I can show you photographs from the summer where you can clearly see the back of Urbana Venturian House, every single side of it, from either of the public streets, Navajo or Millman.
I mean, I can show you photographs from the summer.
So it's inherent in the Secretary of Interior Standards, and part of which the PHC uses, that they wanted it to be not visible to a public way.
They want it to be inconspicuous, to be obscure, to be hidden from every public view.
Did the Historical Commission or the Architects Committee ever say you can't put a new structure that would be visible from Navajo?
I think I just answered that.
Okay, how about slightly visible?
You still answered that.
My last question on this paragraph is, did the Historical Commission or the Architects Committee ever say that you can't have the ADU, this separate building, visible from the interior of the Venturi House?
i believe they did say that i mean i know that it was i don't have the exact verbiage of it off
the top of my head but it was something that was not supposed to be conspicuous i mean we've had
uh you know we during the drawing process we're showing elevations of it but um it's sort of
tucked back into a garden area and we'll have other plantings but the historical commission
deals with views from the public right of way right from streets and sidewalks basically right
okay um it doesn't really deal with views from a neighbor's house um and it doesn't really deal
with views from your house or from mr lockhart's house it's a private house his views looking out
well i'm going to object i think in the record in the first hearing we specifically um submitted
documentation that the Historic Commission did not want to see the ADU from inside the Venturi
House. They wanted people inside the Venturi House to experience exactly what that house was meant
to depict. So we just dispute that. Mr. Primavera, I think it was, I think they liked that aspect of
it, but I don't think it was a requirement. Ms. Lyle, let me ask you a question. Are you aware
that views from inside the house are addressed in either the secretary standards or the guidelines
on new additions and related the way yes i am and the way they address it i'll tell you the three
things about that are critical about this house it's the plan which is iconic for many many well
written about and studied reasons which i could go into if you want me to take the time to do it
each and every elevation, every inch of them, which I can also go into if you want, and the
setting of the house as a perfect rectangle on a field of grass. So the setting incorporates
spatial relationships. So as such, the relationship of the components of whatever is on that site
need to be preserved that is why they the the historic mission asked us to make it smaller
which we did and move it further away which we did to the eight foot which is the other zoning
appeal point okay i was asking about the view from inside the inventory i just thought i would
fill you in correctly on the exact on the reason it's not just a view it's about a special
relationship it's i understand if you incorporates um half a dozen other at least half a dozen other
aspects to it other than just saying to you okay i'm gonna sounds like a separate aspect but i'll
let it go so um in fact though ms lyle and i'm finishing up here uh mr chairman um
The Historical Commission has a special process called approval by consent agenda, where at its meetings, where it has a number of items, a number of applications before it, where the Architects Committee, as in this case, recommended approval, and there is no one at the meeting that is objecting to it.
the historical commission will often just read the address and take a vote without any discussion
with anybody, without any discussion with the applicant or amongst themselves. And that in
fact is what happened here both times that it went to the historical commission. It was approved
on the consent agenda is that correct um anyone it's
It's a public meeting. I don't know if they were aware of it. It was probably in the
Chestnut Hill local. I'm not sure. But what I can tell you from being in those historic
commission meetings is that it's a historic commission. They comment on the architectural
cultural features and the construction of a place of historic significance.
It's not as important to them what the view is from a person's yard or how close it is
to another house.
It's important that they understand, they know when there's a zoning issue that's involved,
which is why we went to them in the beginning.
um you know but they they generally comment about architectural components you forget you
with all due respect but you forgot to answer my question is it correct that they approved it uh
the historical commission both times they saw it approved it on the consent agenda
you were there we saw you're on these videos i'm just trying to establish a basic fact
So, Paul, if you're representing that, then we'll accept that.
Well, she can say yes.
Come on.
I mean, it's really.
If she remembers.
I remember the last time being on the consent agenda.
But if you have it in writing and you have data to prove it, I'm not contesting it.
I'm not saying you're inaccurate.
Well, if you can't remember, that's fine.
That's a valid answer.
I'm not criticizing you if that's your answer.
i just didn't are you done with it so yes you're done with her i am if if but i would like to
since since she is not answering that question and i respect her for that i just answered it
if you have the data i accept that and i and so please let me just finish my sentence please so
i would like to submit the data which is this page with the links to the videos and i'd like
to submit this. I have no objection. That's fine. I have no further questions. So here's where we
are. This is moving much slower than we thought it would. Mr. Primavera, we'll let you do redirect
and then we're going to schedule for another result of hearing. Can I ask Mr. Bonney how long
he thinks he needs for uh his case yes um i think i have pretty much the same length of cross of
mr lockard and then i have my witness of ms lau and i we we did a dress rehearsal and it came out
the 17 minutes her direct examination um i would like uh mr well but but but but mr
we're well over another hour it would take right now i'm just trying to figure out what we need
to finish and i understand you're saying so if you want to do redirect that's fine yes all right
i'll do we'll do redirect and after that we'll schedule another hearing all right thank you mr
chair uh so do you recall in the first hearing uh the discussion by me as well as i believe by you
that the existing house has 1,400 square feet on the first floor and a total of 1,875 square feet
for the total house? That's correct. And it's on a lot of 37,000 square feet?
Correct. And the required lot size for this area is 5,000 square feet. Right.
And then you mentioned subtly, but I'll be more direct, in the supplemental exhibits presented by Mr. Bonney at, I believe it's Exhibit T, he talks about the Secretary of the Interior Standards, and it's a whole exhibit package.
And on page six of that exhibit, his exhibit, it says, if an addition has too much negative impact, that it would be handled better by a separate building in a location which would not adversely affect the historic structure, then that's the appropriate treatment.
Do you recall that generally in the Secretary of the Interior Standards?
Yes, I'm reading it from brief 14, which was in his supplemental information.
Despite the fact that in most cases it's recommended a new addition be attached, sometimes it's not possible.
There may be, there's simply not a secondary elevation.
Some very important freestanding buildings have significant features on all sides.
So in addition, attached to a highly visible elevation of historic building can radically alter the historic form or obscure features, such as decorative cornice, et cetera.
So in addition, attached to a highly visible elevation of a historic building can radically...
An addition would have too much negative impact and would not meet the standards.
All right.
Such situations are handled by a separate structure.
So that's what you were referring to.
And the last question is, as an expert, a professional, someone who understands this, do you believe that there is any opportunity to put an addition on the Venturi House as a professional?
No, not according to the statements of public visibility and not according to anyone who accepts that it's an iconic structure, which, you know, is, you know, it's all about the, yeah, it's all about the elevation, you know.
Then I have nothing further. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. So here's where we are. My understanding is, Mr. Prever, you have one
more witness? Yes. We'll do that the next time. There's going to be another presumptive hearing
we'll have. Tanya will see where she can fit it in, and we're going to move on. All right,
Mr. Chair, I would appreciate if we would have enough time to complete the case.
Well, yeah, we thought we had enough time today. The hour would get us closed,
but we're not there so what we'll do is i'm going to sit with hillary and we'll figure it out and
what we're going to do next all right thank you all right and hillary may get a hold of hold of
you to say how much time you think you need so we can figure out what that really is all right
thank you good mr chair could i could i chair this is good good tanya you go first um chair we
have that can schedule this for november november the 15th at 9 30 a.m where we should be able to
complete it. Okay. May I ask Mr. Primavera a question to try and save time? Mr. Primavera,
you're probably aware that we submitted a statement from Brooke Lau. Are you aware of that?
Yes. Okay. Would you agree with me that I don't have to bring her on to say,
yes, I authenticate that? I would ask her one question.
well i mean i have an objection with that but i i may want to cross-examine her about some of the
contents of it so in the in the spirit of moving quickly she could just say this is how i feel
about it and then i can ask her some questions about it why don't why don't you two listen to
me why don't you two work that out among yourself hillary's going to get a hold of you and say how
much more time do you think you need and we'll go from there okay thank you thank you all right
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Thank you.
Mr. Premier Bear and Ms. Lyle.
Thank you.
Tanya, this is Hillary.
Can you just repeat that date again for the record?
The new date would be November the 15th at 9.30 a.m., where we expect it to be completed.
If not, we will go into the new year with another date.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a nice evening.
okay so we're thank you
we're moving to the 3 30 list
is everybody still with us that is correct here yeah this question mr chair you may you may want
to make sure there's no 2 p.m's but i i think we're pretty is there any pretty covered in the
audience from the 2 p.m. list? If they were, they went home and had dinner. Okay. I see no hands at
this time, Chair. Well, here we go with 3.30. My name is Bill Bergman. I will be chairing this
meeting. With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair. Carol Tenere, present. Ishmael Shahid, our board
secretary. Present, Mr. Chairman. Thomas Holloman, our board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. James
Snell, our board member. Present, Mr. Chairman. Also, here is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit,
and our Attorney, Hillary Emerson. Before we start, be advised the proceedings will be recorded
by participating in the knowledge agreement to be recorded. The video will be available by
contacting the Board Administrator, Tanya Sunkit, at tanyasunkit.gov. For the benefit of our
personographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand
and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email
and the address of the property. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for
um the question answer box on the screen is now for comments any comments should be directed to
comments.
our executive director tanya sunken we've already went over all of our continuances i'm gonna go
write the case number two mi 2022 002 569 10 to 18 cal hill street sharon blyer who's who i think
I've already had one.
A letter of support from the Center City Organized Responsible Development.
Sharon?
She's coming back in as a panelist now, Sharon.
Karen oh can you hear me yes I yes I can I think I've already sworn you in before
yeah sorry about that we're we're sorry to have you here this long um you you're the owner yes
okay so our vice chair Carl Tenere has a few questions sure I sure too hi how are you
good how are you good have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter um from the first one that we did
have you have you emailed in your exhibit packet with all the requirements
yes but um from the first time i think my i think the architect's on here too i think she
mailed it the for this time it's elizabeth can you hear anything well mr chairman this is tanya
may i ask a question please vice chair sure miss biler are you prepared to present
a presentation of your exhibits on the screen for all to view um i don't know you're not at
you're outside right right i had to run to the pharmacy because it was closing so i didn't know
when i was going to get on i was so that's why i'm not at home right now but i don't know if my
architect's still on here let me just text her to see because she has all of that well here's
the situation miss sharon filer you are required to present if you're unavailable to do so at the
moment we could hold it to the end if that would give you enough time we only have a couple cases
but it's actually the call of the chair i just noticed i have to can i share my screen i do
She is putting it all on for you.
Why don't you do this?
You're on the street.
Why don't you go to the pharmacy.
Do what you have to do.
Come back and get in your house.
And we'll call you last.
We've got four more cases.
We'll call you last.
Sounds good.
Case number four.
MI 2022.
002563, 335 South 12th Street.
Brandon Savron is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
With a two-year variance.
Brandon?
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
I'm back. Hello.
Brandon, we haven't seen you much today, so.
Yes, I'm about ready to go outside. I bet all of you.
So you've already been sworn. Could you identify your client?
Yes. My clients are Lucy Colosimo and Joe Hopper, and they are the owners of this condo unit.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Javren. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal instantly to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral,
photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Okay, thank you. And I fixed my camera. Anyway, here we go. So here's the refusal, members of the board. What you're going to see here is this is a use refusal pertaining to an existing condo unit in a five unit condo building, which I'll show you in a moment.
Okay, thank you. And I fixed my camera. I saw it in five years.
Thank you.
it's for visitor accommodation so basically um the owners of the unit who have lived there in
the past want to put it on airbnb occasionally um why why is that well as you'll see actually
in the refusal um lucy and joe currently live in sweden um lucy uh had to go there for work
on something I guess you could call a gig or a project. She is working or consulting for the
Swedish National Health System and living there in Gothenburg while she does so. So she wants to
be able to rent out her apartment so that when she returns to Philadelphia, which is the long-term
plan, that it'll still be there for her and Joe to live in. The reason that they want to do short-term
rentals which is what sparked this refusal is because they do come back from time to time on
breaks from her work um if they had a traditional long-term lease you know they wouldn't be able to
use the apartment when they come home someone would be living there it's also not large enough
to sort of rent out part of it not the other so that's sort of the background for you um
This is the building, 335 South 12th.
I believe it is this one where my arrow is, as I mentioned, and is shown on Atlas.
It has been condo-ed into five units.
Lucy and Joe own Unit 2A.
um this is the letter of non-opposition that was mentioned um uh by uh mr birdman chairman
birdman a moment ago um it is um a letter of non-opposition from councilman squilla that
asked the board to um limit the variance that i hope you grant today to a two-year term
We also have a letter of non-opposition from the coordinating RCO, Washington Square West.
My colleague, Rachel Pritzker, attended this meeting with Lucy.
There were 13 votes taken.
All were in non-opposition, none in opposition.
As you see, I don't believe Wash West even asked if anybody supports.
Maybe I'm wrong there.
But the bottom line is that it was unanimously in non-opposition.
They also, on this next page, asked for the two-year temporary sort of time limit.
The first page of this explanation letter basically parrots the refusal.
The second page actually mentions some useful things here along the lines of what I was saying,
that Lucy intends to occupy the apartment as a permanent residence once her work abroad is
completed. I'll leave it at that as far as the letter goes. The property is professionally
managed while Lucy and Joe are away. That was something that was important to the RCO. So this
is a website called slateandhearth.com. This is a Philadelphia-based property manager. So
So this is somebody who has human beings in the flesh to tend for this unit if issues ever come up.
And this one right there is theirs.
This company has a handful of properties.
Some are on Airbnb, some are not.
Anyway, this is the listing that Slate & Hearth manages on Airbnb.
You can see that it's been very well reviewed by the folks that have used it before.
I believe the use started before the new Airbnb guidelines came into effect this year, which
necessitated variance. Additionally, this is basically a very formal form of support from
the other folks in the building. They actually amended the building's condo declaration to
explicitly allow short-term rental use, which is what this document is. It's the amendment
of the declaration governing the condo so uh her neighbors or at least the ones who make the
decisions for the building are very supportive of what they're doing and this memorializes that
i think that beyond that um you're flying one oh yes that's yes if that's enough for the board
absolutely why don't we adopt your testimony lucy colosimo what is her name
Ms. Colosimo, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hi, yes, Lucy Colossi.
Hi, yes, Lucy Colosimo.
We lost her.
That's odd.
Lucy, she's not here?
That was her speaking a minute ago.
Okay, so Brandon, you're an officer of the court.
We will gladly take your testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
What questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Yes, this is Ron Bednar, City Planning, the first name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
All right, do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
This property is indicated for multifamily residential on the City Plan, given the physical conditions of the site.
recommended a temporary time-restricted variance to be granted.
Thank you. MI 2022-002-563-335 South 12th Street. I vote yes with proviso.
Good until October 1st of 2024 and used to apply to Unit 2A only.
Harold Tenere, yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, yes with proviso.
So, James Snell, yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, yes, with proviso.
Number five.
Thank you, Brandon.
Thank you.
MI 2022, 002573, 2054 North Bodine Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
Mr. Clinton is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
good evening mr chairman hi mr clinton just state your name you've already been sworn
sure henry clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n and could you identify your client one more time in
relationship to the property sure leo osilovich i-o-s-i-l-e-v-i-c-h he is one of the principals
of the ownership llc right and our vice chair has a few questions and if i remember correctly
this is one of the joint cases you had from before correct right okay so you know you can
just go over a little quicker if you want okay vice chair mr clinton do you agree to wave the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral plans of the property and photos
five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you. You may proceed and begin with your screen.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, this is a part of a trilogy of cases.
The companion case was this morning.
It was 2056 North Bodine Street, and this is the property immediately adjacent to it.
table of contents, AA through A10, which I ask be introduced into the record.
The refusal has to do generally with the use of the property. It's RSA 5, single-family
zoning district. We're asking that the property, for a number of reasons which I will discuss,
be used as a two-family dwelling. We have two refusals. One is use. The second is
a de minimis open space requirement.
We're off by six percentage points.
So I'll concentrate on the usage.
We have an RCO letter of support
from Norris Square Community Alliance
concerning 2054 Bodine.
photographs, again, which I showed the board earlier this morning. This is 2054 Bodine. It's
a situation where there's many vacant lots on the street, both the south end of the street as well
as the north end of the street. Across the street were vacant lots. This area has been usurped by
the commercial entity that fronts on American Street. So we have a layout of vacant lots for
some time. I don't know how long this particular lot has been vacant. I couldn't discern from the
zoning records and a commercial use directly across the street. This is looking south again
giving you a perspective of the commercial use which has been screened in to the east and on
to the east and on the west is the vacant lot and another aerial photograph of a different
the west is the vacant lot and another aerial photograph.
property unfortunately so this is going to be a two-family dwelling basement of first floor one
unit second floor third floor second unit open space for the first floor unit in the yard
open space for the second floor unit on the roof when we met with the community group they were
interested in spurring development on this particular block is actually mentioned in their
letter of support. They also were interested in the fact that one of the members of the LLC
is going to help qualify potential purchasers of these units once they are completed.
So I don't want to belabor the point, but in conclusion, we have a unique situation of many,
many vacant lots on a block. The particular lot I can question, 2054 Bodine, has been vacant for
at least a decade, in my understanding. The community group is looking to spur development
with this project, as well as the companion project next door, in the hopes that if other
projects come before them, they certainly are entitled to limit their approval to a single
family home. The use is consistent with other uses in the neighborhood. We're not going to
alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
We're going to bring additional residents to the block and to the neighborhood
and bring more eyes on the street.
In conclusion, I would like to have my client adopt my testimony
if he's still on the call and entertain any questions that the board
or anyone from the virtual audience may have.
Let's do your testimony if he's still here.
Mr. Leo, can you raise your hand, virtual hand?
hey i'm here we have already been sworn twice today so uh proceed henry just just state your
name again for the court reporter uh this is leo icelich i-o-s-i-l-e-b-i-c-h
go ahead henry oh thank you you were sworn earlier today as the chairman said have you
heard my testimony this evening? Yes. If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my
testimony as your own and as true and correct? Yes. Thank you, William. You're done, Henry, right?
Yes. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
planning commission city planning ron bednar property is indicated for residential use on
the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing residential single
family zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or condition of the property that was prevented from being used
in conformity with the code therefore we recommend that the request of variance not be granted
Thank you, Ron. MI 2022-002-573-2054 North Bodine Street, I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Henry.
All right, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Have a great night, everyone.
Number six, MI-2022-002-541-1400 East Mount Pleasant.
Michael Hanley is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 50th Ward RCO.
Mr. Hanley is coming back in now as a panelist, Sheriff.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Handley. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Good evening. Michael Handley, M-I-C-H-A-E-L-H-A-N-D-L-E-Y.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Yes. My client is the owner of the property, Andrew Neville.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Mr. Hanley, do you read away the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, refusal referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met
with the RCO?
And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of those.
Okay, great.
You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So good evening, Council.
Thank you for hearing us so late this evening.
Hopefully we can be quick.
First, I'd like to bring up the receipts for mailing of the notice to the community members.
You can see all those here.
They were all stamped out.
Next, I'd just like to show you the photos of the posting.
You can see here postings in the front yard.
Council, Council, there's nothing up.
It's not coming up?
No, you've got to share your screen.
I did hit share screen.
It's coming up now, but now you've got to get your list out.
Can you see it now?
I think you've got to go into the email now.
We now have your postal.
Okay, that's what you can see?
We see that.
Okay, great.
So this is just the, these are the proof of mail and the notices out to all of the 180
some neighbors.
Next, we have the photos of the posting of the property, front yard and side yard.
I next have the zoning permit refusal.
And if you'll notice here where the cursor is, the property was previously granted a
variants to allow for two family dwellings and a doctor's office on the lower level.
I have here the tax certificate issued August 18th.
We have here the RCO opinion in support of the variants requested.
and i have here some photos of the property you know to go through these quickly um and just for
some background what we're looking to do here is basically convert the the lower level doctor's
office into a third apartment and have this unit be uh grant of airings to have three residential
units as opposed to the two residential units and the doctor's office that it was previously
You can see here on the photos, the front door here to the middle floor and top floor apartment.
You can see over the right here, this is the door to the lower level apartment.
The next photograph here is from the rear of the property.
You can see here is a back door to the lower level apartment.
These are windows going into a shared living room and kitchen space.
There's also a parking spot back here for the resident of the lower level apartment.
Again you can see here this is from the side of the building. This is another door to the
lower level apartment as well as a window to the bedroom and a window to the kitchen.
You can see here in the interior here is the lower level kitchen window we saw on the outside
which provides plenty of natural light to the kitchen. You can see here in this photo to the
right you can see the light coming in and that's from the other window at the back of the lower
level unit this is the window you could see on the outside on the side of the unit
window allowing light in this is the bedroom and this is the separate entrance to the bedroom
this is just some other pictures here and here's a picture of the interior looking in looking out
of the front door so this is the front door here the door to the middle floor apartment is here to
the left and up these two sets of stairs the door to the top floor apartment the property from what
we can tell has has at least since 1990 been three separate units when my client purchased the
property you can see here there's three water heaters in the basement one for each unit
there's three separate heating units this is the heating unit for the the lower level and then the
top floor and the middle floor had their own separate heating they run off boilers this is
a brand new boiler that my uh the applicant just put in and those are the photographs of the
property um you know basically we're looking to like i said have this property uh variance granted
so that we can turn it into three apartments the building is already set up as three separate units
It would cost a lot of money, and basically you'd have to gut the whole building if we wanted to change it back to a single-family residential area, a residential building.
It's going to have – it's going to lessen traffic in the area as the prior use of the lower level was a business as opposed to now would be a residential apartment.
It's also going to bring less people into the neighborhood.
It's a residential neighborhood.
The doctor's office that was in the lower level was one of the only businesses in a few
The doctor's office that was in the lower level was one of the only businesses in, you know, in a few block radius there.
And certainly on that block, it will not be detrimental at all to any of the neighbors.
There's a long term tenant that lives upstairs on the top floor.
He's been there for 20 plus years.
He spoke very kindly of the current owner and he was at the RCO hearing.
And in his opinion, I'll bring that back up.
um you know he testified that the new owner is a good landlord who takes care of any issues if
and when they arise um you know my client has already put thousands of dollars into this
property as you saw he put in a new boiler um he has been working on redoing the basement there
was some water damage in the basement after the doctor moved out so he has had to uh you know
more or less redo the entire basement all new appliances all new floors all new paint new doors
everything was ruined by water damage we had to redo all that uh so basically is your client
here available to take your adapt your testimony yes he is here why don't we have him sworn and
take let him do your testimony sure andrew are you here
mr neville please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hi could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter please
certainly chair my name is andrew neville a-n-d-r-e-w then n-e-v-i-l-l-e you swear
for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed and andrew
did you hear my testimony this evening i did yes was my testimony true and correct it was yes would
you adopt my testimony as if it were your own i would yes thank you uh sure that's all i have for
you all right thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments
from the virtual audience there we have dylan mahoney with his hand up mr mahoney you can
Now, mute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Mahoney.
You've been sworn before.
Just state your name, please.
Dylan Mahoney.
I'm the Office of Councilwoman Parker.
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We've received a letter of support from the 50th Ward Democratic RCO,
and we have no opposition to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
There's no other hands at this time.
Any commission?
Ron Bednar city planning property is indicated for residential use on a city plan our adopted
district plan recommends no change to the existing residential single family zoning at this location
the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or
conditions of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code
this application represents an inappropriate overuse therefore we recommend the request
to advance not be granted. MI 2022-002-541-1400 East Mount Pleasant Avenue. I vote yes.
Harold Teneri my vote is yes. Thomas Solomon my vote is yes.
James Snell my vote is yes.
thank you thank you council number seven have a good evening mi-2022-002-225-7430 state road
sean ward is the attorney letter of non-opposition from the holmesburg civic association
mr ward is coming back in as a panelist now chair
good morning mr chairman is it is it thursday yet
could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yeah sean ward s-h-a-w-n last name ward w-a-r-d uh here as applicant's attorney
My address is 331 E Street Road, Trevos, PA 19053.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
I represent Zalzman, that's Z-A-L-Z-M-A-N, Properties LLC, the owner of the property,
as well as the tenant, Lee Zimmerman, Z-I-M-M-E-R-M-A-N, who is the tenant for the proposed
tenant space, subject of the application, and he is the operator of Counter-Strike.
And he is the operator of Counter-Strike, it's a physical therapy or, I mean, a physical fitness operation.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Ward.
Do you agree to wave through any of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, plans, five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Okay, great.
You may proceed and your screen's up.
So that's good.
Awesome.
Mr. Chair, members of the board, I've submitted my typical exhibit packet, which is displayed on the screen.
Let me blow it up.
I represent Salzman, Properties, LLC, which is the owner.
We were here on an application for them.
They were relocating the gun range from Northern Liberties up to the Helmsburg section.
The board was gracious enough to grant that application with the support of Helmsburg
Civic last year or the year before.
And they have a tenant space within the building that Lee Zimmerman, operating as Counter-Strike,
is the tenant. The property is a 7430 State Road. And A1 is the notice of refusal. The application
was a permit for personal services, which is a fitness gym. There was one refusal. Personal
services are not permitted in the district, and therefore a use variance is required.
a2 is the zba application of appeal a3 project information form a4 is the deed a5 proof of tax
clearance a6 is the site plan a7 is the key plan a8 are photographs of the subject property aerial
view street views as well as posting a9 is the rco letter should say non-opposition sorry from
Holmesburg Civic. A-10, if submitted, I would ask that Councilman Driscoll's letter be marked as
A-10. I don't know if they submitted one. A-11, as far as the relevant zoning history, again,
in 2020, we came to the board with an application for a firearms training facility and retail sales
gun shop. That application was branded with the supporter non-opposition of Holmesburg Civic.
Prior to that, the use in the property was a document shredding and construction warehouse
and storage with accessory offices. And dating back to 1936, it was a lacquer and stain
manufacturing facility. A-12 is a zoning map. A-13 is an aerial photograph.
So not to belabor the board's time, we have the deed.
We have the tax clearance.
We'll reduce these.
As you can see, all taxes are paid.
On the site plan, you'll see this was used in the previous application.
We provide 45 parking spaces off-site, which is well in excess by 15 spaces.
that which we're required to provide with regard to the uh the site plan or floor plan
uh this basically square area here that you see uh is uh currently basically a storage garage
which would be converted into the counter strikes uh fitness center it is serviced by an overhead
door plus a pedestrian door right next to it the rest of the first floor as you can see
in this section is occupied by the gun range currently still under under renovation and
progress with regard to the photographs this is a copy of the posting on the fence a close-up shot
The property is located on State Road with the CRX tracks to the upper left in the photograph
and 95 to the lower right.
It's located just below the Cotman Avenue exit of I-95.
You come up Blythe Street to State Road and the property is right here.
If the board recalls, we were here last week in support of a neighbor's application.
for Sweet Lucy's, which is located directly next door.
Here's just another aerial shot.
This is a dated photo from Google Earth, obviously, when it was more of an industrial site.
But the location of the fitness center would be right around this location here, right
under the red dot.
This is a picture of the front of the building from State Road. This, if I was standing in
This is a picture of the front of the building from State Road.
Lucy's barbecue parking lot, we'd be looking at the side of our building. Again, from this man
door here indicating with the overhead door and this section here is basically where the fitness
gym would be. And these are photos I took during a site meeting with Holmesburg Civic. Obviously
not fit out as a fitness gym but currently used for storage of construction materials and equipment
we do have the letter of support from holmesburg civic regarding this application indicating they
are not opposed and assigned by tara gontek from holmesburg civic she was the president
we have our notice of meeting had a copy of refusal we have a copy of the zoning permit
granted by variance for the board for the gun range and then attached is also all the zoning
history as previously mentioned and it is located in a i3 heavy industrial zoning district and again
going back to the aerial photo that is the sum and substance of the application i would just add
that Counter-Strike currently operates out of the Flyer Skate Zone, which is located near the
Northeast Philadelphia Airport on Comley Road and Decatur Road. And they are, you know, they've
been there for approximately four years, operating in Philadelphia since 2009, and they're looking
forward to their relocation to their new cycle. I have with me this evening Lee Zimmerman, if the
board wants me to have him verify and adopt. Otherwise, as an officer of the court, I can
certainly certify that he has reviewed my exhibit packet. Your officer of the court is fine.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair. Planning Commission.
this is ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for heavy industrial use on the city
plan our adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location
the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or
condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code
therefore we recommend the quest for ads not be granted. Thank you. MI 2022-002-225-7040
State Road. I vote yes. Harold Soneri, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell,
my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Sure. Go back,
We got one more number two. MI 2022-002-569-1018 Callahill Street. Sharon Blyler.
Sharon, I do not see Ms. Blyler's name in the audience.
I'm sorry. Sharon is in the panel list. Sharon, can you speak so we can determine if you have speakers?
I think she just got kicked out.
No, I see her here.
Yeah, she's here.
I just don't see audio.
Sharon, can you turn on your video?
Are you available?
Okay, now she's gone.
Chair, as you request, I could work with Ms. Blyler to come up with a different date and just continue this case in light of the technical issues.
Why don't we do that?
We'll get a hold of her and we'll get her back in as soon as we can.
Okay, can you just announce that on the record, please, sir?
Yes, MI 2022-002-569-1018 Callahill Street.
cases continued um we will be in touch with the uh appellate um is there anyone else in
the audience whose case hasn't been called chair i see no hands at this time hey everybody i'm
really sorry we took so long today but you know we had a lot of big cases and got a lot of work
done and i appreciate everybody staying around so late thank you no problem mr chairman
this is regular time
this is regular time
I used to push it hard
I couldn't push this one today
I thought Thomas was going to go jump the guy for me
at one point
thank you
thank you everybody and of course
IT Pauline thanks for hanging in there with us
no problem
uh no problem happy to tanya all right good night all good night everyone good night everyone
good night all
good night