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.