Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning, everyone.
We will be starting shortly.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's ZBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ishmael Shaheed.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Michael Johns.
Chairman.
Our Board Member, Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our alternate Board Member, Emily Persico.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is our Attorney, Hillary Emerson, our Zoning Board Director, Ian Haggerty,
and our board administrator, Lakeisha Dandy.
Recording of the hearing will be posted on the ZBA website.
By participating, you agree to be recorded.
There is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities.
Whether remote or in-person, if you're called to speak,
you must state and spell your name and then wait to be sworn in.
Once you've been sworn in, please state your name
each time before beginning your testimony.
Any person may enter their appearance
to become an interested party to the case.
There are three ways to enter your appearance. You can identify the case property address on
your Zoom webinar registration. You can see a staff member, or you can call the ZBA appearance
line by the close of the business tomorrow. Call 267-270-5548. Leave a message that includes your
email address and the address of the property of the appeal. The following guidance is for
are remote attendees. First, when directed by the chair, you must raise your virtual hand
in order to be recognized to speak. Second, if you're called to testify, you will be prompted
to join as a panelist. Please accept the request and turn on your camera. Third, the webinar Q&A
for questions about the hearing. Do not comment on cases in the Q&A. Fourth, your participating
5 phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and 6 to unmute. For our in-person attendees, please refrain
from talking, eating, or drinking during the hearings. Verbal and physical aggression will
not be tolerated. Restrooms are across from the elevators. A water fountain is just outside the
room to the right. When speaking or on the record, you must speak directly into the microphone in
order to be heard by all attendees and the court reporter. In the event of an emergency, please
follow the directions given over the public address system or by staff. The main exit is
through the double doors at the rear of the room. The nearest stairwell is to the left outside the
doors. In case of an evacuation, the rally point is Love Park, directly across Hart Street. Please
remain there so we can account for you. Let's look at our schedule for today.
number seven mi 2024 004 773 4926 north 12th street that case is continued till 4 14 25
number nine
oh i'm sorry
oh i'm sorry i'm sorry 514 i'm so stuck in the month
I'm sorry.
number nine mi 2024 007 315 546 north 58 street this case is continued to four
two oh it's here it is 524 25 number 10 well excuse me mr chair so sorry can we just go back
to number seven that one uh that one is just the standard the standard date for um continuance
that you have up there it's not the date that's on there this is the date of the request okay all
right good so i'll i'll go over here go back to number seven right okay so number seven is mi20
24 004 773 49 26 north 12th street that case is continued to 10 8 25 at 9 30 a.m
number 10 m i 2024 sorry number nine you want to do nine too yes nine good read that one goes
to the other day yes so thank you number nine m i 2024 007 315 546 north 58 street that case
Cases continued to 10-825 at 9.30 a.m.
Number 10, MI 2024, 007-317-254 South 11th Street.
Cases continued to 10-825 at 9.30 a.m.
Number 13.
mi-2024-005-135-2401 north 32nd street that case is continued to
mr chair we're still working on the date for that one okay so just continue mi-2024-005-135-2401
north 32nd street cases continued number 14 mi 2024 007 551 23 38 north 31st street that case
is continued and number 15 mi 2025 001 305 2500 north 31st street that case is continued
are there any other requests for continuances
Good morning, Mr. Chair. My name is Jason Hand. I will be your co-host for the session.
I have a hand up from a Barbara Moore. I have allowed them as a panelist.
Okay. This is Barbara Moore. Oh, okay.
I'm sorry. My name is Barbara Moore. I just heard that my case has been rescheduled.
All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Okay. So any other requests for a continuance?
Mr. Consul, please state your name and spell for the stenographer.
Good morning, Board. Joseph Consul, J-O-S-E-P-H, last name C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
What case?
254 South 54th Street.
This is a must-be-heard.
We have a complete packet.
However, I got hired yesterday, and this matter has several violations for prior to my clients purchasing the property.
They have not created floor plans for it.
I believe there's several steps that they need to do to actually create a solid case here and not just what they've done so far, even though we have the support of the RCO and stuff like that.
You were hired yesterday?
I was hired yesterday, and I'm helping him handle the whole thing with the rest of the city, not just the zone board.
All right. So MI 2023-005-621-254 South 54th Street. Cases continue to 10-825 at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you.
Thank you.
any other requests for continuance
yes chair I have a
hander from a Thomas McDonald I will
promote them to panelists right now
Thomas McDonald
T-H-O-M-A-S
M-C-D-O-N-A-L-D
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes what case are you talking about sir um mi 2024 007318
um mi 2024 007318 i was curious about the status of it um because i think it might have been what's
the address uh 1334 east passing avenue number 11 on your list okay
that's number 11 on the list mr chair is this your case okay um
what's your comments on this case sir i was just curious if it was uh continue if it was
happening today or not no it has not been continued okay great today okay thank you
any other requests
i do not see any hands at this time okay we have uh several cases here with no exhibits
Number two, MI 2023-005-685-1335 McKinley Street.
Jasmine Green is the listed owner.
Atiyah Grooms.
Swift Expediting is also involved.
This is the fourth listing.
No exhibits.
I do not see any hands raised for that matter.
Thank you.
MI 2023-005-685-1335 McKinley Street, I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tywin, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Number three, MI 2023-006-880-3200 Cotman Avenue.
Chinead Daru is the listed owner to applicant pro se.
Fourth listing, we still do not have any documents.
She also, no one appeared the last time.
Mr. Chair, once again, I do not see any hands raised for the matter.
MI 2023-006-880-3200-Cottman, I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tyler Wynn, my vote is to dismiss.
Fish motion to heed, my vote is to dismiss.
this mi 2020 number four mi 2024 001 286 513 south 13th street and johnson sachs and eric sachs
are the listed owners third listing no exhibits and mr chair for this one the the uh applicants
had indicated they wished to withdraw the case but we never received a formal withdrawal letter
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, for this matter, I do not see any hands raised.
MI 2024-001-286-513 South 13th Street, I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tywin, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
And the same MI 2024-001-287-1305 Rodman Street,
same owners, Ann Johnson, Eric Sachs.
Once again, Mr. Chair, the applicants had indicated they wished to withdraw, but we did not receive
a formal letter to effectuate the withdrawal. Thank you.
MI 2024-001-287-1305, Robyn Street, I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Iowyn, my vote is to dismiss.
Dishmiel Shaheen, my vote is to dismiss.
We're going to go to our add-ons.
MI 2024-004-344-3230-38 Diamond Street.
I vote yes.
Provisors, revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA on April 30th, 2025.
And for a point of information, this case is Ishmael Shahid will recuse himself.
Michael Johns will recuse himself.
and Emily Persico is our alternate board member.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ty Owen, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Emily Persico, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Thank you.
number two mi 2024 005 732 15 to 17 south 2nd street ta 3061
i wrote yes with proviso revised plans one page stamped by zba on april 30th 2025
no outdoor music outdoor seating area to close at 10 p.m sunday through thursday and at 11 p.m
on friday and saturday interior seating area to close at 12 a.m monday through saturday and at
11 p.m. 11 p.m. on Sundays.
Got it.
Ty Owen, my vote is yes with provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, I certify that I watch the videos that are pertaining this case, and my vote is yes with provisos.
number three mi 2024 007 299 609 annan street i vote no
michael johns my vote is no
chair i believe we were going to hold the vote on that one because there may be an amended refusal
on the airbnb yes yes okay yeah let's be scheduled yeah we're not going to vote on
that one today i'll be in touch with the applicant
okay okay so mi 2024 007 299 609 annon street the vote in this matter has been reached
scheduled to Wednesday, May 7th at 9.30 a.m. Number four, MI 2024-007-301-10188 Busselton
Avenue. The vote in this matter has been rescheduled to May 7th at 9.30 a.m.
number five mi 2025 001 558 2308 st alvin street the vote on this matter has been scheduled
to 5725 at 9 30 a.m
number six mi2024-005-975-9230 cambridge street i vote no this is a reconsideration
no to reconsideration and rehearing michael johnson my vote is no to uh reconsideration
and rehearing. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing. Tyowin, my vote
is no to reconsideration and rehearing. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no to reconsideration and
rehearing. Number seven, 30-01 Hellerman Street. I vote request to file non-pronk tonk is granted.
Appeal is accepted and will be scheduled for a hearing. Mr. Chair, we need to call Mr.
derizio and give him a chance to present thank you he what's that call mr derizio and give him
a chance to present and explain why he explained his non-partum request okay thank you all right
mr derizio
here mr derizio will be coming back in as a panel short thank you
it's coming back right yes all right find it back
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Wait one minute, we're having a little problem with Zoom.
I can move over.
It's coming slow.
Just a moment, please, Mr. Drizzio.
We're having a little technical problem in the room.
Should be resolved in just a moment.
Thanks.
Thank you.
It's from overuse in the past.
We're back.
We're good. We're back.
Mr. Dorizio, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
My name is Raymond Dorizio.
My last name is spelled D-O-R-I-Z-I-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Good morning.
Make your short presentation.
Yeah, so I'm respectfully requesting this to be non-protect to be granted for the appeal.
I uploaded the application.
I was missing, I believe, an address in an email.
I was notified. I timely re-uploaded it, but I inadvertently didn't have those two pieces.
All of the other substantive information in the appeal was there. The fee was paid.
So I would just ask for us to, for this NUNC Proton to be granted so we can move forward.
I did refile it with my NUNC, adding those two items.
Okay. Any questions from the board?
any questions from the board any questions marty not at this time mr chair um
Any questions from our attorney?
request to file non-proton is granted appeal is accepted and will be scheduled
for a hearing on the merits thank you sir thank you have a good day
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes to request the reconsideration.
The non-Protonk request, yes.
Michael Johnson, my vote is yes to the non-Protonk request.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no to the Nunk Protonk request.
Taya Nguyen, my vote is yes to the Nunk Protonk request.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number eight, MI 2024-004-775, 3645 North 19th Street.
Albert Sylvester is the owner applicant.
This is a pro se.
Albert Sylvester please raise your virtual hand and wait to be promoted
they should be back in as a panelist shortly Mr. Chair
thank you
good morning board good morning could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer? First name, Albert, A-L-B-E-R-T. Last name, Sylvester, S-Y-L-V-E-S-T-E-R.
You swear or affirm the whole truth is nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Okay. So this application is for use as a multifamily household living,
three dwelling units in an existing structure. The proposed use of multiple family household
living is prohibited in the RSA
5 zoning district.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning.
Good morning, sir. Have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits as needed and
required to proceed with this case five days
in advance of this hearing?
Yes, the last
one was requested a tax clearance certificate.
I did send it in this morning.
I'm not too sure if the
board did get it.
Yes, we received it. Thank you so much.
Please proceed and you can share your screen.
Good morning again. Thank you for hearing my case. The basis, again, for the property is to be used as a three-family dwelling in an existing structure.
I've owned the property for a few years now, and the reason why I've taken so long, if anyone has any questions, just a little trouble navigating the system, finding an architect, and trying to navigate time through my work schedule.
But getting the zoning is the first step in being compliant with the city, as to what I understand from the L&I officer assigned to my case on my property.
Okay, so why don't you share your screen?
Can you see my screen?
We do not.
So you should open your documents
and then hit the button at the bottom
that little green button says share screen.
It's coming up now, sir.
And on the,
from the beginning,
I have the drawn up plans of the property
as it sits now existing.
If I may zoom in a little bit,
But I don't know if anyone can see it.
Is it currently a three-unit building?
Yes, sir.
All right.
And it's been a three-unit building how long?
Since I purchased it, it has been the RCO that was the chairperson for the RCO, meaning he has been in area for quite some time.
and he did notify me that the building has been a three-family structure for quite some time
someone someone previously did try to um get a zoning for it in 2016 that was granted but the
for it in 2016 that was granted but the paperwork never was followed through by the owner and
paperwork
through property records the building was sold in that time frame there so the basement the
basement you have nothing in the basement but utilities right yes sir so i want you to talk
about what you have on the first floor and the second and third okay thank you
the first floor unit is here's where you enter let me see if i can go a little bit
All right. Here's where you enter the building here. And this area here is the vestibule. And I do have pictures of the property as everything I'm explaining to as well. And here are the steps that go upstairs to the second floor.
but in the first floor as soon as you walk in this is the kitchen area here here is the bathroom
area there's a uh a hallway here that goes around to bedroom number one and to down the hall is
bedroom number two here and there is a access to the backyard over here to the in the room itself
and the second floor unit is where you enter over here you enter their living room living area here
to your left is the bathroom and here's bedroom number two coming into the unit to your right
down the hall there's your kitchen area here and here's where you enter the first bedroom
And there's a bay window area here.
This area indicates a closet space here.
And the third unit, let me just move my screen up a little bit.
And to the third unit, this is where you enter over here.
When you do enter, this is the bathroom area here.
This is a closet area.
Here's the kitchen and the dining area.
And this area into the back is the bedroom number two.
And as you enter the unit over here is your bedroom number one.
These are indicating three windows here.
All the blue marks indicate windows.
All right.
Could you show us photos, please?
Here's where you enter the first floor.
first floor unit.
Oops, I'm going to get my arrow.
That's the first floor
first floor unit where I had some water damage
and I'm still currently in the process of getting all of that
taken care of. From the first floor there was some water damage.
That's bedroom number
the middle bedroom, the second one.
And here is the bedroom number one in the back.
And here's where the access to the backyard is at that door.
Here is the hallway going to the first bedroom and the second floor.
And here's this area where the water heater is located.
And there's the bathroom area here.
And that's the entry to the second bedroom.
That's a picture of the second floor bedroom, and that's the second bedroom there.
And that is the entryway to the second floor bedroom.
And this is the third floor unit.
As you enter here, the bathroom is here, and through this door here is the first bedroom.
and that's the entryway into the third floor unit as here's the kitchen living area and there
is the second bedroom that's the second bedroom there oh and that's my other documents for the
in my packet
go ahead mr sylvester what's the rest of the neighborhood look like what's the block
multiple family units here is there's a property and here's the other property attached
to mine what is that is that a multiple family attached to yours yes it is a multi-family
how many units that one is i believe it's four i'm not too sure she said she wanted
to make it for but i know it for sure it's existing as three and what's the rest of the
block look like multiple units yes there is a few i don't have pictures of them but there are a few
multi-families on the uh on the block as well okay all right questions from the board uh yeah can you
Questions from the board?
Can you go back to the plans for a minute?
Yes, sir.
Can you zoom into the first floor unit?
i'm trying to understand how this first floor unit could work when there's not a whole lot
of room there's no living room right all there is is kitchen dining room then there
two bedroom it's kind of kind of like a sro just kind of set up i guess um so
there's no there's no living room and you have to go through the bedroom to go to the
backyard which is horrible for people to have to go through a bedroom to go to utilize the backyard
so the ground floor the first floor unit doesn't work at all it's a unit quite frankly uh the second
and third floor units are are better uh but the first floor unit uh just doesn't work there's
There's absolutely no living room.
My comment.
And my comment is, for the second and third floor, right, you have to go through the, if you're in this first bedroom, you've got to go through the kitchen and living room to get to the bathroom, right?
It is on the second floor, but on the third floor, again, you've got to go from that back bedroom through the kitchen to get to the one bathroom that's on the floor.
it's kind of a weird sort of setup that you
you're speaking from the second
I'm just talking about if I if it's you know
whoever you're going to have traffic right from this second
bedroom on the third floor you got to go through the kitchen dining
area to go to the bathroom here
and on the um the second floor it's the same kind of issue you got to go if you're on the
in this first bedroom in the front then you have to go through the kitchen and the living room to
get to bathroom it's kind of a weird yeah the the cut on the on everything is i'm not too sure on how
they what their what the thinking was behind it but uh but when i first looked at the building i
thought everything did seem a little uh functional so to speak but i i do understand where where you
where you would see where it would cause some uh um inconvenience to to get through the
the kitchen area on the second floor to go to to the bathroom here right
And on the first floor, just following up on what Board Member John said, either for the first or second bedroom, you got to leave your bedroom and go to this bathroom, which is in the kitchen area, down the hallway into the kitchen area, basically, to go to the bathroom.
I mean, it's not the most, as a setup for living, it's not the most optimal, shall I say.
Yeah, what I do have is, for sanitary purposes, some exhaust fans inside of the bathroom on the third floor and the second floor.
and i don't i can't remember if there was one on the i do no there's a no there is an exhaust fan
on the first floor bathroom as well you know because it is it is close to the living area
where the kitchen is so in the event somebody does you know use the bathroom there is some type of
ventilation in the bathroom to uh you know relieve any type of heat and humidity or any
odors from in the bathroom to not enter out into the living area, the kitchen area as well?
Well, on the first floor unit, you don't even list a living room. It just says kitchen dining.
it just says kitchen dining so there's absolutely no living space right no living room no yeah this
So there's absolutely no living space, right? No living room.
yeah the kitchen area is is more so here where the cabinets extend to about here and then there's uh
in this area roughly would be enough room for a a seating table with chairs what about a living
room no no no uh no living room kitchen that's not an apartment that's right that's not an
that's not a two-bed that's not a real two-bedroom apartment also the living room has to be 120
square feet i mean just throwing that out there any any any other questions i do have a question
on the second floor do you know if the kitchen has the three feet required walkway how it's
unclear from the plan but i'm not sure that meets code minimums my concern is that you have a lot
of things that are very tight and barely making code minimums and that if there's like any margin
of error during construction that you're not going to meet code and i do agree with all the comments
for the first floor unit this is it's not very well laid out at all and i do think that it would
work better as a one bedroom and for the density that's trying to be put in this unit um that's
supposed to be single family home i think that these could have been better laid out questions
from our attorney hillary emberson not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the
virtual audience or the audience here i do not see any hands raised for the matter mr chair
Planning Commission.
Morning, Chair, Jonathan Goins, Planning Commission staff.
Jonathan, spell your name for the court stenographer.
Yeah, first name is Jonathan J-O-N-A.
I'm sorry, T-H-A-N, last name Goins, G-O-I-N-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
uh the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this
location however there is a documented and permitted history of multi-family use
the appellant has demonstrated that there is a unique physical condition and circumstance
at this property that would prevent it from being reasonably used in conformance with the zoning
code therefore a city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed use
variance for multifamily residential. Thank you. MI 2024, 004-775-3645 North 19th Street, I vote no.
Johns, my vote is no. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no. Ty Owen, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheem, my vote is no. Thank you, sir.
Number 12, MI 2024-007-327-714 North 43rd Street.
Meredith Verlager is the attorney.
Yeah, they'll be coming back in as a panel shortly.
Good morning.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is 716 North 43rd Street, LLC, which is the owner of the property and is represented by Simon Shane today.
Vice Chair has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the written of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
I do, yes.
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did, yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
If the administrator could also, at this time, promote Jimmy Hare to panelists just for efficiency's sake.
okay they will be promoted to panelists shortly thank you
Thank you.
do you want to start one of your presentation yeah no problem we'll get her to adopt your
testimony. So Jimmy is actually our architect, and I am going to have him testify today, but
I can get started while he's joining as a panelist. The request before the board today
concerns two properties in West Belmont located at 714 through 716 North 43rd Street. This proposal
received overwhelming support from West Belmont Civic Association, evidenced by the letter of
support that is in your exhibit packet at tab 14. As I mentioned, we do have our architect from
Design Blends here to discuss the design with you in a few moments. The deed and the tax clearance
for both of these properties are included at Exhibits 2 and 3. Let me first orient you to
the location of this property. As you can see on the zoning map up on your screen at Exhibit 8,
the properties sit on North 43rd Street between Aspen Street to the north and Fairmount Avenue
to the south. The properties are zoned RSA 5, and you can glean that they are each larger than most
of the properties in this immediate area, but are also extremely narrow in relation to their overall
length. Prior to 2023, just for context, the opposite side of this street, as well as everything
essentially surrounding this property, were zoned RM1, which is relevant as the board learns more
about the context of this particular block. I've also included aerial views at Exhibit 9, which are
up on the screen now. I'll point out a few things. First, you'll notice that this block only has a
few structures of no particular dominant character, with the rest of this side of the block sitting
virtually entirely vacant. The subject properties are shown with an arrow, which are two
dilapidated structures sitting roughly in the middle of these lots. Immediately next door,
the lots have been converted to a garden use by the church that is right here at the corner of
Aspen Street, and you'll see that garden a little bit better in some photographs.
You will also notice the swath of newer development that is diagonal to the rear
along Fairmount Avenue.
From the next aerial, you'll see that the opposing side of the street is predominantly
occupied with existing structures. So this side, the subject side of the street exists
quite differently than the opposing side. Although there is an existing structure immediately next
door at 712 North 43rd Street, which you can see in this aerial, the structure is likely incapable
of preservation just based on the photographs that I will show in a moment. I've also included,
oh and you can see that a little bit better here in this photograph as well.
I've also included another view of Fairmount Avenue, showing several newer developments that have recently been constructed.
Finally, although I will touch on this later, I have included a final aerial, showing that although these are two separate tax parcels that are proposed to be consolidated,
L&I has historically treated the structures that sit on these lots as one, as you can see here from the highlighted map.
And this is based on L&I's system where they would show building certifications or things like that.
So they do identify what they deem to be the structure.
And you can see here that they have treated this as one structure.
Turning to the photographs at exhibit 15, again you'll see the frontage of the two existing
rundown structures which have no evidence of any use since at least 2007.
You can see a better view of the garden next door in this image
as well which again is maintained by the church at the corner.
not only are the existing structures in a deteriorated condition you can also see that
they are situated in a rather unusual condition being set back nearly 40 feet from the front
property line i've included another image of that adjacent structure at 712 north
I've included another image of that adjacent structure at 712 North 43rd Street, which was historically used as a shelter, educational facility, YMCA office, and even, it seems later, as a dance hall.
It is unclear from public sources whether there are any plans to revitalize or demolish this structure.
despite the non-uniform condition of of this side of north 43rd street where the properties sit
the opposing side of the street contains predominantly brick three-story structures
with front setbacks and front porches the view looking towards fairmont avenue
is fairly consistent in that same brick character. Looking north towards Aspen Street,
the only intrusion into the three-story brick character is a stone church that sits right at
the corner. Finally, I have included photographs of the timely posting which was made on April 9th.
at this point i would like to uh have jimmy hair come on and walk you through the uh the proposal
so is is jimmy available ah i see i'm here excellent hi could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer my name is james harrah h-a-r-r-e right do you swear or firm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel thank you uh
Jimmy, could you just identify who you work for and your involvement with this particular project?
Yeah, I work for Design Blends Architecture in Manioc and I am the project coordinator on this
one seeing, you know, through the design and day-to-day activities of it. Thank you. All
right, so before we get to Jimmy, first and I guess most importantly, just in terms of lot context
here. As you can see here at Exhibit 5, these lots are proposed to be formally consolidated,
and we did include that consolidation plan for reference, which is on your screen at Exhibit 5.
The original lots are 3,600 square feet and will be combined to create a lot of 7,200 square feet.
The combination will help to mitigate the effects of having lots that are extremely long and narrow,
which currently exists at 180 feet long while only 20 feet wide to create a substantially less
uniquely shaped set of lots. Jimmy, I'm going to turn to the zoning plans that were filed with
L&I here, which are also at Exhibit 5. Can you just describe to the board, just generally speaking,
the structure that is proposed and its orientation on this lot yeah so the structure is a four-story
multi-family building contains 20 units we have one pilot house currently uh well correct term
roof deck access structure uh but it's being used for mechanical access only um which is triggering
part of our uh refusals here um rsa5 does not have an exception such as commercial districts do that
accepts the pilot house from the building height for mercantile access so again that's why our
building height is reading as i believe 40 47 feet instead of 38 feet which the primary building
is topping out at so um and can you talk a little bit about the the front setback landscaping
Yeah, so the front setback is set back to match the primary building face of 712 North 43rd Street. Meredith, if you zoom up a little bit, you can kind of see the existing site photos on the site plan for me, and that just kind of explains.
so we are matching the face of the second and third floor of that building not the front one
story build out there that's what's considered the primary face so that's what we're meeting
it's about 19 and a half feet set back from the sidewalk right of way and then the rear yard is
I believe we're at 10 just over 10 feet 10 feet 6 inches we have landscaping in the rear
for yard trees, two trees at one tree per 1600 square feet per the zoning code, as well as two
street trees for the subdivided lot that's greater than 35 feet. And then we also have a side yard
that is facing 712 North 43rd Street. We oriented this way since that is an existing building
and is a little bit worse for wear. Providing the side yard there allows us to kind of mitigate
and touching that building as much as possible while also providing um egress for all of the units
And just to confirm the data that is on your plans, this proposal represents an occupied area of only 73.45 percent, correct?
and and just to confirm the data that is on your plans this
Correct.
And other than the height, which we'll talk about again in a minute, all other dimensional aspects of this application are compliant with the code?
Correct.
Great.
All right. So if we scroll then to the elevations, you touched on this briefly, but just now that the board has the plans up in front of them, if you could, again, just explain the height of the building itself and the height of the pilot house that is ultimately triggering this refusal.
all? Sure. So, four-story building, the top of the primary roof is at 38 feet. So, that does meet the
compliant dimensional standards for an RSA 5 lot. In this case, we are providing a pilot house
to provide easier access for all of the mechanical systems that will eventually end up on the roof.
Now, as I stated, the zoning code does provide some dimensional relief for pilot houses. Normally,
in the roof deck, they would be exempt. Or in commercial districts, you have an exemption for
pilot houses that are used for mechanical access only. That exception doesn't extend to the
residential districts. So in this case, since we are only providing one pilot house and not an
actual roof deck, that's where the variance is being triggered or the refusal is being triggered
for the building height. So it's your understanding that if this owner and applicant decided to
actually make the roof deck occupiable by the future tenants, this refusal would have been
eliminated? Yes. Okay. Before we turn to the floor plans, I want to turn to the renderings that I
have up on the screen at Exhibit 7. If you could just talk a little bit about the aesthetic
characteristics of the building and ultimately how you landed on this particular design.
Yeah, so I think the building next door is kind of the primary inspiration for materiality.
The city of Philadelphia is a big brick city, so of course we're going to utilize that as our base.
And then utilizing the mansard, which is also pretty common around this area of the city,
to kind of help visually reduce some of the additional height where this building will be standing over 712 North 43rd Street.
We also utilize the porch, again, another common feature in this part of the city.
The one thing I will say, this rendering is slightly outdated.
The porch as it currently designed only runs from the entry door on the right to where the balconies are.
And the left was left open so that we could provide adequate maintenance service to a PicoVolt that will be in the basement for the building.
And that is shown on the colorized renderings and design plans.
Is that is that correct? So this is representative. It is correct on the zoning plans.
Got it. And then can you just briefly talk and we'll touch on this when we get to the floor plans.
But if you can just briefly touch on the balconies as well.
Yeah. So ideally, obviously, when you have a multifamily building, we're not providing a full roof deck.
We try to provide as many outdoor spaces for as many units as possible.
So they do have some of their own personal outdoor space.
so these front bedroom units that you're seeing here are two bedroom units so we provided a small
deck in there I can get you the dimension it is I would say I think it's about eight by eight
and then we also have a similar balcony condition for the two bedrooms in the rear which we'll see
as we move through the floor plans as well. So it's seven by six and a half is the front balcony
and the rear balcony is nine by three and a half. Okay so let's talk let's flip to the floor plans
now at exhibit six. If you can talk about the overall unit count and then if you can move and
describe the first floor and the basement of this proposed structure? So overall unit count is 20
units. It's a mix of 13 one-bedroom and seven two-bedroom units. When we enter the building
on the first floor there on the right-hand side, you do have one entry or one one-bedroom unit
there at the beginning. We'll preface this, the building does include an elevator, so at base value
All units are developed to a type B accessibility level, including this one.
We kept this unit at the front to try and keep some type of residential presence at the front of the building and push trash and mail further into the building.
further into the building, but since we still had access to the side yard to pull all that out to
But since we still had access to the side yard to pull that out.
the street. So again, as you move in, you have the mail and trash rooms, and then you have your
stair and elevator tower. The stairs and elevator will take you down to the basement, which is all
utility and storage, as well as the bike room for the property. I believe we are providing at least
eight bike spaces. It may be seven bike spaces is what we're providing in this, which does follow
one space for every three units. As we move up back to the first floor and we kind of continue
into the rear of the building, we have three identical one-bedroom units along the middle
core, and that is pretty standard as you go all the way up. All one-bedroom, one-bath, very tight
designs, efficient designs with eat-up peninsula bars for all the kitchen spaces. And then in the
rear, we have another two-bedroom, two-bath unit here. Again, two-bedroom, two-bath, pretty standard
sized bedrooms and bathrooms for everything. As we move up to the second floor, again, you'll see
that middle grouping of three bedrooms is all the same, which is going to help with all the structural
design in this building. And then in the front and back, our two-bedroom units kind of shape a little
bit differently, but these are consistent from the second to fourth floor levels. Again, they're both
two-bedroom, two-baths, and these units are all provided with the exterior balconies.
And then we didn't utilize balconies on those side one-bedroom units so that we
stayed compliant to the minimum side yard requirements for an RSA 5 lot,
which is a minimum of five feet. We're providing six.
And instead of full balconies, what have you provided instead on these units?
So we provided Juliet balconies, much larger window openings to help bring the light in, and then you can still open up and get some fresh air into the space.
And in addition to the Juliet balconies, can you just touch on, again, the way that this design has really allowed for ample windows and light and air into all of the units throughout the entire building?
Yeah, so the consolidated lot allows us to get the full use out of the 40-foot lot by, A, providing the side yard and then providing units that are deep enough that will allow us to put windows or bedrooms and living rooms both along that side yard so we're not proposing, you know, studio units or units where bedrooms are set in from the side.
So the consolidated width really allows us to get all of that along the front facade or side to side.
Thank you. And I think just for visual purposes, I think that it's very helpful to look at the colorized elevations where you can really see what Jimmy has testified to here in terms of the window, the window layout.
We do also in the floor plans have enlarged unit plans for these units. So if the board has any particular questions about any of the unit designs, we do have those with additional measurements. So we, of course, can turn to those towards the end if the board has any questions on the units.
Just to go back real quickly. So what is the what is the theory behind the method of trash disposal for this building?
So trash disposal, we have the room on the interior behind the first floor unit.
We have an interior door for residents to be able to swing in and put into either individual garbage cans or up to a five cubic yard container.
I believe we have a six foot door double swinging that swings out to the outside so that that trash
can be pulled through the door correct or directly to the side yard and out to the front so it doesn't
need to be transported through the inside of the building at all. And this building would be
required to have commercial trash pickup is that correct? Correct. So just uh before before we wrap
up, I want to just touch on the roof plan very briefly. You mentioned that the roof here is
only intended to be used for mechanicals. Why can't you put those mechanicals inside the basement?
Why does it make more sense to put them on the roof? So the mechanicals that are going to end
up on the roof are the air handler units, the exterior portion of those. So they have to be
outside. Typically, you either see them on the roof or the rear yard. The rear yard is a little
bit tighter here. Plus, having the yard trees there, putting them up to the roof just makes
the most sense and most efficiency. It gets them out of the way and out of the view of everything.
We can also inset them. Since the building is wide enough, we can inset them far enough so
Since the building is wide enough, we can inset them far enough so they're not really seen from any of the surrounding properties.
they're not really seen from.
And in terms of the overall building design here, obviously, despite the fact that L&I has treated the existing building on these lots as one building, feasibly somebody could develop two different structures on two different lots.
So can you explain the basis for one combined building and why, in this particular case, that provides a real tangible benefit in terms of the living spaces?
So I think really it comes down to the efficiency of spaces.
So ultimately, you know, we would probably require to do two stairs if we did two buildings each.
So you're decreasing the amount of stairs and you're decreasing the amount of circulation, which automatically increases the amount of square footage that we can then devote back into the units to make sure that the unit living rooms and bedrooms and bathrooms are all of an adequate size that somebody actually wants to live in.
And then also it pushes us into the threshold of the elevator, which, you know, becomes a cost question across many times when the project is right on the fringe here, including that really gives us it makes it worth the while producing a number of units and then also allows us to build in some level of accessibility so that we can make sure that these units are accessible to the widest variety of potential tenants.
Thank you, Jimmy. Stick around.
Obviously, towards the end, if the board has any questions, we can bring Jimmy back up, but I'll just conclude with some argument and some additional context to consider.
So as you've heard regarding the refusal, the proposal received two refusals.
One which stems from an oddity in the zoning code that this board has heard countless times before.
I personally have made this argument in front of this board before.
Aside from the pilot house, no other dimensional variances are requested, and the proposed structure does comply in full with the provisions of the code.
In fact, as Jimmy described, the structure is smaller than the code would permit for a lot of this particular size.
Now, again, starting with the pilot house, this stems from a feature of the zoning code
and that the pilot house height would have been exempted had this been an occupied roof deck.
Because the roof deck is only for mechanical access, the pilot house height is counted
towards the overall building height, even though the building itself is compliant.
it. As I alluded to earlier and to put it bluntly, this refusal could be eliminated if the applicant
made this roof deck available for tenant use, which is not something that is generally desirable
in this particular area or for this particular building. That would create far more impact to
the surrounding area than is desirable, but you also heard that placing mechanicals on the roof
is the most economical and efficient location to avoid obviously having more impact to surrounding
properties. Given the proposed location of the pilot house, which again, for context here,
I'll bring up the colorized zoning plan. Given the location of this pilot house, which is over
100 feet from the front property line and about 35 feet from the rear property line,
the pilot house height will be virtually invisible, and the building will retain its
code compliant 38 feet from the front. Now, in terms of the refusal for the multifamily use,
the applicant submits to a hardship given both the history of the property as well as the character
of this neighborhood and block, which are all highly relevant to the applicant's entitlement
to a variance. As the court has found in notable cases, such as Hertzberg, hardship can be
determined by multiple relevant factors, including prohibitive cost of developing a property for
permitted use, surrounding uses, state of disrepair, length of vacancy, and the economic
feasibility or inability to use the property. This property meets all of those factors.
Historically speaking, and based on licensing records available through Atlas, the lots at 714 through 716 North 43rd Street were last seemingly used in conjunction with some kind of a dining service or a hospitality group.
License number 4315566 was issued in 2007 to Eaton Park Hospitality Group.
was issued in 2007 to Eaton Park Hospitality Group for food prep and serving for 30 seats.
That license remained valid until about 2012, which again is consistent with the time frame
around when the structures were seemingly rendered vacant. There is no corresponding permit history
to the license so it is not entirely clear exactly what the nature of this particular use was.
Now aside from the historical use, erecting a new single-family home on this lot or a subset
of this lot would also represent a deviation from the predominantly multi-family dwellings
that currently exist and have been recently constructed on this block and in the neighborhood.
As you can see here at Exhibit 11, I'll zoom out a little bit, I've marked up a map of the surrounding structures showing that this block specifically contains a variety of multifamily dwellings of density in most of the structures on the block, ranging from two units all the way up to six units for most of the newer construction.
In addition to the considerable vacancy that still plagues this side of the block, multifamily use is a dominant use of this 700 block of North 43rd Street.
As I mentioned earlier, the structure immediately next door was not only historically used as a shelter, it received a variance decades ago on the basis that, even then, providing a single-family use was not viable.
A few lots away, with a purple star at 708 North 43rd Street, a building permit was recently
issued for the construction of a new six-family dwelling. The board heard and granted that
particular variance in 2023. Unlike this application, that applicant also sought
variances for dimensional relief as well as for the multifamily use. I'll touch on this again in
a moment, but just for comparison's sake, that application was for a lot of 2,250 square feet.
So the density there represented 375 square feet of lot area per unit granted. Comparatively,
the density proposed for the application before the board today is 360 square feet of lot area
per unit, so materially the same, and done so without dimensional variances for insufficient
rear yard and open area, as were all the case with 708 North 43rd Street. Similarly,
with an orange star at the corner at 700 North 43rd Street, a building permit was recently
issued for the construction of a five-family dwelling with two vacant commercial spaces.
Based on the total number of units proposed there, both residential and commercial, that also represents a roughly 350 square foot of lot area per unit breakdown.
In comparison, the lower density multifamily uses you see on the map are all existing structures, not new developments.
The recent new construction, as you can see with the purple and the orange, have all been five or six units, which is entirely consistent on a lot per square foot basis to that which is proposed today.
The mixed character of this block results from the historical zoning classification of this area, which was predominantly RM1 until the rezoning in 2023.
While the rezoning aligned some blocks in West Belmont that do contain a predominant single-family use, this block is one of the many that are now left with a single-family zoning classification that diverges from the character that has been created over many decades on this block, particularly in light of much of the new construction that was approved either just prior or has been approved by variants since that rezoning occurred.
This was a very similar circumstance and character, just one block away on Brooklyn Street, which is just out of the view here, where the board just heard and granted another case of mine several weeks ago.
The multifamily character-
So, counsel, let me, I know you're giving us a good picture of the area. I think you need to say, how did you get to 20?
I mean, you've talked a lot about fours and fives.
So how did you get to 20?
So there's two things, Mr. Chairman.
So as I mentioned, when you look at, and this was not how it was designed.
This is put forth as part of the justification for the number.
This is put forth as part of the justification for the number of units.
But when you look at the lot square footage compared to the density for these new developments, and you do that calculation, it is about 350 square feet of lot area per unit.
So you've seen many applications for an RM1 lot where the calculation is based on the lot area per unit.
So in terms of a justification for it, the 20 units here, because of the size of the lot, is consistent with that density breakdown.
Now, in terms of that, that obviously is just the justification itself.
Now, in addition to that, if you actually do this calculation based on the RM1 zoning, it would have been eligible for about 16 units without any bonuses.
So once you added those bonuses, you could have put about 30 units here.
Now, again, I don't say that to suggest that that RM1 calculation alone is dispositive here.
But when you look at the floor plans of this building, and the most compelling point here is that the layout here establishes that the 20 units is the least minimum density that is appropriate for this building.
So, for example, there's no living basis.
So, we've really taken a lot of time with this.
How much more time do you think you need?
Two minutes, Mr. Chairman.
All right, thank you.
Two minutes.
So, the units themselves, and I'll bring the floor plans back up here, as you can see here, these units are very large, ranging from 600 square feet to over 1,000 square feet.
The units themselves are laid out efficiently and designed well to allow ample living space.
And importantly, since the building has an elevator, this building is going to bring new ADA accessible living to West Belmont, where virtually none currently exists.
And as the board knows, the cost of installing an elevator requires a more substantial development to support it.
So that is simply not realistic.
once you start to get into lower density so you know the fact that these units will be
ada adaptable units is really something that is extraordinarily uncommon in this type of area
so based on all of this and again um you know we're happy to bring the architect back up to
talk a little bit more about how how this was designed i don't we don't think we need the
architect. Thank you. And again, as always, we have a memo of law in the exhibit packet
at Exhibit 12, and I'm happy to touch on any particular point. So at this point,
I will bring up my client, Simon, to adopt my testimony. Okay.
Back in as a panel shortly. Okay, thank you. Good morning.
did we see him he's here i see him okay simon can you hear us yes hi sir could you please
state your name and spell for the stenographer simon shane s-h-i-m-o-n s-h-a-i-n you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel
thank you um simon have you heard all of my testimony uh and evidence that was offered in
front of the board today yes do you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you
adopt it as if you had given it yourself yes thank you uh we're happy to answer any questions about
property management or anything like that as well i have three questions one just because it's not
clearly labeled on the plans are there in unit washer and dryers because there doesn't appear to
be um public laundry facilities in the building yes there are so they're in the mechanical closet
so um if you so that's the uh water heater mechanic the washer dryer is in front right
next to the adjacent uh to the unit entry there and then in the two bedrooms they're in the side
by size got it okay that's what i assume that might be it but it wasn't labeled my second
question you guys mentioned the ability of these with the elevator to accommodate um people that
people that might have mobility access, yet none of the bathrooms seem to be sized for ADA
might have mobility access yet none of the bathrooms seem to be uh
conversion. And so one, just wondering, could you touch on that? And then have you checked to make
sure that all the corridors and the kitchens and the bathrooms allow for that five foot turning
radius? Yes. So the corridor dimensions are five foot, you know, as we get into actual
documentation if this is approved you know we may look at increasing that closer to five six to make
sure there's some tolerance built into the hallway because you never know what's going to happen once
you actually get out on site and then all the bedrooms uh so these are all at minimum type b
compliance um i'm not sure we're hitting a threshold currently to do a full type a accessible
unit um but something we'd be happy to look into to just kind of increase the variety within the
building. And then my third question is for the owner. Are there any of these units currently
targeted to be affordable or subsidized? Simon, are you with us? Yes. Sorry. I was just looking
for the unmute button. I apologize. We have other units in the area and we're very
very comfortable with Section 8 tenants. We have a lot of Section 8 tenants. So the answer is yes.
Okay. I just feel like for the density here and for it to be more than what is allowable in the RSA 5,
it does feel like this is a perfect opportunity to get diversity of unit types in a multi-story building.
Other questions from the board?
uh the uh rco uh community um support correct
all right thank you okay any other questions
questions or comments from our attorney not at this time mr chair comments from the virtual audience
yes sir i have a handout from a jihad ali i will promote them to panelists and they will be back
in shortly good morning mr ali
Mr. Ali
Hello Mr. Chairman and members of the board
Good morning, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
My name is Jihad Ali, J-I-H-A-T-A-L-I
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yeah, I affirm.
Please proceed, Mr. Holley.
I attended that board meeting with the community group that night.
I guess I didn't recognize their murder being the attorney because I would have reached out to her.
But I do remember there was a lot of dialogue from the community about the amount of units.
they did support the development but not I don't believe that it was the 20 units that people wanted
people thought that was too many so I just wanted to put that on the record because I don't see
that it specifically says it was the 20 units that everybody voted on because there was a lot of
dialogue about that being okay counsel do you have any questions thanks
Mr. Ali, you've testified in some of my other cases and have represented that you live on Parkside Avenue. Is that correct?
Yeah, that's correct. That hasn't changed. And in fact, in this day, I told, you know, there's a the council office is aware that I represent.
I work with a lot of other people and I was over that way as a member of the neighborhood.
I frequently attend a meeting. So it's not about where I live. It's that I'm a participant and I did attend that meeting.
Okay. Understood. Mr. Chairman, I don't recall specifically this meeting that there was much dialogue in concern about the number of units.
and and i think that the support letter that the rco issued uh speaks for itself on that particular
point thank you um thank you mr ali anyone else in the audience
there are no further hands mr chair planning commission
monathan goins uh planning commission staff the comprehensive plan recommended a change to the
residential single family attached RS3 and zoning at this location to RSA5. And in 2023,
And in 2023, this property was remapped to RSA 5 to align with the recommendations in the district plan.
this property was remapped to RSA5 to align with
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the requested variance for multifamily residential use and the maximum allowable structure.
All right. Thank you.
um council we're going to uh we're going to hold this till next wednesday we'll vote at 9 30 a.m
and we'll view it in executive session and we'll make sure we get it at a vote
understood all right thank you very much chairman all right mr council
M.I. 2024-007-318-1334-East-Peshon-Gavin.
Mr. Consul is the attorney.
Mr. Consul, I believe you've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
My client is PH Rentals, LLC.
I've got John Holt, one of the owners of the company.
with all right and i understand that there's a letter of opposition professional square
civic association a letter of opposition to the council member squilla and there's a community
letter of non-opposition so our vice chair has a few questions good morning council do you agree
the way to read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy i do have you emailed in all
the required documents and exhibits as needed and required to proceed with this case i have
thank you please proceed good morning board joseph consul for ph rentals 1334 east paschionk avenue
ph rentals is owned by john holt and gabe plaguey both are in the audience today
prior to the city shutting down visitor accommodation properties mr holt's company
had five properties that were purchased and furnished by his company and operated successfully
for a few years prior to them being shut down. We've been in front of the board for the first
four. This is the final property that they are needing to legalize, having been purchased
prior to the shutdown. I'm going to share my screen now.
All right. So this is 1334 East Pass Yonk Avenue. This block is the block of East Pass Yonk Avenue that comes up from the Acme and the CVS.
There is a wide range of uses on this block. There is a popular brewery, an art gallery, at least two beauty salons, a bike shop, single family homes, and many multifamily properties.
uh i'll just real quick go down the list of the ones that i i found quickly 1324 1332
1334 which is our property it uh while being zoned currently is rsa5 it has been a legal
three unit building since 2008 when that was a buy right thing the rental license
is active and has been since that time 1338 is a three-unit building 1337 1339 1347
and 1335 uh so this um like a lot of east passion gav is a combination of a lot of different uh uses
Here's our proof of mailing, exterior photos, showing the bin, here's interior photos showing
their furnishings as with all the properties we've presented on behalf of my clients.
They have very nicely furnished these properties at great expense to their company.
We've included a layout of all three of the floors.
As mentioned, these are previously approved three units.
Each one's a bedroom, a living room, a kitchen, and a bathroom, as well as a dedicated laundry space.
as well as a dedicated laundry space here is their old listing showing they have a perfect
score for this property 5.0 a couple of other photos and more information about the
listing some of the good reviews included on there
gabriel is the super host he's in the room um as mentioned
we uh went in front of the passion square civic and um it appeared uh to be or they made it clear
that their policy was not to approve these they vote they had the community vote uh and there
were near neighbors um involved and there was no uh no down votes it was an eight to zero
community vote and so it was um a little disappointing when we got their um letter
of opposition uh again we believe this is a strict across the board denial of these kinds
of requests and um we're hopeful similar to um another of our properties that the fact that my
clients have operated successfully prior to being shut down um and have had no specific um knocks
against them um by by anyone that the the board or the rco had nothing specific to say against
this property was just a blanket opposition. Some RCOs, you win the community vote and they
vote with you, but this is not what happened here. Their tax clearance, we submitted two
neighbors who live within the bounds of Passion Square Civic. Their letters of support
were uploaded I believe yesterday and included today. We also included in this packet
my client's operational policies. We've been through this manual before but I understand
there is a neighbor on the call that perhaps we haven't spoken to yet. My clients have a very
strict and thorough process with which they manage these properties. I'm going to call him
basically to talk about trash disposal and safety for this specific property in a second, but we
have and have available my client's operating manual that dictates how they run their properties.
And as we noted, they've done so successfully for many years for many properties.
um with that i'll call my client mr john holt to uh good morning good morning sir could you
please state your name as belford stock sure jonathan holt j-o-n-a-t-h-a-n holt h-o-l-t
he swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please
proceed counsel good morning mr holt did you hear my testimony just now regarding
your company's property at 1334 East Pass Yonk Avenue?
Yes, I did.
Do you agree with what I said and do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
For the benefit of the board and anyone in the virtual audience,
would you first speak about how your company handles bookings
and safety concerns at this property?
Sure. Bookings, you know, we understand that with Airbnbs,
there's a lot of concerns with parties, that kind of thing. We have a lot in place to prevent
any of that from ever happening. Starting with when the guests reach out to us, we only allow
people over the age of 25 to book. We do advertise towards families. We stock all our units with
things like baby monitors, cribs, to really advertise to a clientele that's not going to
be bringing a party in, anything like that. We also collect IDs, do background checks,
things of that nature, and have minimum night stays because most of the time, the people
that are booking for a party are trying to do a one-night stay. Unfortunately, they're
also local residents, so we can vet them and fill that out and eliminate any issues before
they happen. We also include in our units some safety measures like noise monitoring system
called a minute device that doesn't record or anything in the units. It just kind of monitors
decibel levels. We have it set to 75 decibels, which is the, you know, the basically
uh decibels which is the you know the um basically equivalent to a vacuum so anytime like our cleaners
go off and they run the vacuum we'll hear it but you know that's a good way for us to prevent
you know any issues or people getting louder at night um so anytime the noise gets above that
decibel reading it'll send not only the guest a message immediately to to have them you know you
know respect the quiet hours but also to us so then we can enforce that as well okay um and then
finally would you discuss the um trash disposal specific to this property yes uh trash disposal
we have multiple markings throughout the property as well as uh the information they receive once
they book when trash is the rules of the trash when to put it out the night before trash day
not before 5 p.m. Besides, so if they're staying at the property during that trash time, they know
to bring it down. If there is no guest there, then, you know, our cleaners, once they clean the
property, they'll be able to bring it down for us at the appropriate time. We also have
maintenance men that do that as well. Okay. And finally, do you, are you and your partner local
and do you manage these properties yourselves uh yes we are i actually from this property
am just out of this zone i'm on uh fernon street so tasker is the southernmost zone so i'm right
off passing on gav and you know we care about our properties we care about the neighborhood
okay nothing further questions for the board yes how many total um short-term rentals do you have
in this neighborhood in this neighborhood this is our only one it's the only one okay and then
how many do you have total in the city of philadelphia in the city of philadelphia we have
12 i believe and at all of them do you leave it to the short-term rental tenants to put their
trash out on the street uh no it's the same thing um you know for the trash pickouts if there is a
guest there yes um if there is not a guest then you know we have maintenance and other you know
avenues to do so okay and then just for a point of reference the rco um the head of the rco i think
also lives on your block so did you talk to any of the nearby name i know most of the people on
that board specifically live on the block where this is so just wondering what has been your
interaction with the uh past young civic association membership not besides that first
meeting that was uh the only time okay and you've never had to present to them before like in your
previous operation of the of the property i was on that board but that was over 10 years ago yeah
when i when i lived there but no no one no one knows me anymore there um uh have you had uh john
have you had any experience with um any of the neighbors on the block either positively or
negatively regarding that property no other questions from the board
questions or comments from the our lawyer hillary emory oh hillary hill
i thought maybe she got married no
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Thomas McDonald.
I can promote him to the panelists shortly.
Mr. McDonald.
Good morning.
i think i already swore you earlier in today yes you did are you a neighbor yes i live at 1336
east passing avenue which is the unit directly next to this unit okay please proceed yeah so i
wanted to specifically speak on the trash collection and maintenance from uh my perspective as a
neighbor i've had multiple instances where like my partner and myself have had to take the trash out
because it had overflowed so significantly in the small like container in the front of the unit
and then on an instance in April there was a rat that had died out in front of the property that
was there for about a week I have pictures dated and my partner and I had to remove the rat
ourselves. So I am a little concerned about whether this property is being monitored well
and being maintained well. And I'm concerned if it's really benefiting the
um and i'm concerned if it's really benefiting the neighborhood and our street in particular
thank you miss you have any questions uh well could i have my client respond whatever you want
um mr holt um are you able to to speak to that i i understand that at the moment you're not
a short-term rental but perhaps the the longer-term tenants you have in there might have some um or i
don't know if you've sure uh one of the things i guess in regarding to the trash and the black uh
bin that he mentioned was overflowing just from the earlier uh testimony today one of the things
they brought up with the trash in that larger building um we do have access in the sidewalk
there's a built-in bilko door so we'd be happy to move that kind of trash so to keep it in our
basement which is completely separate from all the units uh that would hopefully alleviate uh you
know uh mr mcdonald's our neighbor's um issue with the trash piling up you know out front right
right there where where he mentioned um so we would be able to uh bring that down through the
bilko door to store the trash uh there and keep it off the street and hopefully you know keep any
issues with the rodent that you know happened as well would you be opposed to commercial trash
pickup uh no we're fine with that as a proviso as well as a temporary variance other questions
or comments from the audience no further answer mr jay planning commission
sorry jonathan goings planning commission staff
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single family attached zoning at this
location there is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent
it from being used in conformance with the zoning code therefore city planning commission recommends
the board deny the most proposed use variance for visitor accommodations mi 2024 007 318 1334 east
Patashank Avenue. I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston,
my vote is no.
My vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thanks, Gordon.
Number six, MI 2024-004-752-1923
East Allegheny Avenue.
Mark Feynman is the attorney.
They will be coming back in as a panelist shortly.
Good morning.
Good morning, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, good morning.
My name is Mark Feynman, M-A-R-K, F as in Frank, E-I-N-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
i do yes but you identify a client relationship to the property
yes um so my client is dema d-e-m-a realty comma inc it is a corporation owned owning the property
The president of that entity is Haytham, H-A-Y-T-H-A-M, Ayad, A-Y-Y-A-D, and Mr. Ayad is present with me, and if you'd like, I'll have him appear.
Sure, why don't you start first, and then we'll bring him on afterwards.
Very well, thank you very much.
the reading of the refusal and do you agree with its accuracy? I do, yes. Would you please start
your presentation, sir? Yes. The application is for the proposed- Sorry, excuse me, Mr. Feynman,
just an initial question. We don't have a letter from the RCO. We did receive from you a copy of
the letter that was mailed, but we didn't receive proof of mailing. Do you have either proof of
mailing or a letter from the rco with you today i do not i've never received that it was my
understanding that that was sent directly in um okay in the earlier listings um but i have never
received that okay do you have um do you have proof of mailing for the notices that were sent
out the certificates of mailing or other proof that they were mailed
i i do not have that again i thought that um when when i was involved that was
When I was involved, that had already been sent out, and there had already been the meetings for my retention.
had already been sent out and there had already been the meetings
Mr. Trey, I think we can hear this, but I think we'll need to just hold for either the RCO letter or proof of mailing.
Thank you.
All right, please start.
Thank you very much.
Greatly appreciate the courtesies.
So this is an application for the proposed use of offices, both business and or professional, on the first floor with a single-family household living on the second floor in an existing structure with no changes to the structure.
The reason for the refusal is reflected as the proposed use is prohibited in the RM1 residential zone district.
If I may, bear with me one moment, I'd like to share my screen.
You open your documents and you hit the button at the bottom that says share screen?
Bear with me for a second here.
My documents are open and I'm trying to find where my shared screen is.
So, so Mr. Feynman, I still have two other cases. So why don't I move on? I'll move on. You figure it out, then I'll come back in about, I'm hoping 15, 20 minutes. Okay.
Okay, I'm trying to, yeah.
No, that's okay.
Thank you.
I appreciate it.
All right, I got a phone.
Number 16, MI 2024.
You're going to have to go out, okay, and come back.
MI 2024-007-354-1432 South 49th Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Let me come in back as a panel for shortly.
Sure, thank you.
I appreciate it.
Good morning.
Good morning, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Hashel Partners LP.
They're the owner of the property.
Right.
And do you waive the reading of the refusal?
Do you agree with this accuracy?
And I would say there's a letter of unanimous support from Southwest Philadelphia District Services, nine votes total.
and we're going to need a corrected refusal am i correct hillary not for this i i don't believe
for this case there is a need for a corrected yes so mr jinn when we were reviewing this the
so it's um the examiner unfortunately made an error and put they did not put the description
of the project where it needed to go and listed the refusal twice so i've already spoken to l and
i they'll we'll just hold it for a week they'll issue a corrected version of it and then we can
both okay but the refusal item should be the same yeah the refusal items are fine it's just it does
not give a description of the project where it's instead it just listed the refusals twice
understood understood so thank you thank you uh if i may i will share with the board what would
submit it as exhibits thank you i'm going to share with the board what was previously submitted can
the board see my screen on theirs it's coming yep we see it now sir great thank you so this is
an application based on a refusal for a RSA 3 zone district. The proposal is for a single family
dwelling. However, in RSA 3, there's a requirement for one accessory off-street parking. In this
situation, this particular case, in order to meet what the consistent look to the neighborhood,
and also it would be kind of a hardship to put in a parking, which in itself would trigger a
separate refusal. We're asking for a waiver of that requirement. This is a roll home block
on South 49th Street. As you can see from our photos, existing properties and properties in
the area, there's simply no off-street parking available for the individual buildings. They're
available for the individual buildings they're all set back with a front yard as our building
All set back with a...
will be as well but the front yard really isn't large enough nor are there curb cuts available for
the purpose of getting I'm going to zoom in a bit for purpose of getting a parking spot there's no
rear access roadway as well so there's just simply no way for us to meet that requirement
under the code. So our position would be there is a hardship to the land because of the
situation of the land itself. The proposal is for, again, a single-family house. It will be
set back to have the front yard and therefore matching to properties next door. The design is
a three-story structure, although everything dimensionally is all within code requirement.
The block does have a lot more two-story buildings, but the neighbors understand that the newer
buildings coming to the area are all three-story structures.
Again, it's laid out as a single family.
I'm going to move to the floor plan, show the board quickly, the setup within the building.
it's a living room kitchen on the first floor a bedroom two bedrooms on the second floor master
bedroom master bath set up on the third with a smaller setback roof deck and a utilities and
open space essentially for basement use and that's essentially our application before the board we're
asking for a waiver of the one accessory off-street parking space and that concludes my testimony if
the board has any questions
or want me to redirect to any part of the plans.
Why don't we bring your client in first to adopt your testimony, okay?
Isaac, can you raise your hand
and be identified?
Should be
Mr. Katz.
Okay. Do we see him?
Jason?
I do not see that name in the virtual audience this morning.
Counsel, you're an officer of the court. We'll gladly accept your testimony. Questions from the board?
Yes, I know you said that you have unanimous support from the RCO and that the neighbors understand that this is the nature of new construction, but currently it's an all two-story block and it's primarily two-story for two, three blocks in each direction.
Do you have evidence of other buildings at this height, including the pilot house coming in the vicinity on that block?
I do not have evidence with our evidence package today.
So, no, I do not have any evidence to present at this moment that would verify that.
Other questions from the board?
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair questions or
comments from the virtual audience you should be on the southwest i'm not seeing any further
answer mr chair planning commission good morning chair members of the board michael gall with the
philadelphia city planning commission m-i-c-h-a-e-l-g-a-l-l do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do so firm please proceed the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at this location the proposal's
parking provision is appropriate for this location as most adjacent properties also lack off street
parking spaces the appellant has demonstrated that the required parking would not be feasible given
the physical circumstances and condition of the property the city planning commission therefore
recommends that the board grant the proposed parking variance thank you um if i hold this
isn't that correct? If I may, to answer board member Wynn's prior question, I'm looking at
the Google map. It looks like, yes, the residential properties are mostly two stories,
but there are some three-story structures, I think a block away, although they are more of
a commercial mixed use in nature. But as far as on the available documentation, I could pull up
right away, I cannot see specifically a three-story structure on that block.
Hillary, are we going to hold this to next week?
Just for one week, Mr. Chair.
We're going to hear this next Wednesday.
We'll vote, I'm sorry, at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you.
Number 17, MI 2024-007-370-2646 North 17th Street.
Ernest Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from all in the family and a letter of opposition from Councilmember Young.
There's a letter of opposition from all in the family
and a letter of opposition from Council Member Young.
I'm making as a panel, sir.
Morning, Mr. Chair.
Morning, Council. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Sure. Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
But you identify your client, the relationship to the property.
Yes, I represent Mr. Hodge Pei, owner of 2651 North 17th Street.
He is in the courtroom today.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with its accuracy?
Let's see here.
we have tax compliance with this story am i correct
yeah we do it we have everything and do we have a proof of posting yes sir okay yes that was all
yes thank you thank you
mr chair 2646 north 17th street's property my client purchased in 2019 you're going to hear
testimony today from my client as to how he discovered that the property was not zoned for
the three-family dwelling sort of in the middle of the transaction. And at the time, he would
have lost his good faith deposit at that point if he pulled out of the transaction. So he proceeded
and bought the building for the full market value of the three-family dwelling, even though
it was zoned for one family.
He proceeded to, once purchased, hired my firm, and we pursued the three-family dwelling.
And we based that request on the sides of the building itself and the various multifamily
dwellings on the block and the immediate neighbors in support so with that i'll show you the uh the
plans here's just the the plot plan and here are the interiors
uh each apartment by the way is in excess of five or six hundred square feet
the basement is just for mechanicals and washer dryer
and that's for the benefit of the first floor unit when you come on the porch you enter you
can go up the stairs to the second and third floors or you can make a right into the first
floor unit which has got an eat-in kitchen full bath living room and a bedroom
up the stairs. Oh, by the way, there is trash storage in the rear. And then we have on the
second and third floors, you've got your living room in the front. You've got your kitchen,
full bath and a bedroom. There is a ventilated trash closet on both the second and third floor
apartments. And the entire building is just three bedrooms, which is akin to if this were in fact
a single family home. And I want to bring some photos into here so you see. It's a handsome
block, all with front porches on one side. The other side, not so handsome, boarded up and
vacancies abound. Here's the interior. This is the letter that was mailed to all immediate
neighbors to invite them to both the community meeting and to the hearing today. Here are all
the addresses that were mailed and we have proof of just under 200 individual
households received our notice from the Vista company we've got our tax cert and
we've got our deed and I also want to show you this is an aerial here's a
better aerial to show you some of the, you know, large chunks of disinvestment and vacancy
with the vacant lots on the block.
with the vacant lots on the block.
So some density is not necessarily a bad idea
when it comes to redeveloping that block.
We also have an email from my client,
and I'd like to actually call him now to the stand.
I should be coming back in as a panel shortly, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Hello?
Hi, sir.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Jaquan Hardfay.
Jaquan Hardfay.
Jaquan Hardfay.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I swear.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Hodge P. The email that I'm showing the board right now dated 25th of February.
Did you write this email, sir?
I did.
I did write that email, sir.
And can you please explain to the board your experience in purchasing this property and how you found yourself in this difficult situation?
Well, I was led to believe that it was a multi-unit.
And the owner told me that.
And I looked online on the Atlas and said it was in process of getting zoning.
And so I had the idea that it was.
I see.
So the Atlas program system that the city uses mistakenly noted that 2646 was undergoing the process of legalization of a three-family when, in fact, it was not.
Is that right?
Correct.
It was actually 2651.
Understood.
And, Mr. Chair, just for this board's information, this zoning board approved a two-family dwelling for 2651 on that same block, just a few doors down.
It was initially submitted as a three-family dwelling, and this board approved for the two-family and not to exceed two families at 2651.
And Mr. HodgePay, you paid the full amount of what you believed was the three-family dwelling.
Is that correct?
Yes, I paid the full amount as if it was a motor unit, correct.
I understand.
And then you've also spent, in addition to the full amount of what a triplex would cost,
you've spent another $50,000 since.
Is that right?
no one more time so i'm sorry you spent another fifty thousand dollars
absolutely yeah because i had violations and for me to clear up the violations it cost me
another 50 grand and the but and the violations uh you learned about after purchase is that right
yeah it was at the purchase and it was more like structural problems right i love the active
purchase correct understood and but you were able to secure the property and clear those out is that
right yeah i got everything cleared up okay and this is the last one the well i guess there's no
violation yet on on this one but okay so now you're pursuing the three family would you be
willing as 2651 on the same block was to uh accept a variance for um a two-family dwelling instead
okay anything but a one family will at least help you break even is that right
yeah one family will be beneficial for me understood thank you very much
and by the way mr chair did you i'm sorry mr hodgepade did you hear my presentation to the
board today yes i did is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes do you adopt it as
your own testimony yes okay and mr chair members of the board we have six immediate neighbors
uh 2651 isn't even on here uh all in support of the variance that my client seeks again we
We understand that the council office is not pleased with the three-family dwelling option.
As such, we would ask that the least minimal variance would be the duplex.
What's that side of the street look like for multiple family units, that side of the street?
This side of the street, again, has two-family dwellings and single-family homes.
on your side of the street, right?
On your side of the street, right?
On our side of the street, that's correct.
On our side of the street, that's correct.
Okay, all right.
Okay, all right.
And then we have the six immediate neighbors
all surrounding the property
who are in support of the, I'm sorry?
What happened at the RCO meeting?
They didn't want the three-family dwelling.
They wanted it to be a single family home.
We explained the financial issue under Hertzberg
that he would be, you know,
So that this is, in fact, a real hardship.
And also, you know, here's the other thing.
He's willing to do this and put these units up through, you know, affordability with Section 8 vouchers, which we explained, you know, as a public policy with the city and the city hall asking us to produce 30,000 affordable units.
Well, here's here's two that we can add to that list right now.
So because of the financial difficulty here, making it impossible for him to come out in the black unless there's something other than a single family at this point, just because he overpaid for this thing.
We're respectfully requesting some sort of relief.
Again, if a three-family is an overbilled, then we respectfully request the duplex in this case, as other duplexes on the block.
Questions from the board.
Yeah, what year was the property purchased?
2019 and uh were any i'm sorry was any research done prior to purchase to check its lni violation
status before closing yeah he went on atlas and didn't see anything other than he could not have
because there were seven violations before he purchased the property including unsafe property
and leaks at the roof um so one i think that there's been a lot of violations on this property
since it was purchased in 2019.
I think my question is like,
what has been the plan for the past six years
since the property was purchased?
It looks like it's been a continuous nuisance property
in that neighborhood.
Well, it was prior,
there was violations on this property
prior to purchase as he testified.
When he looked on Atlas,
I don't, you know, he's a layman.
So I'm assuming he didn't know where to look for those.
But Mr. Hodge P, again, this property was a distressed property prior to purchase.
Is that right?
Mr. Hodge P?
Distressed property and-
The property was distressed with major violations prior to and during purchase.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
Right. And you then spent thousands, tens of thousands of dollars in eliminating those issues. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. And then just for clarity, what were, what led you to believe that this was a multifamily at sale?
i think it was marketed as such but i mean i'm looking at the marketing from it right now on
zillow and on redfin and in trend and it's not listed that way anywhere it's listed consistently
as an eight better owned single family house so i just want to know like what what led you to
believe that mr hodgepee i can answer that question for you so when when i when i like
You said, why did it take six years?
No, Mr. Hachpi, Mr. Hachpi, listen very carefully to the question.
The question was, what led you to believe that you were purchasing a multifamily dwelling?
Because it was marketed as a multifamily dwelling.
And the reason why I look single now, because I posted it single when I couldn't do nothing with it.
But I saw it online as a multi-unit, and I was told it was multi-unit.
You did see it online
and was told by the realtor that it was
a legal multi-unit
and they had the zoning, correct
that it was getting the zoning, correct
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney
Hillary Emerson
Not at this time, Mr. Chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any planning. Hold on, sir. I have a hand up from 3552. This must be Adrian Fernandez. Okay. I'll have him speak.
Hello? Good morning, Adrian. How are you? Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Adrian Fernandez. My last name is spelled F-E-R-N-E-N-D-E-Z.
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes please proceed okay um along with the council district and also um the affected rco
along with the council district and also the affected RCO All-in-A-Family who served as RCO coordinator for this address.
own a family who served as
Swampadu is also opposed to changing this family from single-family to multifamily.
This address has been denied multifamily variants on at least three separate notices of refusal since 2014 or 2015.
the improvements that the owner is claiming are not supported by permits on Eclipse it's just
showing that a bay was fixed I haven't been there recently so I'm not sure but I will look at it
when I'm in the area so there's been no renovation the neighbors next door had to move because they
were very involved in all the previous zoning hearings and the house was a nuisance to them
next door they returned to their house next door as a retirement home and had to go back to mount
area because of the long-term nuisance from 2646 we're opposed to this being changed and when it
used as a single family rental was fine there are multiple successful single family rentals on the
block and even the block captains there's two co-block captains um they want single family
single family homes to be maintained to bring in more families into the area and not like party
type occupants um also there's three overlays um that do support the renovation of the single
family homes in this area um please vote to oppose this variance all right counsel do you have any
questions of her? Other than the objections on hearsay, next door neighbors moving and all that
stuff, I have no cross-examination. However, sins of past owners should not be at the feet of my
client. My client bought it in good faith. He testified under oath. He was told and even saw
online that it was multifamily. He purchased a price that is a multifamily price and is willing
to, you know, even if he can get a duplex, something that would, you know, if 2651 on
the block and various, just recently, a few weeks ago, was approved by this board, and
various other homes on the same block, on the same side, are two and three family dwellings
as well.
Question.
I think this is a really good example of where relief would be appropriate, at least
some sort of relief.
Vern, you said how many properties on this block have been converted to duplexes or triplexes?
The ones that I've, well, I know just several weeks ago, this board approved 2651 North 17th, no more than two family.
And then just walking down the block, I saw at least another four or five, which look like two and three family dwellings.
Yeah, I think the concern that I that I have is that and I understand the desire for folks to want single family houses.
This is a six bedroom house. This is huge. It's too big. That's the problem.
work for for a single family to to kind of maintain and manage it's just a huge property
so um a duplex probably makes in my opinion in this location probably makes sense the way that
you've laid out the three bedroom three unit apartment doesn't work at all because you have
to go through that bedroom to get out to the yard in the first on the first floor so that doesn't
make sense. But that is my concern, that they're huge properties and single-family,
six-bedroom houses. It's a lot to maintain. It is. And I think that exact challenge
is illustrative. If you walk on the block and see so many vacant, either boarded up properties
or vacant lots, because the properties just haven't been able to be maintained. And perhaps
that was one of the struggles of previous owners um okay but my client has all right let's let's
let's see where the planning can planning commission michael gall with the philadelphia
city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommended a change to the previous zoning at
this location and the property was intentionally remapped to residential single family attached in
2014 pursuant to the recommendation of the lower north district plan there is no unique physical
condition or circumstance of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the zoning code proposed use as a multi-family residence has a higher density level than
appropriate for this location city planning commission recommends the board deny the proposed
use variance for multi-family residential use thank you i appreciate mr chair i just if i may
just briefly just i say that i appreciate the planning commission's input uh i think uh board
I think Board Member Johns was very articulate in demonstrating and communicating the unique physical condition here.
Remember, John was very articulate.
These properties are just too big in today's market at 2025 to sustain a single family home.
Thank you.
MI 2024-007-370-2646 North 17th Street, I vote yes with Proviso. Maximum two units.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you all.
Let's go back to number six. MI 2024-004-752-1923 East Allegheny Avenue. Mark Feynman is the attorney.
let's be coming back in as a panel shortly sir
good morning again and thank you very much for the uh courtesy just for the record state your
name you've already been sworn yes it's mark fyman case number six all right could you please
share your screen I am sharing now can can we confirm whether or not it's being it's able to
be seen we cannot see it sir
um mr feinman i'm listening yes we're going to have to continue this if if you can't get one
yeah my apology oh i beg your pardon okay i think i think i found so let me
okay now if i can bear with you if i can ask bear with him for a few moments here so i can get
retrieve the documents i just had them
while i'm retrieving these documents if i may give a brief overview yeah but i i i i want
to make sure you retrieve the documents.
I understand.
IT, have any suggestions?
Mr. Feynman, any luck?
One last moment here.
Okay, Mr. Feynman, we're going to have to continue this.
Understood. I understand. My apologies.
Hillary, can we give this a resumptive date?
We didn't give anything yet, a resumptive date.
If you want to just continue it and then we can see what's available.
So instead of giving a date because the scheduled date's pretty far out, we're going to continue it and then we'll get back and figure out when we can hear this case.
OK, well, I appreciate that.
I will get you back as soon as we can.
I appreciate that. And I will also work to get the RCO letter. It was my understanding.
So, okay. Thank you. So thank you so much. You're welcome. Is there anyone in the audience whose
case has not been called? Mr. Chair, I just have a brief additional announcement. There was one
add on this morning that we forgot to add on. It was MI-2024-004765, 1624 North 26th Street.
We will vote on this matter at 2 p.m. today.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
I do not see any hands raised.
All right.
Thank you, Jason.
See everybody at 2 p.m.
Thank you.
The ZBA hearings.
I will be chairing the CBA hearings this afternoon.
ZBA hearings this afternoon.
Present is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present is our vice.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is our Attorney, Hillary Emerson,
our Zoning Board Director, Ian Haggerty,
and our Board Administrator, Lakeisha Dandy.
Recording of this hearing will be posted on the ZBA website
by participating you consent to be recorded this is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities
whether remote or in person if you're called to speak you must state and spell your name
and then wait to be sworn in once you've been sworn in please state your name each time
before beginning your testimony any person may enter their appearance to become an interested
party to a case there are three ways to enter your appearance you can identify the case property
address on your Zoom webinar. You can see a staff member, or you can call the ZBA appearance line
by the close of business tomorrow. Call 267-270-5548. Leave a message that includes
your email address and the address of the property of the appeal. The following guidance is for
remote attendees. First, when directed by the chair, you must raise your virtual hand in order
to be recognized to speak. Second, if you are called to testify, you'll be prompted to join
as a panelist. Please accept the request and turn on your camera. Third, the webinar Q&A is for
questions about the hearing. Do not comment on cases on the Q&A. Fourth, if you're participating
in five phone press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute for in-person attendees
please refrain from talking eating or drinking during the hearings verbal and physical
physical aggression will not be tolerated restrooms are across from the elevator a water fountain is
just outside the room to the right when speaking on the record you must speak directly into the
microphone in order to be heard by all attendees in the court reporter the event of an emergency
please call the directions given over the address system or by the staff the main exit is through
the double doors at the rear of the room the nearest stairwell is to the left outside the
doors in case of an evacuation the rally point is love park directly across art street please
remain there so we can account for you let's look at our schedule
right with you one minute
number five mi 2024 006 715 8200 to 08 caster avenue this case has been continued to
5, 7, 25
at 3.30 p.m.
Are there any requests
for continuances?
Good afternoon, Chair.
This is Yvette Benton. I'll be your co-host
for this afternoon. We have
Henry Clinton with his hand up.
He's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, Mr. Clinton.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
I just missed the date you say. Sure. So it's five, seven. All right. Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you. Number two, MI 2024, 003, 271, 1201, 203 Adams Avenue. No exhibits
forth listing. David Chandler and Helen Bach are the attorneys. Would they please come on?
David Chandler has been unmuted and allowed to speak to you. Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
uh david uh for the uh for mr chandler could you please spell your name for the court sonographer
yes david chandler c-h-a-n-d-l-e-r you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth uh yes i do could you please give us a status on this case this is
the fourth listing well yes uh we haven't had a community meeting yet but we'll uh get to that
Okay, I'm sorry. We've had the community meeting, but we do not have the results yet. So
we'll get them and hopefully in time for the next meeting. Okay, so this case is going to
be continued. It has to be heard the next time. Yes. So it's continued to 8-6-25 at 2 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you.
We're going to go to our ad-ons.
MI 2024-005-262-1311 to 13 North 27th Street.
This is a brief resumptive hearing.
Mr. Nockamson.
Nockamson, could you please state your name for the stenographer?
Yes, Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N.
last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do so um um this is a resumptive hearing i understand you will brief
us on what's changed and what has been done different am i correct yes um i will say this
that i i have been unable to enter my appearance um or get access to uh the wi-fi here the wi-fi
us down so i i can't like share my materials um but i can tell you what we did file uh was uh
revised plans uh which removed uh one of the units um so if they're if the board feels so inclined
we would do maximum four units uh the bedroom count went down to ten to six we removed a floor
of of the of the property we went from three stories because it is an existing two-story
structure with two doors just as a matter of background um we made a presentation to this
board to seek uh originally five units here with off with an off-street parking spot there are two
doors here i don't have the presentation in front of me so i can't really tell you you know exactly
what's what but like there's two doors there's a there's a garage on the on the first floor that
you can walk into it has had a history even though this is an rsa5 property it has a history of
multi units. Um, my client wanted to do, and it was, I think a garage on like a commercial garage
on the first floor. My client wanted to do, um, an adaptive reuse to make this into a five unit
building where he would add a third story, uh, which would get gain additional space. Um, and so
he had originally four refusals. The first was height while, um, again, we're at 38 feet. We're
in the overlay. We're in the Brewery Town Shortswood Celestial Community Overlay. So even
though we're at the 38 feet, which is typical for RSA 5, because we're in the overlay and the
surrounding properties, we had to be at 36 feet. We had a roof deck, which again was against the
overlay. We were multifamily, which again is against RSA 5 zoning. And we had to repurpose
the garage as for one parking space which again led to a refusal and this is a non-conforming
building so it's full lock coverage on the first story and i and i believe to a degree on the second
story um but we were increased increasing this yes uh i think so at least the first story on the
what we were doing is going three stories up with the same depth or lack thereof in the rear in
terms of rear yards. So when we met with the community, we provided, after meeting with the
community, we have revised plans. First, we're eliminating the third story. So we eliminated
the refusal regarding the height. We eliminated the roof deck access structure. So that eliminated
the second refusal. We got rid of the garage, which now it's going to be space for one of the
apartment unit so we got rid of the third refusal for the fourth refusal regarding the five units
we lessened the variance from five units requesting to four units and just as again if memory serves
me right when the planning commission gave their recommendation they did propose you know that
multi-unit should be there but three units what i will say as to that is that the 2035 plans
proposes that this should be an rm1 structure and based on the the lot size of 3132 square feet
that means we would be allowed seven units as of right we're saying we would like four units
and then in terms of the rear yard depth we're lessening the impact on the second story where
we're not going flush to the rear like the non-conforming structure on the first floor
So we're lessening the impact. Now, the rear yard setback is five feet, seven inches.
Okay. Questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just quickly, I didn't see on the proviso form that the rear yard was being reduced.
being reduced. So if that's also changed, can you just submit an updated
So if that's also changed, can you just submit an updated?
Yes, we will.
provisor form? Yes, I just want to note that since that was one of the refusals.
Yes. Thank you. Questions or comments from the
virtual audience? Chair, we have Sharon Hildebrand
with her hand up. She's been allowed to speak. Okay.
Mike, could you please state your name?
Sharon Hildebrand, S-H-A-R-O-N-H-I-L-D-E-B-R-A-N-D.
You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So the comments on this, your testimony, should be directed at what Mr. Nocklebson just said.
The comments will be relative to what we presented today.
So please proceed.
Thank you.
I just want to make a point that it is or has not been a multi-unit structure in the past.
It was a commercial building.
There was no one living there, staying there.
There was an office on the second floor, and the first floor was a roofing company.
And then I believe city council, or I'm sorry, pardon me, city planning recommended no more than two units, not three units.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate that. Is there anyone else in the audience?
Here we have Sharon Walker. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
I could you please state your name is bell for the stenographer is Sharon Whitaker. W. H. I. T. T. A. K. E. R. Whitaker. Sharon is S. H. E. I. R. Hyphen capital R. O. N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. And like the last witness, your testimony should be directed at what Mr.
Nockmson just testified. Yes, I'm the owner of the building. I'm sorry,
I wasn't able to appear today in person. However, in reference to what Mr.
Nockmson had said, the real yard, we will not, the real yard will still back up 100%
to the community garden.
What will change now is we're staying
in the existing confines at a building
where it will allow for some side yard now
and a community garden can still access
the garden through a breezeway.
And also the building, it was always commercial.
It was a firehouse in the 18 and 1900s.
And now, and then it was a roofing company to complete building. So it wasn't used as a multifamily. However, it was always commercial and industrial. And it just was, it's a very large building.
again. Mr. Nockms, do you have anything for your client? Yeah, again, I don't have the benefit of
the drawings. My understanding, and maybe I'm wrong, was that the second floor was going to be
set back to a degree facing the community garden. I don't have the drawings in front of me, so I can
speak to what my understanding of those drawings. Is there anyone else in the audience?
okay um planning commission do you want to change your position on this
okay could you do me a favor just state your name and then we'll get you to officially say no
amy board with the planning commission right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the tooth i do you want to stay with your same position yes planning is staying
with a recommendation all right thank you very much um mr knockamson we're not going to vote on
this today as you're aware um we're gonna hold a date we'll get back with the particular date
later hillary next week next week okay so it'll be uh five seven all right thank you at 2 p.m
thank you hillary can we can you circulate the drawings that we can't see now to us
Mr. O'Brien
all right MI 2024 007 538 1318 McKean Street
I understand that it's Mr. Masters online
Mr. Masters
as a panelist now chair okay thank you we have an internet issue here in the room
could you please state your name as bill
Would you please state your name as Bellford?
W-I-L-L-I-A-M, O-B-R-I-E-N.
I'm sorry, this is the reporter.
I cannot hear.
We're going to do it again.
Go ahead, Mr. O'Brien.
William O'Brien, W-I-L-L-I-A-M, O-B-R-I-E-N, Manionk Law Office, on behalf of Derek and
Maria Baker, owners of 1318 McKean Street.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Masters?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E-M-A-S-T-E-R-S with the law firm of JustLaws.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
So this is a resumptive hearing?
Yes, it is.
And I understand you're going to give us an update as to what's happened and where you stand?
Yes, I have additional documents to present.
most importantly, the documents on page four, five, and six, which are the proviso form and
the corresponding proviso plan. We discovered there was an error in the elevation plan.
The original plan is submitted and reviewed by L&I, showed the second floor to be 11 feet,
seven inches. That was a typographical error. The correct height of that existing second floor
is nine feet, six inches. So with that correction, and then the architect who's online with us,
he can be available for questions. Chris Karakoff went and adjusted the height of the fourth floor
structure so that the overall structure is now code compliant, 38 feet. Okay. So the only
remaining variance requested is for the set foot back of eight feet. Right. Mr. Karakoff did a sun
study to show that the, as depicted, the third floor without the eight foot setback has no
adverse effect on any neighbor. And I uploaded samples of 11 similar circumstances where a
shallow building, where the third floor foot plate is relatively small, was allowed to put a third
floor addition uh without the eight but set back when it was uh sided by structures in your side
either side there were two floors sorry sorry
we just lost here too um okay um here we go i was in touch with uh uh
Mr. Masters, who represent the neighbors at 1320 McCain Street, they expressed interest in knowing the construction schedule, both, you know, what times of day and length of construction.
I provided that information, not more than nine to five weekdays, and occasional Saturday if there's a weather problem that interrupts schedule, but generally be Monday to Friday, not more than nine to five.
They're fine with that. Duration will be four to five months once it's started. There was no objection to that. They've expressed interest in the bakers helping them with the installation of a skylight. Even though the height is not a refusal, they are still concerned that the new structure may reduce the amount of sunlight they get.
and I believe the parties have come to an agreement
where the Bakers are going to assist them
with the installation of their skylight.
Hilary, should we have his testimony adopted?
Yes, we can do that.
Why don't you have your client adopt your testimony?
Get him to state his name and spell it first.
Your name and address for the record.
My name is Derek Baker, D-E-R-E-K, B-A-K-E-R.
Me and my wife Maria live at 1318 McKean in South Philly.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Mr. Baker, you're sitting next to me.
You've heard my testimony.
Is it true and correct?
And you adopt it as your own?
Yes, sir.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Masters?
Would you want to make your presentation now, sir?
Thank you.
There's been some late breaking news in this case that I just checked my email and discovered
that all of the settlement terms that we had requested have been agreed.
All of the settlement terms that we had requested have been agreed to by the applicant, so I will present the additional evidence, but we are no longer in opposition to this project.
We are now in support of this project, provided that there are provisos for the construction hours, the weekdays.
And that both our clients and Mr. O'Brien's clients sign a binding agreement for the terms that were negotiated earlier today.
So here we are looking at the 1300 block of McKean.
We're facing north.
My client's residence is in red.
It is 1320 McKean.
The building that we are here for today is 1318 McKeon. It's highlighted in yellow.
This is another view from across the street showing that this entire block is solely two-story homes.
uh here we have uh the issue that our clients had presented at the at the previous hearing was
their concern that the only light that comes into their home will be blocked because of this uh
this uh construction of the addition and um so the the their window um on the second floor
is not easy to see, but it is in the area of this red square, and the window that the 1318 McKean
is over in the yellow. This is a view of the bathroom window that's facing east.
That was the second floor. That's the one that they were the most concerned about,
and this is another view of the bathroom window facing east during sunlight where there's
clear light coming in. And this is natural light in the bathroom that comes that's eliminated
by the sun. Here we have natural light coming into the second floor hallway also all from the
bathroom window because there's no other windows available. And here's a view of the middle room
window uh facing south and uh the middle room window also facing south uh our last view is the
middle room window that faces south um and uh i will i will add um that uh as mr o'brien um spoke
to our clients feel that as a result of the of the addition it's really a four-story addition
onto this onto this structure next to them they will have significant amount of light blocked
because of the dimensions of the of the addition so they are planning to construct a a skylight
that will be on their on the roof of their second floor in order to provide the light that is going
be missing because the addition of the structure is going to knock out all of the clear, unobstructed
light. And we greatly appreciate the offer from the applicant to contribute to the cost of that,
which was a cost that was unanticipated and unplanned for by our clients until they discovered
the plans for this project.
So at this point, we would rest and ask the board
to provide a proviso for construction
only between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays.
If there is going to be construction on the weekends,
we would ask for them to have advance notice to our clients
on days that there will be weekend construction.
And then we are looking to complete an agreement with Mr. O'Brien that codifies the agreement that we had around the cost of the skylight.
Hillary, your response relative to the provisors?
Yeah, I don't, because L&I, well, there's specific provisions in the code and it's not in the zoning code.
There are specific provisions in the code that limit when construction activity is permissible.
So I don't think it would be appropriate for the ZBA to put a proviso in place for that.
But certainly you can privately understand that that's when the construction would occur.
I've already offered to Mr. Masters to put it in.
to put it in oh okay sure sure thank you all right questions questions just one other thing
Oh, okay, sure.
Sure, thank you.
All right, questions, questions?
Just one other thing.
just for the record a short housekeeping i'd ask chris karakoff to raise his hand to be recognized
all right he is he is in the audience yes see your turn uh you're the architect
hello can everyone hear me i can could you please state your name and spell for this
stenographer. Sure. My name is Chris Karakoff, C-H-R-I-S-C-A-R-I-C-K-H-O-F-F. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. All right. Thank you.
Thank you. Please proceed. Mr. Karakoff, you heard my testimony earlier in this hearing? I did.
And I made a representation about a SUN study that you performed and I provided to the board.
Is it correct that that sun study shows no adverse effect on any neighbor as a result of the eight-foot missing setback on the third floor?
That's correct.
And the correction on the second floor from 11 feet, seven inches to nine feet, six inches,
as depicted in the Proviso plan as well as the reduction in the height of the fourth floor to
reduce the height of the overall structure to 38 feet. Is that correct? That's correct. Thank you.
Questions for the board? Okay, so just to be clear, since we're not looking at drawings,
the current height at the pilot house is 38 feet of the roof line.
me if we could bring up the yeah if anybody could yeah so the two adjustments so height is measured
i know where the height is measured i just want to know like what is the highest point
can you can you speak into the microphone please so the height of a structure is a defined term
it's not the highest point of the structure no i know but i'm asking what is the highest point
of the structure. So I get what you're saying, but my actual question is, what is the highest
point? If we can go to the second page, top left corner, I think that's the cross section.
Oh, this is Ian driving the car. That'll be nice.
so the cross section will show that the slope of the fourth floor uh goes uh from mccain street
it then slopes back it reduces in height to the rear of the structure the average of the highest
point and the lowest point the midpoint is the height of the structure that's that's where we
get it. I get how we officially calculate roof height. My concern is this is a block that is
all two stories. I have just checked an atlas. It is two stories for the next five blocks in
both directions. And so every other house is 20 feet. And I think the concern I know I brought
up the first time was less the third floor and more the roof deck. And so that this pilot house
is still putting it almost double the height of any other. It's not a pilot house. It's a fourth
floor it is okay it's a fourth floor it's labeled as a fourth floor and the act the fourth floor
roof um i'm just reading the plan where it says top pilot house the cross section is the best
image to show that because this is the four seasons room that's on the fourth floor right
yes there are three stories in the neighborhood so you can see uh the structure
the architect there i am i'm here i'm available
is he the one trying to get to the no it's not me controlling
All right. Next page. There you go. That's the cross section on the left side, top. Go bring it down, bring the page down. There we go. That's the image.
So you see the fourth floor roof is sloped, and that midpoint is where you measure height.
It's the average of that roof, and that point, as indicated in the plan, is 38 feet.
Chris Karakoff is still in the audience, and if you have any questions for the architect, probably more in his wheelhouse than mine.
okay any other questions from the board
um mr chair i wanted to just have my um client um
Mr. Chair, I wanted to just have my client authenticate my testimony.
Can Jenna Ryan please raise your virtual hand?
We have Jenna Elliott with her hand.
She's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Jenna Elliott, J-E-N-N-A-E-L-L-I-O-T-T.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Masters.
Ms. Elliott, did you hear the testimony that I provided earlier today, and do you agree that it was true and accurate and adopted as your own?
I do and agree.
Thank you.
I have no further questions.
All right.
um questions or comments from the our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience what are you good mr baker wants to make a very
brief statement okay okay i just wanted to uh why don't you state your name please derek baker and
i think i swore you right yes sir okay so uh this is going to be short am i right yes sir all right
I just wanted to thank you for hearing us out.
We're from the neighborhood, born and raised in South Philly.
We're having twins tomorrow.
We're doing this expansion for our family.
Based on our needs, we engaged in a contractor engineer to design a house that can address our needs.
We sought input from our neighbors.
Everybody's been in unanimous support.
We got unanimous support from the RCO.
regardless you know I just want to make any further
concession design on my attorney we'll discuss
given the fact the variances have been
requested are very minor
they have everyone else's unanimous support
including the RCO so I just want to appreciate
your time and everything like that
thank you
anyone in the virtual audience
a single hand share
did you already take a position
yes planning took a position
Do you want to change it? No, thank you. Okay, thank you. So, MI 2024-007-538-1318 McKean Street, I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA, April 30th, 2025.
I can't hear you.
Hillary, is that right?
Just let me just check
because it may it may only be one because it has to match what was originally approved by lni
or reviewed by lni so just give me one second to check that may be why it's i just put one
page down because we can't do x we can't add pages to the plane so just give me one second
The plans reviewed by L&I were only one page, so we can only stamp one page, as well as
the proviso form, which explains the changes. Okay. So let me go back again. So
MI 2024-007-538-138-Nakeen Street. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, one page,
MI 2024 007.
stamped by ZBA on April 30th, 2025. Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is no, and this is in no way personal to you all.
I wish you the best, and congratulations tomorrow.
Maybe you should leave.
I mean, it's difficult.
We don't have much time left.
So you got your votes.
Are we good?
Yeah, you're good.
That's why you're sitting there.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, members.
Thank you, Mr. Masters.
so number three mi 2024 002 120 963 north lawrence street the vote in this matter has
been rescheduled to wednesday may 7th at 2 p.m number four mi 2024 000 233 2963 north
Florence Street, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tywin, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Number five, MI 2024-002-000-800-South 56th Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Temporary variance for a sit-down restaurant expiring 5-1-28.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Number six.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Number six, MI 2024-004-765-1624 North 26th Street.
I vote yes with Proviso.
Maximum two dwelling units, no roof deck or roof deck structure, access structure, no interior storage, revised plans.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, that was interior trash storage, not no interior storage.
Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, let me go back. Maximum two dwelling units, no roof deck or roof access structure, interior trash storage, proviso.
Revised plan, one page, stamped by ZBA on April 30th, 2025.
Michael John, my vote is yes, with Provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with Provisos.
Tywin, my vote is yes, with Provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Provisos.
At number seven, MI 2023-006-953-2122 West Estos Street, the announcement, the resumption
hearing in this matter is scheduled for Wednesday, May 28th at 2 p.m.
and in here we're going to go to our regular list
we're going to start with number nine mi2025 000324 1600 to 02 chestnut street
Good afternoon, Mr. Patterson.
Could you please state your name and spell for this sonographer?
Good afternoon.
Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Patterson, I understand you have an associate with you today.
Would you want to introduce your associate?
Would I come up and say hi?
Livy is our intern for a little while.
could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer hello i'm olivia calvinese c-a-l-v-a-n-e-s-e
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth just
in case we need you yes i do and thank you for coming in to help mr patterson
mr patterson could you identify your client the relationship to the property
sure i wanted to make sure i was on here
there's a letter of non-opposition from the center city residents association
sure hi uh regards 1600 o2 chestnut street um my client the tenant is hdr holdings llc doing
business as wonder restaurant and also the owner of the property 1600 chestnut uh partners
and also the owner of the property, 1600 Chestnut Partners LP.
And our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to wait another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and show you this room.
Oh, it's coming on.
One second.
Thank you.
beautiful okay so this application regards 1600-02 chestnut streets on the southeast
corner. It's currently vacant. It was formerly a bank. So today is our application for a second
wonder restaurant. You've heard of, I think the first one I did in March that needed special
exception relief, which was a broader Washington. It's part of hopefully a trend of a renaissance
So Chestnut Street and to populate it with good tenants.
It's located across the street from Liberty Place.
You may recall Wonder is a New York City-based food service.
let's move in slow run
yes it is
I want to get to the drawings. Here we go. Okay. Yeah, here we go.
A new and unique food concept.
They partner with national chefs and restaurants using their menus and products.
The property is located in a CMX five commercial zoning district,
but it's also located within a center city overlay,
which requires special exception for restaurant uses on chestnut wall and
south broad, of course. The space is 3,700 square feet. Here's a floor plan of it.
It encompasses the entire area that I'm depicting here. The red area is the public area and part of
the back of the house counter. All this area here I'm depicting is back of the house.
This blue rectangle is the interior trash storage area where trash will be picked up and taken out
through the back door to the commercial trash hauler.
Days and hours a week are Monday through Sunday,
10.30 a.m. to 10.30 p.m.
There's a type 2 hood for heat and condensation venting,
and it will be vented through the roof.
Eden is provided, but it's predominantly takeout,
and I'm going to go through just briefly how the takeout is handled
so you can see that there's no adverse impact on the area.
Deliveries are controlled by the Wunder app, as we'll hear.
We met with the Center City Residents Association on March 25th, and their letter of non-opposition with provisos is attached.
So with that said, I want to introduce Erica and go through some testimony.
Tell the board your name and address.
Could you please state your name, Ms. Bell, for the stenography?
Could you please state your name, Ms. Bell, for the stenographer?
Sure. Erica Downey, E-R-I-C-A-D-O-W-N-I-E.
Sure. Erica Downey, E-R-I-C-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. You've heard my testimony. You agree it's true and accurate?
And would adopt it as if it were your own?
And could you please tell the board your affiliation with Wunder?
I am the Senior Director of Real Estate for Wunder, so I source the locations.
And the exhibits we're looking at, these are renderings of the actual proposed interior?
Okay. And could you briefly tell the board what the wonder concept is?
Sure. We provide a fast casual type of restaurant where we partner with big name chefs and restaurants across the country.
We also create our own, and we offer various different types of cuisines where people can walk in and order anything from tacos to pizza to a filet mignon from Bobby Flay.
And everyone can order all at once on the same receipt off of these different restaurants.
We offer a dine-in, pickup, and delivery as well.
And we service, usually in the city, it's a five to ten minute radius of homes.
So you may recall, for the last case we heard aboard, was probably in questioning into how the takeout operation would work. And if you could describe the Wonder app that's being used.
Sure. We own a courier company. So all of the courier drivers are 1099, but we're able to control where they can and cannot queue based off where they're allowed to in the app. Also, if there's a problematic courier that is repeatedly causing issues, we can turn them off and not use them as one of our couriers.
So the orders are by reservation?
uh you have to order on the app and then it pings and the idea is that the courier only comes right
before the order is ready to get picked up so they're not standing around waiting so there's
things in queue the order's in queue and as though it prevents congregating yes until the order's
ready is that correct and um your lease term requires you to take reasonable steps to prevent
such congregation is that correct correct yes and and what's the incentive of using the wonder app
as opposed to the DoorDash app?
Well, for the customer,
they are able to order off different restaurants
within the Wonder app.
On DoorDash, you can only order Bobby Flay by Wonder
or a restaurant by Wonder.
You can't cross order off the different restaurant options.
Also, as a customer,
the fees are a lot less on the Wonder app.
And when you start,
what do you think the percentage of people
using the Wonder app would be based on your experience?
Yeah, so over 70% of the people use the Wonder app.
and then we are constantly trying to convert the DoorDash
and Uber Eats people to our app as well.
Showing the CCRA letter.
With that said, I'd say that the special exception approval
is justified in this case as the use will cause
no greater detrimental impacts as if it were a permitted use.
and we see that there will be no additional or detrimental impacts
on the public health, safety, welfare, or traffic as a result of this use.
And you also agree to the provisos by, correct, interior trash storage,
deliveries to occur on side or rear streets,
and ventilation for all cooking apparatus will fully extend through the property roof.
That's correct.
Okay, questions from the board?
Yes, I guess similar to the conversation we had for the Washington Ave,
on south street location where are we doing deliveries because this is an even tighter street
um and it's even more congested then like it's literally in the heart of like the probably the
worst congestion in center city so i'm wondering what is the sort of flow expected for both
deliveries from the warehouse where they're bringing the meals from but also for this
pickup that you're anticipating and is everything anticipating happening on the chestnut street side
as opposed to the side streets uh so for the operational delivery for the daily food um to
the restaurant there is a service alley on the side street that we can deliver from do you know
which street uh yes it's um it's on 16th 16th in between us i'll show you yeah it's i think
it's ionic it's right behind the building okay right down in here do you have a designated
loading space uh we're unable to because it's a travel lane right in front of us but um 16th
street uh is not and we were we would look into whether we could have a loading space on 16th
street so you've looked into it and it's not confirmed yet one of the backstreet well the
backstreet's really not right travelable 16th street i'm saying is there's a parking lane there
travelable 16th street i'm saying is is there's a parking lane there so we could if it's approved
So we could...
be able to look into a loading zone but we have not okay that would look at the questions from
the board yes um okay uh are you are you going to be able to deliver all the way to fairmount
um i believe so i think that when you go on the app will it tell you yeah you know we can we can
deliver to your area we should be able to but don't quote me on that i have to check what the
delivery zone is okay from the last case i just find this whole concept a little intriguing yeah
You know, as to how it's really good for you.
We hope they try it, and it'll get hurt.
The question from the board.
Final question is, when you're trying to control the traffic,
is that with this app being controlled by the bike traffic as well?
Because I know a lot of towns when you have a lot of these bike apps,
a lot of congestion is on the sidewalk where a lot of the pedestrians are walking.
The idea is that the courier is parking, his bike, walking in,
getting the food, and getting out.
So he should be there less than 60 seconds.
So there should be no congregation on the sidewalks.
And that is designed.
And what is the use in the next tenant space on 16th street?
The cookie.
Yeah, I think it's insomnia cookies next door.
And have you noticed in the, in the,
in the service street behind the,
some like carriers congregate there?
Other questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
A-M-Y-B-O-I-D.
Did you swear me in already?
I did swear you in earlier, I believe.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning to the current commercial mixed use CMX5.
The appellant has demonstrated the proposed takeout would have no detrimental impacts beyond what would reasonably be expected.
The Planning Commission recommends that Board grant their request a special exception for a takeout restaurant.
Thank you. MI 2025-000-324-1600-202 Chestnut Street.
I vote yes with provisos, interior trash storage, deliveries to occur when side or rear streets, ventilation for all cooking apparatus will fully extend through the property roof.
John's, my vote is yes with provisors.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisors.
Tywin, my vote is yes with provisors.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisors.
Great, thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you to your associates.
Thank you.
Move to number one, MI 2023, 004267, 900 East Shelton Avenue, Moomin Islam, and Wallace Wade are the attorneys.
Letter of support from Faith, CDC.
Letter noted reduction in height and removal of roof access in addition to reduction in units.
Chair Wallace-Wayne is coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Can you hear me?
I can.
all right could you please turn on your video first oh i'm sorry no sure i didn't see that
there you go thank you very much um could you state your name is spelled for the stenographer
sure my name is bookman and your apostrophe m-i-n-i-s-l-a-m do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do affirm um could you identify your client
relationship to the property uh he should be on this call semi uxo he's the owner of green eagle
properties okay and our vice chair has a few questions good afternoon council do you agree
to wait to read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy i do have you emailed in all
the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case i have thank you council
Thank you, council. Please proceed.
So please proceed.
All right.
All right. Can I share my screen?
Can I share my screen?
Let me know when I'm live.
Am I okay to go?
It has not come up yet.
No worries. Thank you.
I have a PowerPoint presentation here
I'd like to show
I see you've been promoted
Do we think we're having
technical issues again?
I think a presentation is helpful, you know, for some reason.
Can you share it or you're unable to share it?
No, my screen is shared.
Well, I'm showing it on my laptop.
Can you see it or no?
No, we can't share it.
We can't see it.
Yeah, I got it screened up.
You try closing it and opening it again.
Yeah, why don't you close and come back in?
Why don't you close out and then come back in?
Oh, get out of the logout, you mean come back in?
yeah so if you
check down the
presentation and then reopen it please
yeah I did that I'm opening
up right now
can you
see anything
there'll be a green button at the bottom
of the screen
yeah I see it say starting
once you hit that green share button at the bottom
it should ask you what documents
do you want to share
oh you know what that is my fault
alright let me share my whole window
there we go
my apologies
I'm off the 2020 time
I forgot my fault
thanks Lakeisha
alright thank you
so I think I won't be too long on this
so my name is Mokslin Islam
I'm an attorney for Green Eagle Properties
this property is regarding 900
and Shelton
just to tell you a couple of things about the properties
historically this property has been vacant
excuse me I'm sorry this is Hillary
one of the things that we need to see
before we can proceed
is proof of posting for today's hearing
the photo that was provided
was from a poster from a year ago
So we need to see proof of posting for today's hearing.
I thought I'd provide at least
Give me one second.
I found that in my location, in my office.
i know we've had hearings for this at least two or three times and i wasn't involved but
i do not have the actual one on my computer here well why don't we do this why don't we come why
don't we come back and that way and see if you can find it and i'll be back with you in 45 minutes
all right thank you okay thank you thank you mr knockamson
it's knockamson uh as you're aware we have several cases of you today what i'm going to try to do is
you're aware we have several cases of you today what i'm going to try to do is do two or three
then come back um and um you've already been sworn in if i remember correctly right that's
great so one of the things we want to try to do today is that um when you present yeah go to the
refusal yeah tell us what the refusal is and then go right into your presentation okay so why don't
we do this just for the record state your name alan knockamson right and it's mi20240043206560
north povere street could you identify your client and the relationship to the property
uh yes my client is uh vantium llc uh the owner of the property and then the virtual audience
should be sam clifton right and our our uh vice chair has a few questions council do you agree
away the reading of the refusal or stipulate to
his accuracy. I do. Have you emailed
all the required documents and exhibits that's needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance
of his hearing? Yes, we have.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share his screen.
Well, I can't share my screen, but
I do have my legal assistant
online, Nicholas Slatov.
The promoter? Promote him, yes.
Please.
Me? Nicholas Slatov.
Can we
promote Nicholas Natov?
Thank you.
Nicholas is coming in as a panelist.
So, Nick, if you can go straight to the notice of refusal.
All right. Just as it from the outset, at the request of the council member's office,
um we're asking the board to hold the votes to give us my client additional time uh to meet with
the community i would ask um only for two weeks um as you can see from the notice of refusal the
date of the notices of refusal is june 20th of 2024 so it's been some time since we've had this
matter we've met with the community twice um and uh i think it's appropriate just to hold it for
two weeks uh so let's see can we do that hillary just just to clarify just one are we holding it
just to give them a chance to send in the letter and then any response from you you don't need are
you are you asking for an additional opportunity to present no just just to for them to present
whatever letter and then for us to respond um we're not having another or another certified
rco meeting it's just to give my client additional time to so you know solicit neighbors and nearby
and and make the the rco feel more comfortable okay so so basically you just like to submit
supple you and the rco would like to submit supplemental information but have the case
voted in two weeks that's right okay thank you bye all right so this is an rsa 5 property
um it's thirteen hundred and fifty three square feet um and what we're looking to do here is make
this into a two-family dwelling and the one refusal we have is because it's an rsa5 property
next nick so the correspondence exhibit two we we don't have any um we're waiting for that and i
think that's part of the community input next nick so there are multiple nearby multifamily
structures on 66th avenue um can you go to the exhibit three nick uh so 6601 north grass street
is multi-family in nature 6551 north grass street is also multi-family in nature
6600 north grass street is also multi-family in nature 6550 north grass street is multi-family
continue so again maps of the area i mean we're just a corner property on the corner of 66th
and uh avenue and bouvier next again you see from a google maps perspective next
photographs of the property uh so this is looking from bouvier street there's a front door can't
really see it behind the tree but there is next and then to the side on 66th avenue there's a
separate front door on the side for the lower level unit. While what you should pay attention
to is there's no lower, like below grade living here. Next. And then this is from the rear of the
property. As you can see, there's two separate doors, one for the lower level unit, one for the
upper level unit. Again, so that means there's two forms of regress. My client purchased this
property uh this way from the exterior point of view the intention is once if we get you know
zoning approval for the two units he is going to replace those steps um they're pretty shabby uh
uh next uh these are proof of our orange notice posters being posted for from both public streets
next uh these are proof of our orange note
next and again i guess a closer view of that as well next so again my client purchased it as two
units um and he made cosmetic changes which would not require any um permits so he didn't do any
plumbing work or electrical work it was all cosmetic in nature so and it was advertised in
this way as well but you can see there's two electrical uh meters here uh for two units really
should be three but i guess there's so one of the units is taking the common area electric as well
next and then there's two hot water heaters which were there before next and then this is north
barbier street to the right of the property to the left of the property 66th avenue to the right
of the property until left of the property.
And then interior photos, again, he made cosmetic changes only.
He did not need any permits for that. But you can see
put a nice product in there. No one's living there.
My understanding, we can ask my client that. But these are just interior photos.
Now, so the second floor.
And then, again, simple floor plans, next.
So if you look at it, it's kind of reversed, but the basement is really the first floor because there's no below grade living.
But if you go to the top, that's, you know, it looks like you can get in that side entrance on top top and you go and there's a separate exit.
Remember in the rear that's on the left hand side.
But, you know, I can't even see it's like kind of small for me.
but it looks like a living room kitchen uh looks like a bedroom there with a with a bath and then
if you go up a flight of the steps um that's you know basically the first floor unit which is
you know on the first floor and the second floor which is a bi-level and there are multiple living
areas and then upstairs are the bedrooms so it's a little tough for me to see but there are multiple
forms of egress and things like that next so the last time we met with the community was april 17th
at 6 p.m again we have no issue with the coordinating rco and that i think everything
has been done with in good faith i think we just have had challenges meeting with them like twice
we've we've had meetings where the meetings have been started for a half an hour to an hour late
and i think there's been some miscommunication in terms of the neighborhood in that
respect where it's been challenging for us that's why we're asking for one more time but just two
weeks application for appeal that we filed along with you know the notice of refusal and then most
importantly the tax clearance certificate the deed to the property and then a tax clearance
certificate with that being said i would ask that mr clifton virtually raise his hand
who's the person that we're looking for
uh samuel clifton he should be in the virtual audience
Okay, Mr. Chair
Mr. Nakamson, I do not see the individual
in the virtual audience
Okay, so Mr. Nakamson, you're an officer of the court
We'll take your testimony
Questions from the board
Yeah, do you know if your
client has spoken to
the contiguous neighbor?
They have
um and they actually attended the last community meeting that was the only person that attended the
last community meeting i think they asked about uh trash storage and we stated and actually that
would be a proviso we would agree to to be trash stored in rear but that was the only question
that was asked of us by that neighbor all the questions from the board yes are there other um
two family dwellings in the area or is this just
that's assuming you know in the i mean legal ones not well we only show the legal ones so we showed
i think four or five instances on on the on the presentation at the beginning so we have a separate
exhibit for that so again corner properties we focus on corner properties because corner properties
tend to be multi-unit in nature and these are all properties nearby which are multi-family structures
So you have 6601 Northgrass Street, 6551.
So you have 6601 North Grass Street, 6551 North Grass Street, 6600 North Grass Street, 6550 North Grass Street, and that's it.
Other questions from the board?
Welcome.
Actually, I have one more question.
Could you pull up the basement or the first floor plan again?
I was just, where is the entrance?
I think the pictures would be helpful.
i think because i can't really see my eyes i think it's been something a little more so
let's uh nick why don't you go to the the pictures of the exterior of the property
because i think it will kind of help you a little bit more i'm just trying to understand
like where is the first yeah go go next one more yeah one more so that's the lower level entrance
right there you see that one that's on 66th avenue that looked different than what was drawn
that was because because they flipped it like if you go to the drug and by the way nick want to go
to the first picture which shows the picture of the front door door for yeah yeah you can't really
see it and then if you go to the third picture down there nick these that's the end exit for
both of the users rear entrance which i saw on the plans but the side entrance did not look like
that it flipped here nick why don't you go to uh the floor plans that was what was that was
it it got me for a loop too it was so the yeah um so if you kind of flip this around
it would make more sense i get it okay yeah i i got confused when i was reading the plans too
yeah all the questions from the board questions from our attorney not at this time mr chair
Hillary, we'll go to the community now, and then we'll do it again if we get something from them.
So we're just holding it for a vote for a letter from the RCO, a response to the applicant, and there may be supplemental information from the applicant wishes to submit to show support.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, Samuel Clifton is now in the audience. I will allow him to speak.
I promoted him. He'll be coming back in shortly.
Sure. Thank you.
Mr. Clifton.
Can you hear me now?
Mr. Clifton, could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Yes, my name is Samuel Clifton. Spelling my name is C-L-I-F-T-O-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Hi, Mr. Clifton.
I'm trying to turn off my phone so you can hear me on the computer, but it's not working right.
mr clifton could you uh do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
the unmute yourself you're muted
you're muted please can you hear me now i can do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel yeah sam you heard everything
i have to state today about jersey yes clifton this is ian heger you're gonna have to turn the
volume off on your phone right the problem is that the computer is not picking up that zoom
is not working right for me so i turned my phone why don't we just try to get you to answer some
questions real yeah and you heard everything i had to state today about your zoning matter
yes and it's true and correct correct and and do you adopt this your own testimony
yes questions or comments from the virtual audience for the audience
yeah i have a hand up from uh charles richardson i will promote him to
panelists it'll be back in shortly i'm mr richardson
good morning uh no good afternoon mr chair
uh do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth mr richardson
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, Mr. Richardson?
Just for the record, state your name.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Baskin, 508 City Hall.
Please proceed.
I spoke with Alan earlier in the week and was determined at that point that the applicant had not fulfilled his obligations that he had agreed to
with regard to meeting with several individuals
in the community, including the vice chair of the RCO
who was our former chief of staff, Tyrone Barge.
He never reached out to them.
He said that he did, but Tyrone emphatically says
that they did not. There was supposed to be a meeting so that the people
would get to know the individual and nothing ever
occurred. And this was last year. And I spoke to Alan, and Alan was talking about this two-week
thing a couple weeks ago, you know, earlier this week. And I told him I didn't think two weeks was
going to be sufficient for their applicant to be able to meet with the community or for us to be
able to gather together the people that they needed to gather that were interested in the last
meeting. And it was a fair amount of people that were on the last meeting. It was not just that's
the one person that's next door. And they had a lot of questions. So, you know, at this point,
we're objecting to this request for two weeks. And, you know, for, and Alan, for all of the
things that we talked about earlier in the week, and I could not support that because of the fact
that he needs to fulfill that obligation first in order for us to be able to be comfortable to
to either support him or, you know, we're to object.
So can I respond, Mr. Chair? Sure. So Charles,
I think you're confusing me with Alex because we didn't talk about this this
week. Okay. Well, it was, it was Alex then maybe, but again, it's your firm.
Yeah, no, no. And I agree with that,
but this is the first I'm hearing that we were going to have to talk to anyone
in your office. We have been dealing with Sharon Carter,
who I also understand this with your office, who is a,
is the head of this rco and what happened the first meeting you know full disclosure
we were supposed to have a meeting at six o'clock when was that we had that meeting i think it was
either the day or the day day before the original hearing date i i was not getting through uh the
zoom we weren't let in we were in a virtual meeting room i eventually got in at seven o'clock
and we made our presentation what we heard from the community was they were very upset with us
so they were very upset with us because they thought there was like a bait and switch that
we were we put a six o'clock meeting and it we presented at seven i said i have no control of
being let in to the to the to the meeting the second time we so then we had another meeting
The second time we met, Mr. Goldberg from my office presented the meeting again, I believe it was at six o'clock. We weren't let in until 630. There was one individual that showed up. We then logged off. And then we're told, I think, probably like 15, 20 minutes later, all these people started showing up. Can you log back on? He was not in front of his computer anymore. We finished.
They were already a half an hour late for the meeting, and we made our presentation.
He logged off his computer, and we were asked again, can you just show up?
And I think that was very unfair.
And I don't think there's any ill intent here, but we have a notice of refusal dated June of 2024.
My client told me today that the bank that he's lent money, he borrowed money from,
is threatening to foreclose on this property because it's not an active use and you know
we've told our client that we're willing to work with the community but it reaches a point
so the fact that I'm hearing now that we have to meet with someone in your office Charles I have
no problem with me with Alex hold on did Alex uh speak to you with regard to this because I spoke
to him maybe a couple days ago then if that was the case yeah he was the one that that put it out
there that he wanted to do two weeks and i said two weeks was not going to be sufficient well we
got a call from our client that they're going to your client did not your client did not fulfill
what he was originally supposed to fill so we're not going to have it yeah here i mean yeah charles
what's your position uh position is that we're we're going to hold our opinion until he meets
the community okay very good thank you um anyone else in the virtual audience
mr chair i do not see any further hands so uh hillary will take a position from
hillary will take a position from um planning planning please
planning planning please
and we work with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this location there are no unique physical conditions
or circumstances that the property that would prevent it from being using strict conformity
with the zoning code except for two other properties this is a single family block
the property was converted to multi-family without the benefit of permits in fact there
was a 2019 building permit stating that this is a one-family structure and a one-unit rental license
from the same year. There are no other building permits available on Atlas after 2019. The planning
commission recommends that the board deny the proposed variance for two dwelling units. Thank
you. Hillary, can we take this out three weeks? Are we still just asking for additional information
to be submitted i want to see what was what came from the neighbors and alan's response to that
and also i believe the council office may have a response as well right um yes um okay so it's
can i just respond to planning just for two seconds just give me give me one second um so
three weeks three weeks out um would be may would be may 21st right okay exactly yeah that would be
fine yeah if you just look at how the building's configured that that and the fact as a corner
property this speaks to it being multi-family in nature you have four entry points or exit points
uh this looks like the quintessential like at the very least a cmx1 property um so i would say that
you know the fact of how it's configured and again my client it was advertised this way to
have two units uh he has made those changes thank you okay so we're going to hold this until 5 21 25
at 2 p.m other than that it's closed except from what we hear from the neighbors your response
the neighbor's response and also the council person so can so are we taking neighbors are
we taking rco which are both are we leaving i think i'd open up a what he's going to deal
with the rco but i'd open it up again here okay well so then why don't we we'll we'll we'll just
leave the record open for any any public comments so that could be the rco the council office or
neighbors and then any response from the applicant otherwise it's closed okay thank you thank you
all right now we're going to go with uh
see here i think number six
How about number six?
MI 2025-000-318-527-East-Chelton Avenue.
I'm going to defer to Mr. Goldberg.
There you go.
We'll do the same thing with your office, pumping it in.
Mr. Goldberg, could you please state your name and spell for the courts?
Alex Goldberg, A-L-E-X-G-O-L-D-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to the property?
My client is Madison Ventures, PHL2 LLC, and it's Representative Carlos Mesa's in the virtual audience.
I have a letter of non-opposition from the 59th Democratic Ward.
Also, there's a letter of support from a neighbor for three addresses on the, signed by three addresses on the block.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate towards
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed
and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes i have thank you counsel please proceed you have already shared your screen
nick if you could go full screen for me um so this is a property on the 500 block of east
shelton street and uh it has a long history of non-single family use despite its zone and
classification as rsa3 this application is for can nick widen the screen please sure nick if you can
widen it and also go right to the refusal we're seeking zoning approval for two dwelling units
in an existing structure no changes to the building and this is actually a property that
the planning planning commission has identified in its 2035 plan to change to rm1 which aligns
with the uses that are on the block.
If this was an RM1 property, we'd be allowed four units.
As of right, we're asking for two.
Nick, if you can go to the refusal.
It seems like he has his hand raised.
Nick, can you hear that?
Can you zoom?
Hold the control button down to roll your will.
I think that,
I don't think he's sharing his screen right now.
It looks like Jasmine is sharing her screen.
jasmine is sharing her screen
she can unshare i think he'll have the ability to share
there we go
cool okay thank you
there we go um so the notice of refusal is on the screen it was issued in december
again two family household living in an existing semi-detached structure this is the left side of
a twin next slide nick letter of opposition from the 59th democratic ward we had two meetings
we we had one that was not very well attended then we had a second one as well same situation
we have a couple of letters of support from the block there's a lot of multi-family on our block
and and you know the the rco has stated non-opposition they told me that the council
member was joining in non-opposition i'm not sure if a letter saying that has been delivered
um anyway um next slide next letters of support from 531 530 next three and 535 east shelton
those are all multi-family structures as well next slide here's the property history it has
a history of four rooming units um before that it was a nursing home um so no recent um you know
legal use as a single family living. There are multiple instances of multifamily living on this
block, what we're asking for in two units as well as more. You can see there, I know it's a little
faint, but I would say there's as many instances of multifamily here as there are not. The property
to the left of us where it sort of just looks like nothing is there, as well as the one next
to it those are drive aisles for the large industrial buildings that are behind us which
is a warehouse for the distribution of storage of plumbing supplies a metal welding shop and a
newspaper distribution center so behind us is is a lot of industrial use you'll see that in the
photos directly across from us is a church so again not not a ton of single family use on this
rsa3 lot which is why i believe the planning commission has identified it as a as a lot to
change to R1. Next slide, Nick.
Here are the archival documents
sort of backing up that map that you just saw. If you could click through these, Nick.
Two and three family structures, we think two is appropriate here.
And you'll see the floor plans in a couple slides.
Here's the Upper Northwest District plan.
I pointed out with a red arrow, our block, just our block.
you can see the purple industrial is right behind it and proposed zoning change to orange which
would be residential multi-family on our block next slide zoning map which looks different from
what you just saw but again you can see that industrial use covering the rear the rear of
this entire block next slide google maps perspective as well next slide here's some photos so you can
see the front of the property here to the left of us is no residential use it's just a driveway
you can see the property needs some tlc um here's here's notice posters there is a front door
leading directly down into the basement but it's an unfinished basement we'd agree to a proviso for
no no living in the basement you'll see it on the plan it's just utilities and laundry i believe
here's to the right of the property and to the left of the property
architectural plans and drawings if you can zoom in nick the first floor
um both both you both units enter through a common hallway
there we go uh the first floor you make a left it's the it's the second plan to the to the you
know on the left side here um it is a two bedroom one bath um with access sole access to the basement
but again just utilities and storage we'd agree to a proviso as such the upstairs unit travels
straight through up the stairs it's a four bed two bath suitable for a family about 1200 square feet
and you can see in the middle of that second floor this is a bi-level unit you have a large
sort of open space for kitchen and living space next slide nick
rco meeting notice we met twice this is the notice from our most recent meeting
which was on march 18th or actually even more recently than that
which was on March 18th, or actually even more recently than that.
It was mailed out to the neighbors.
Keep going, Nick.
Application for appeal.
Deed to the property showing that Madison Ventures PHL2 LLC owns the property.
And then the tax clearance.
And with that, I'd like to call my client to adopt my testimony.
Client's name?
Carlos Mesa.
Carlos Mesa has been promoted.
Thank you.
Why could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
so coming in okay
oh and one other note while he's coming in we have a little side yard to the left of the
you know if you're looking at the property we'd agree to trash store it in the side yard okay
thank you do we see him
he declined at first but he's keeping it now
he's unmuted sir could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
Carlos
Carlos Mesa you're allowed to speak
all right counsel you're an officer of the court we're going to thank you move on questions from
the board question on your on your floor plan are are you planning to take out the front wall
it looks i mean based on your first floor plan it looks like you're taking out the
for a front first floor first front first floor wall um i don't believe that's the plan i'm
confused um well your your basement plan shows that there's space under the porch and there's
of course the foundation for the porch correct so i guess they're enclosing the porch
we're not proposing to make any changes to the porch i think
um uh scale wise i i see what you're saying that the that little square should be further forward
right um we're not proposing to make any changes to the building structure i apologize well then
your plan doesn't make sense right um because your first floor is larger than your second floor
there's a bay on the second floor so if you go to the picture can you go to your picture of the
front right that bay sits over the porch right that's correct okay so based on your plan it
shows that there is a wall of the face of the porch on the first floor and the wall where
that door currently shows on the first floor is gone understood um i i mean i wish carlos was
was able to to testify i don't believe his intention is to enclose the porch this is a
use application um i'm happy to to get some clarity from him you know if the board would
like that while we're talking about it there's also a wall that's showing on the plan that
is what you would typically put for a demolition that's showing it halfway through one of the
bedrooms right now so similarly to mike's question my question is is there an extension
sure so i was not aware of any changes to the building structure i'm happy to
um you know table this and and speak to him if there's going to be modifications to the building
i think that would require you know obviously more detailed you know plans and a site plan
um sounds like he's having some technical difficulties
is this going to be a result of hearing so this i believe is a change of use application so we
can't add construction to it anyway so if he's going to make any modifications he's going to
need a new zoning permit like new test to do a new zoning permit application so basically his
options are to do the use now and then do the addition although if you do the addition and
then expand the use you're going to need yeah it's going to be complicated so i mean if you
want to take if you want to take a minute to you know right not right now but just talk to your
not right now but just talk to your client and see what he wants to do um we that that would be
client and see what he wants to do um
fine um we can just can i guess we can just continue it and then you can get back to me
and we can figure out if we need to do a you know a resumption or um if there's going to be some
changes made or something also alex it looks like on the first just for you to know that
where the front door is on the photo is not where it is on the plan so right yeah that that too
All right, Hillary, we're going to go for a resumptive here and we won't give a date.
It's okay.
I got a resumptive date here in July, 930 a.m.
Okay, that's fine.
We can do it that way.
MI-2025-000-318-5278-Chelton Avenue.
This will be a resumptive hearing July 15, 2025 at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you.
One more.
Team Nackam's in here.
2231 Earp we're going to go with.
So MI-2025-000-320-2231 Earp Street.
mr goldberg just for the record could you please state your name alex goldberg
um you've already been sworn could you identify your client in relationship to the property
my client is to my left lucas ledke he's the owner occupier and there's an animal i have we
have a letter of unanimous support from point freeze community development um eight total
votes including three from the block um this is a legalization our vice chair has a few questions
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to do his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of his hearing?
I have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed.
Nick, if you want to just jump right to the refusal.
The background here is Lucas lives here.
He's owned this property since 2022.
Variances, the same exact variances we're asking for today, were granted in 2019.
A building permit was then granted based off of those variances in 2020.
The developer who Lucas purchased the property from, you know, built it, you know, in accordance with the variances that we're asking for today and were previously granted, as well as the building permit.
And rather than sort of formally and legally complete the construction process, a fraudulent certificate of occupancy was issued to my client when he purchased the property.
um the permits obviously then expired it's been some time since 2019 and 2020 so we're here today
asking for zoning approval of what was granted in 2019 and ultimately what is standing here and
what he's living in today and those are an occupied area an open area de minimis variance request as
well as a variance request to not provide the eight foot setback at the front facade and rather
just go straight up the property that you saw on the home page or the cover page of the presentation
packet is what was built nick next slide letter of support from um the coordinating rco point breeze
cdc uh very strong support uh it was a positive meeting because neighbors felt bad for him this
has actually happened to other homeowners on his block so um you know i think this developer has
reputation and unfortunately it's not a situation he he planned for he loves his house loves to stay
there um you know so we're here now to sort of finish the job next slide here's the zoning
permit that was granted those are the plans that were approved um here's zoning permit itself
a single family home single family zoning classification next slide you can see the
refusal is the exact same no changes have been made because that was what was approved and that
was what was built next slide here's some here's an aerial view of the property continue nick uh
a map perspective um a zoning map as well rsa5 we're not seeking a use variance for this property
next slide nick here's some photographs so this is what the property looks like beautiful three
story home um despite what what you're seeing in the image there and you can see it on the next
image this it's not the only three story sort of straight up property on the block that was
supported by the rco back in 2019 and they supported it again herp street to the left
here's some interior photos um he lives there so you know his stuff is in these images uh
continue
continue
Architectural plans and drawings. These are the drawings that were submitted and approved at the time. Next slide. There are basic floor plans here. Three bed, two bath home. Lives there with his girlfriend. And we're not proposing any changes to what was already built.
architectural plans and drawings
these are the drawings that were
submitted and approved at the time
rco meeting notice we met with the rco in march um it was fairly well attended um especially by
several of his neighbors some of whom you know spoke you know in support and in just general
um you know kind words about him being a good neighbor here and their you know disappointment
that this is a situation that he's having to deal with next slide we sent the notice out of course
to all their acquired neighbors in a timely fashion.
Keep going, Nick.
Application for appeal.
Lucas owns this property in his own name.
Lives there. Keep going, Nick.
We'll see the deed to the property next.
And then tax clearance.
And with that, I'd ask Lucas to adopt my testimony.
Sir, could you please state your name
and make sure that's turned on
and spelled for the court stenographer?
Sure. It's Lucas Lidke, L-U-C-A-S-L-U-E-D-T-K-E.
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, doesn't he quit the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Lucas, did you hear my testimony today?
And was it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Is there anything else you'd like to share with the board?
No, I don't think so. I moved here from Wisconsin and just bought this house, so definitely don't expect something like this to happen when you're just the purchaser and not the builder or developer.
So, yeah, my neighbors, we were hoping we can get to a point where we laugh about this. Obviously, we're not, I'm not laughing right now. This has still been really serious and not fun. But, but yeah, so that's it.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
I did have a question. Yeah. Do you know if L&I did the final inspection?
i i don't believe they did don't believe they did are you opposed to a ceo as a proviso
well we don't have a ceo i know she wants you to get one and we want to get one
yeah we have to get one i have to get yeah yeah we're not opposed okay
i guess my question is um this happened with other properties on your block is that
what i'm hearing yeah so and it's the same builder same same builder same developer um
you know like the whole the whole way i found alan's team was through my neighbor
um when this process started when i was first served the uh you know the letters from the city
for not being compliant so yeah and how did i mean do you know how this came to the city's
attention like my case or did they use something to this person now uh i'm not sure to be honest
it could they could have been triggered when somebody in the audience has their hand up
i mean you've already been sworn just state your name serving in the sense that
alan occamson um i believe the other clients received a violation notice uh regarding the
fact that there was no co for this property uh and then i believe then that's how you know lucas
found out about his as well unfortunately this is not uncommon you know not just for this
developer but other parties we've seen this before sadly um did you get title insurance
when you purchased well i asked my title insurance company and they said that they only cover
No, I meant just for your own protection.
So one other thing, if you got the enhanced policy
and not the standard, it would have protected him.
So that's the difference.
Questions from our attorney?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see enhanced, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single family attached zoning rsa5 at this location the property had permits
for the proposed dimensions but those expired the planning commission recommends that the
board grant the requested variances for rear yard depth and third story setback
MI 2025-000-320-2231, Herb Street, I vote yes. Proviso. C-O to be obtained.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Iowyn, my vote is yes with Proviso.
My vote is yes, with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
I'm going to go back to someone else now.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2024-005-357-839 Airedale Road.
Good afternoon.
So this is a resumptive hearing.
I understand the way we have it is you will give us an update, possibly call Primavera or Ron Patterson may speak, and then planning on making a recommendation.
Does that sound right?
Well, it did sound right.
There's been a little bit of a development, I think, with the Planning Commission, which we may need to discuss.
So just for the record, state your name and spell for the court's doctor.
Certainly.
My name is David Orphanides.
Last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Do you swear we're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
All right.
So why don't you give us an update and then we're going to move right into this.
Certainly.
When I was last before the board, well, you have a picture of the property up in front of you.
To the right of the image is a house that my client built on a property.
We don't have anything.
Oh, really?
Hold on one second.
I thought I shared.
Sorry about that.
he's at the building behind you no that's not his all right how's that better
yeah it's yeah got it yep okay so long story short um there was a wider parcel uh 100 feet wide
um the the parcel couldn't be subdivided as a matter of right into two lots it's extremely
large. Even now, as two lots, it's much larger than any other property surrounding it, both
properties. They go very deep, and it was very wide. The lot that he subdivided off back in the
early 2000s, he built a house, a two-story house, the side of which you can see in the photo that's
up on the screen. He's come back, and on the lot that's slightly narrower than what is permitted,
he wants to build a house, the same size house, the exact same house, the same plans, the same
market that um it's generally the same and uh they had he had because a lot is slightly narrower
um than the lot next door 841 uh he had a side yard refusal and then because of and you can't
see it you know in but through the trees but there's a slope a steep slope that kind of goes
up to the back of a pet boy's um parking lot and um i could really i don't need to i don't know if
I need to go into all of that right now.
But essentially, you can see that here.
There's our property.
Here's the house that he built at 841.
And here's the Pep Boys.
And then all through here, there's a steep slope.
It kind of goes up, slips up, and it gets steeper going up to the higher grade of the parking lot where the Pep Boys is located.
So we have two refusals.
I went through the whole presentation last time showing.
I believe we believe that the slope was manmade, although the planning commission doesn't say that that necessarily matters.
But we in order to accommodate the neighbor at 841, the original zoning drawings had his house is 15 feet off the common property line.
The original zoning drawings had our house located closer to his house than his house is closer to the common property line than his house is.
That was an unintentional oversight when the drawings were initially prepared.
My client wanted them to be mirror images of each other the same distance off of the common property line.
So what we've done is we shifted the building towards Pep Boys, the back of their lot.
And instead of having seven and a half feet to a bay next to the off of the common property line on the one side and 11 feet to the property line where Pep Boys is,
We shifted away, and now we have 13 feet to the bay, 15 feet to the main house, which is the same as 841, but we reduced the side yard from 11 feet to 6 feet on the other side.
Overall, we've increased the overall side yard from 18.5 feet, the total, to 19 feet.
to 19 feet um when we were here last time the question became uh was raised regarding whether
When we were here last time, the question became,
or not there might be a question for the planning commission to look at because we've shifted the
building um towards the steeper slope um running up to the pep boys parking lot however the zoning
code the that provision of the zoning code that we were cited in the notice of refusal simply
deals with, it doesn't say, it's not like a height of a structure. 38 is the max. I'm at 41.
And then I come back with a revised plan that says, now I want 44. I've increased the refusal.
Or if I decrease the overall side yard, which is not what I did here, it'd be a different story.
There's no kind of quantitative measurement. You're either in the steep slopes or you're not.
And whether you're in the steep slopes by one square foot, or if you're in the steep slopes
by a million square feet, it's a refusal, and it's not a question of degree. With that being said,
the original plan that we had, the ENS plan that was submitted and reviewed by the Planning
Commission, had an area, had a limit of disturbance shown on it, and I can pull that up right here.
So this orange, let me zoom in.
So it has this, what's shown as this area of disturbance, which goes from side property line to side property line.
And I think the reason the question was initially raised is that by shifting the building over, we had a, originally had a retaining wall that was off the side property line.
And within the revised drawings that I can show you in a second, we moved that retaining role right to the property line.
So I think the thought was, hey, we're now going more, we're disturbing more of the slope, even though, again, the refusal doesn't say how much you're going into or disturbing.
But in reality, on the original submission, the area of the limit of disturbance was right up to the property line.
And then on the revised drawings, which I have here, and which I presented at the last hearing, also shows it's the exact same.
It's the same area.
It's 8,600 square feet.
It's the same dimensions, sideline to sideline, the same depth.
There's no change.
So, you know, we went through this afterwards.
I received an email from the Planning Commission yesterday raising some concerns about this.
They can obviously get into it. My position is that it's been two months or so. I would suggest, and Hillary and I had some conversations, and she can obviously speak for herself, but I think the idea of having the board vote this case and then having a proviso, we do not believe that a new ENS plan needs to be submitted.
Our engineer has stated that the water department wouldn't require it because the limit of disturbance is exactly the same. It's not required. But if Planning Commission wants it, we'll submit it. We don't see there are not going to be any issues in doing that.
And we think that the case should be voted today with a proviso, again, if the board so decides, that there be a new ENS plan submitted. Even again, we don't think that it's necessary in this case.
We have shifted the driveway a little bit and are talking to the engineer who prepared the plans. And my own experience is that streets department, because this is the zoning review, doesn't require another look at the curb cut. We're far enough away from the telephone pole that's located to the left of the property. There's no issue there. The distance is five feet.
So for these reasons, you know, we believe that the case should be voted today. I will say that at our last hearing, scheduled hearing, we did not yet have a support of the owner of 841.
Since that time, we've entered into an agreement with them regarding what's how the not zoning related issues as much as kind of quality of life issues during the construction process.
That agreement has been executed. We now do have a letter of support from Carl Primavera on behalf of his client showing that 841 does now the abutting property does now support our our application.
In addition to that, before that, we had the letter of support from URCA.
We have some other neighbors, particularly the neighbors that live behind us on Northwestern Avenue.
You can see here, 842, 848, 850 Northwestern.
There's even one here that says, this property is directly backing up to my backyard.
I fully support, would love to have Mr. Borthwick as my neighbor.
I would love to have Mr. Bortwick as my neighbor.
He's actually going to be moving into this house.
He's actually going to be moving into this house.
He recently got married.
He and his wife are going to be moving into this house that he plans to build.
Again, the exact same house as he built on 841 that is now occupied by the Molinares, who I think are the second owner.
So, again, we feel that the criteria for the granting of the variances for the two refusals that were cited in L&I's notice of refusal, I did point out initially in the original hearing, there were some questions.
they cited the wrong section regarding steep slopes. Their math was wrong in regards to the
total side yards off by half a foot. They didn't reference that there were two-car parking in the
garage. Those things have been clarified on the revised drawings that were provided before the
last proceeding and are included in my exhibit book that I was just pointing to, just showing
the board along with the revised proviso plan form. But again, we went through all this last
time i'm not going to rehash it i know the board has a list that they still need to get through
but i think we were here expecting to hear from the planning commission as to the impact of shifting
the building to accommodate the desire of the neighbor at 841 and the original intention of my
client um and at this point i think there's a mechanism for for everybody to be satisfied
for this matter to be voted. After all this time, my client started this process, came to me last
summer, and we're almost there again to just build a house exactly like he built next door.
You would have thought it would have been a little easier of a process than this. But
at this point, we would respectfully ask that the board vote. We think that a proviso that states
an ENS approval
condition or a proviso that there be an amended or
a revised ENS plan submitted to Planning Commission and approved
and if everybody wants, we can submit one to streets even though we don't think it's necessary
we'd be happy to do that as well and we feel that should take care of everybody's
concerns. Hillary, we have Mr. Mavera's
letter. Yes, we do, Mr. Chair. I wasn't sure if anyone
was going to appear, but we do have
the letter. Mr. Primavera or
Mr. Patterson?
I did not speak with them before the proceeding
one way or the other, but
I think they would have told me if they were going to be
appearing. Good. Thank you.
I was going to say, I do see
Mr. Primavera on Zoom,
but he's not raising his
hand, so I don't know if he feels
the need to speak. So our next step
is planning. Am I correct?
hi amy boyd with the planning commission planning is actually going to hold testimony and submit
in the form of a letter while we complete the review of the revised plans
and again mr chairman we submitted these revised plans two months ago um and no offense i know
everybody's busy um sometimes things get lost where are we going to be with this well two things
first Mr. Primavera now has his hand raised so why don't we take sure why don't we take one
Mr. Primavera Mr. Chair has been promoted to panelists he'll be coming back in shortly
Mr. Primavera
you're muted please unmute
uh sorry this is carl primavera could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer
yes it's carl primavera p-r-i-m-a-v-e-r-a uh claire harrison law firm and i'm attorney for the
Molinaries who live at 841 Airedale Road. I just wanted to confirm. Hold on a minute. Hold on a
minute. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, told truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank
you, sir. Please proceed. Yes, I just wanted to confirm what David said is accurate. You know,
our clients have been meeting and discussing the issues on this. We had a meeting way back when
attended by the community and also a representative of the Friends of the Wissahickon.
And there was a lot of discussion about stormwater management and all those issues, which included David's presentation of the revised plan.
And everybody was, you know, confident and comfortable that this was going to be workable.
You know, if you go to the site, the bottom line is that the area in question is the rear, the very rear.
The bottom line is that the area in question is the rear, the very rear of the Pep Boys.
And it's it's not Fairmount Park land. It's not anything. It's really just an overgrown area.
So pushing the house closer to my client and leaving more room for the Pep Boys dumpster doesn't help anybody.
And also, Mr. Boothroyd's. No, Worthwick. I'm sorry.
Right. I remember Mr. Boothwick. Mr. Boothwick, you know, his house is actually going to be a nice buffer between the Pep Boys and my client and the other neighbors in the area.
So everybody's very supportive. I don't believe that there's any stormwater issue. I think it's all been engineered.
So we have indicated both our letter and in this presentation, you know, our full support for the project.
okay thank you council who me no no no I'll say our council how's that just um just want to ask
the planning commission when when they think they would be able to have the letter to the board if
they're if they want to submit testimony via letter Amy from the planning commission um I
can estimate that we could have a testimony
letter by this time
next week, provided that we
get the ENS plans as well.
Okay, so Hillary will
continue this the next week?
It sounds like they would have the letter
by... Well, I
can't speak right now how quickly
it can update the ENS plan. I'd have to
talk to the engineer.
I mean, we could
I hate to have it scheduled for...
I mean, we could schedule it for next week.
And if we don't have the ENS plan in time for them to review it, I mean, how many days
do they need to review it?
I guess that's the question.
Do they need to get the ENS plan today, tomorrow?
Or if they get it by next Monday, will they have enough time?
I mean, to say we want it, we need it now, it's just not realistic to say we have it
already because we didn't even think we needed to do it.
So our typical timeline to stay in plans is seven days.
I know that we do already have the revised plans, so it should be a little bit longer. I can't say exactly because it's not my work team that that does that.
all right so why don't we hold on hold on hold on why don't hillary how about two weeks
um yeah i think i think that that should clear that should clear everything up and um and if
the um if the revised um ens plan is already submitted then we don't need to i just note
we don't need to add that as a proviso then for for um the decision if the board grants
That's what I'm trying to clarify. The representative from the Planning Commission says they have this drawing, which is the revised zoning drawings. So let's be clear. Is it the revised zoning drawings they need to review, or is it the revised ENS plan that they need to review? Because the revised ENS plan we do not have yet. We have not prepared it because, again, we don't believe it's necessary. So do they need both, one or the other?
It's my understanding they already have the plans and those are under review. Is that correct?
zoning the zoning plan we have the site plans we don't have the ens plans
so are we talking that they need both plans and the letter their response
the ens plan is what they the revised ens plan because that has not been done yet
correct but she was saying that they've already reviewed the plan but she's talking about zoning
not the ens so i want to make sure we're clear what they need that no it's the it's the revised
ens plan because the revised plans have not changed since the last hearing correct right
but they haven't reviewed them even though they haven't reviewed these plans either the zoning
plans they haven't reviewed these they do have them they have them they've had i mean well i mean
they were submitted to the board at our last hearing in february okay all right so i mean
we'll we'll they can let us know what they need weeks we'll give it to them we'll see you in two
weeks all right so this is continued to 5 14 so that so we'll just we'll just hold the i know
yeah right so you don't have to do a resumption it's just a vote right you don't have to post
correct no right so we're going to hold this to 5 14 at 2 p.m that will be our vote we're going to
do is we'll vote then and yeah so the record the record is closed except for the revised earth
moving plan or ens plan um as well as the letter from from the planning commission with their
testimony and any response from the applicant okay okay mr ford yeah as long as i get everything
their letter in advance of the hearing so i can respond i mean all right yeah not the day of amen
yeah not the day of amen okay thank you all right thank you
okay thank you all right
Notchamson.
Eventually.
Eventually.
What did I say?
So this is number eight, MI-2025-000321-4461 Silverwood Street.
You've already been sworn to state your name for the record?
Allen Nockamson.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Ivan Hernandez Sanchez, the owner of the property.
And we do have a letter of opposition from the Manioc Neighborhood Council.
Yes, we do.
There's 11 opposition, one in support.
That's correct.
And just for record-keeping purposes, behind me is Ivan's parents who would be living in the property.
So, Nick.
All right.
One of my vice chair has just a few questions.
Yeah, sure.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to either read another refusal or stipulate to his ex?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. Thank you. I'm a little off my routine because I'm used to actually being in front of my computer, so I apologize for that. All is good. Nick, can you put up the notice of refusal? Thank you.
So this is an RSA 5 property with a lot area of 1,500 square feet.
And as the chairman stated, well, this is in the Manioc area of Philadelphia.
And what my client's trying to do is put a duplex here for the first floor and lower level will be for his retired parents.
And the upper level unit will pay for the mortgage for some other renter.
There's two entrances you'll see from the pictures.
We have two refusals here.
One, because this is an RSA 5 property, it's multifamily in nature, that's refusal number two. And then second, we are expanding a non-conforming use where we're building on the second and third stories so we don't meet the minimum setback requirements of nine feet, where instead we're proposing seven feet, six inches.
Next Nick. So we did meet with the Manlyon neighborhood council. As the chairman stated, there was opposition to this project. Continue.
My client did solicit nearby neighbors, which include an address at 4472 and 4474 Silverwood Street. You also see addresses on the cross streets as well.
that is on Maiden. And I feel like there's another Green and Carson Streets. So these
are all nearby neighbors who are, you know, conceptually in support of this, of the two
unit use. Next. Next. Yeah. So and it hasn't been used like this in a while, but it does
have a multi-unit past um i believe that this says that it was a bar and a single family above so
it's not uncommon you know given its history to have uh you know multi-unit use next
and again not uncommon in the neighborhood to have multi-unit use there's 4462 silverwood
44-74 Silverwood
44-33 Fleming
and 44-44 Silverwood
maps of the area
both from a zoning map
and a Google Maps perspective
and then photographs of the property
so just from this picture
you're going to see the front of the property
like there one
can you just slow down
can you go back
the one unit you'll see in the front door
and then where that would go lead up a flight of steps to unit number two for the second and third
floors. And then there's that side entryway path where unit number one would be. Next.
And that's our orange notice posting for today's hearing. Next. And this is just the rear of the
property. Again, you can see it's a non-conforming use right now. All we're doing is building on top
of that and that's where we gain that second variance request next and then silverwood to
the right of the property till left of the property and then our plans and drawings
fill after the property and then our plans and drawings that's just the site plan next nick
not the easiest plans to see so i'm gonna try my best here um if you go thank you nick
i go a higher uh so if you the other way i'm sorry go down to the floor plans so
if you go to look at the second set that's level one that's the first four if you go in the front
part, you'll see those steps like they're going up to that, you know, the second unit, which is
level two and level three. And then if you go on the right side, there's a separate door on level
one. That is, you know, these are my understanding pre-existing openings, but we can confirm with my
client, but let's just go to unit number one. That's where his parents would be living. You
come in um there's a kitchen there there's a bedroom in the rear and then if you go closer
to the front of the property that's where the the living room is and the dining room and you can see
there are a lot of windows because of that side path like there's a lot of light in there and then
if you go down in the basement lower level there's this a there's a laundry room down there it's
unfinished so they're not planning to live that like have any real living down there it's just
storage instead of going to unit number one you go up to unit number two on the second floor where
you see that landing and you know it's a it's pretty nice it's it's uh it's three bedrooms
two baths and um you know there's a kitchen there is a living room there's a bathroom in the middle
and then if you look at the gray boxes on the second and third levels that's kind of where the
the additions are and what's added is a new sunroom on the second floor with a new deck
and then on the third floor is where we're not going like we're not going it doesn't look like
the building structure is going completely back there in some in some respects because it looks
like there's another opening for that deck but there's a bedroom and then a new deck there and
then it's just additional bedroom so it's three bedrooms two baths for unit number two and then
two bedrooms one bath for the parents in unit number one next and then our rco meeting notice
i see mr hunter in the audience like he'll he'll confirm that you know we did have a meeting
obviously through the letter but we we mailed this notice for the march 5th uh community meeting to
nick uh how many addresses we sent it to 117 addresses and the addresses follow and proof
of mailing those addresses and then we have our application for appeal that we filed on ivan's
behalf next along the notice of refusal in project information form deed showing that he owns the
property next and then certificate of tax clearance uh with that being said i would ask that
Ivan virtually raise his hand
and be sworn in.
They have been promoted.
They will be coming back in shortly.
Hello.
Hi, this is Ivan Hernandez.
S-I-V-A-N-H-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Ivan, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Correct.
Is it true and correct what I stated?
And do you adopt as your own testimony?
And then specifically about your parents, the intention is to renovate this property,
create two units and have your parents live in unit number one yes that's correct and then uh
for the second and third floor either uh rented out or me and my wife are also considering uh
to move there and to your question about the existing doors uh in the first floor on the side
yes those are uh have been there since before we moved all right thank you i don't think you
go to the rco meeting um no mr goldberg did do you know what happened well i think well mr hunter's
here so i i yeah no i think i see other people okay yeah i think that there there was you know
obviously this is the the zoning classifications rsa5 yeah sure and i do think though that given
the history of the property um and given that there's other use similar uses on that block and
nearby um and given the large size of the lot i think okay questions from the board
um and given the large size of the lot i think okay questions from the board the only question
i have is just looking at the way the bathrooms were designed are those all assuming that they're
going to have stand-in showers i would defer to ivan about that i know there's probably limitations
with the parents so i it looked like there was a bigger bathroom i don't know almost like an
an accessible bathroom to a degree didn't look accessible yeah i will i'll leave it i i'm just
an amateur uh so um ivan can you answer that question yeah the additional bathrooms that we
propose would also include uh showers there is one that we were proposing on the third floor
uh in that place where we have currently uh a room so we will almost lose that room uh when
we add that bathroom and that's why we are adding an additional one and then we propose to also add
another bathroom in the basement since that's a substantial space that we're not using as much as
we would like to. So then my follow-up question though that is what's the depth of the basement
below grade? Because the egress wasn't super it looked like the basement wasn't really being used
for principal living but so i i think the architect that handled this um main i don't
remember if we got a site plan well we did we had to have a site plan because we're doing the
addition there we go there we go go up uh nick did uh yeah where the floor plans is the upper
level of the that page there you go so let's see what we got here uh i can't see it uh it's like
six feet it looks like it's a bilko door to the front yeah the note says six feet below grade
yeah so i just wanted what's the egress from the basement because it's not noted on the point
gotcha in the section yeah so yeah we have to take a look at that um thing that shows is the
bilko door yeah right but that's not light or air oh no i'm dumb to saying that's me yeah no i know
you say initially it's unfinished in the sense of there right now it's unfinished there's no
intention to like again ivan can you explain are you planning to finish this off or are you planning
to have it keep it raw like it is now other than the bathroom uh yeah other than the bathroom i
will keep it uh raw the the objective is just to have an additional bathroom to make things easier
and right now there's one way to get to the basement from within the house and then also
from the outside so it has these two uh entry and exit points so ivan would you have any objection
if there was a proviso no bedrooms or i guess bedrooms in the basement or living in the
basement i think the bathrooms count as living yeah so i think other than having like a washer
and dryer um and storage would you have any objection to no other living no okay so we could
i think they would agree to that i think it does honestly if it's going to be raw down there it
doesn't make sense to put the bathroom anywhere anyway that also didn't facilitate aging in place
i mean yeah that's fine yeah thank you all the questions from the board how many bedrooms is
the first floor unit two so i probably uh it looks like if you go in the rear there's i think
it's the front and the rear so if that that's that that's the one that looks like a primary
suite right with a bat of sec their own bathroom and then if you go to the front it looks like
that's an it's another bedroom right there because there you see there's a door right above you get
into the unit? You get
to the unit in the middle
on the side? Off the side
if that else? That's a pre-existing
door. That's correct.
Gotcha. Okay, so you enter into
the kitchen. Yeah. Right.
Okay, other questions?
Questions from our attorney?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the audience or the
virtual audience? Mr. Hunter?
Yeah, why not? Sure.
Are there neighbors back
there too well those those are my clients but they're your clients okay good the parents who
are going to live there right okay hopefully mr hunter could you please state your name and spell
for the court sonographer you might want to get closer or pulled closer to you all right that
okay that's fine that's fine um john hunter h-u-n-t-e-r do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do mr hunter please start your presentation
I'm sorry excuse me this is the court reporter could mr. hunter pull the
microphone even closer all right how's that testing thank you sir
all right how's that testing thank you sir okay um we are the uh coordinating rco uh we did have
the public meeting just a little background amplification of what mr notcherson said
this property use was last used as a bar first floor bar and a rooming house in 1987
The property was a larger overall property with a vacant lot to the west, and a driveway and a separate garage to the east in 1987.
It was then bought, renovated, and turned into a single-family dwelling, and it was the same owner from 1987 until 2023.
During that period, the properties of the West, the vacant lot was sold, and a new property
was built by Wright on that house, on that side of the property.
In 2023, that same owner sold the driveway and the accessory garage to the opposite neighbor
on the east, and they came before this ward for a variance for that because it was a non-conforming
lot it was too small and it was a non-accessory garage use so the property as of 2024 was
an attached row house with a side yard which was about three feet wide the remainder of the driveway
and a solid six foot high fence was built the rear yard is non-conforming it's seven feet
something or other with a single story edition so that's the condition of the property
we are aware that the property was bought in 2024 and the family moved in we were happy that they
moved in if you look at the photographs there was some renovation work done and you can see
from the photographs that the um the property seems to be used used on all three floors or
air-conditioned units placed in to the third and second floor, so it was used as a single-family
house, which we all applauded and think that was great. The proposal, therefore, is problematic
for the neighbors because it subdivides an RSA 5 house into a duplex unnecessarily, we
believe, particularly as it really compresses the existing family that are living there
at the moment to the single floor the first floor in order to expand the upper two floors into a
totally separate dwelling unit so really it's a trojan course for an rsa5 being converted into
a duplex with no parking on the side other than that just raising parking parking is a problem
Not as always in anywhere in Philadelphia is parking is a problem, but just across the street into the south is the St. Mary's redevelopment of the whole estate as a campus.
So the property was sold five years ago and still under construction, converting the school, the convent, the church.
and more significantly there was an 80 parking space open space that was used by local residents
and that was lost so there's a lot of pressure for parking so um going to the adjacent use uses the
mr notchinson side one of the properties across the street also came before this board it's a
triplex from 1930s and it's always been the triplex and it's an airbnb and you the board
granted them a three-year extension there's another one on fleming street that was cited
which is also an airbnb but other than that as you can see from the photograph the street on
silverwood street is predominantly single family use and stable and therefore introducing a duplex
conversion into a housing stock which is pretty similar all along that street is not seen as being
beneficial three-story property next what is that single single family yes and i don't know if the
the owner is um here in the audience to give testimony but he did at the public meeting
he was particularly concerned because his property is a lot shorter than the adjacent
house with these proposed additions and he would lose obviously any possibility of sunlight and
overlooking the additions on the on the upper two floors have decks that look sideways into
the adjacent property so the property is principally being developed within the rear of seven feet
principally being developed within the rear seven feet um and there was the concern that was the
general concern for that okay um any questions no i just commentary um and i know that this
variance would run with the land uh but my client's parents don't have a car uh so i and i know that
doesn't stop you know future occupants but you know the intention here is to put as light a use
as possible um and you know we talk about aging in place um and you know this is something that
allows them to age in place you know again mr hernandez did state to me that there was a
possibility of him living there but i didn't want to put that in there because it's a possibility
but it's a hundred percent that they're they want to live there but the only way he can afford to
keep this house the way or do this is to have that second unit um didn't he say didn't he say
he may live there he may he may but i wanted to make sure i didn't want to represent that to the
board because okay may is may is different than they they will and i will say this is that given
the history of this property having non rsa5 use should come into the equation of for this property
and having uses that are multi-unit in nature nearby,
having a diversity of housing.
How many issues?
Does his parents live in there now?
I believe they do.
Well, Mr. Ivan, do your parents live there now?
Okay, but you can't afford to keep them in this property
if this was a single family property, right?
Yeah, it wouldn't make too much sense.
And I mean, ideally we would move there,
but we can't because there's no separation so that's why we want to separate the two units so
if I move there with my wife we can have some privacy. All right so any other questions? Yeah
well I have a follow-up question based on the neighbors. It looks like in one of their letters
they wrote about the garage and the driveway being sold away recently and I guess my question
is did that happen before or after your client obtained the property and if after why?
Given that that's like the main comment that we've gotten from all the papers.
So the only way he can sell it separately, if it was subdivided or if it was a separate lot.
So, Ivan, were you a part of that process where a lot was sold, where there was a garage on it?
No, when I bought the house, the house already came without any garage.
Other people in the audience to testify?
Sure. I have a Daniel Ryman with the hand raised. I will come up to him and let him speak.
Hello. Can you hear me?
Yeah, I can. Daniel, just for the record, state your name and spell for the stenographer.
And if you would, please turn to your video on.
Oh, of course. There we go. Is video on?
Okay. I'm Daniel Riemann, D-A-N-I-E-L-R-I-E-M-A-N. I am the owner and resident of the adjoining
property at 4463 Silverwood Street. Okay. Oh, sorry. Do you swear we're firm to tell the truth,
told truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Why don't you please testify? Sure. I'm the owner and
occupant of the adjoining property at 4463 Silverwood Street. Two primary concerns around
parking as well as uh the the variance so um i have a bit of a statement um so um i respectfully
oppose the rezoning of 4461 silverwood street the neighborhood already faces severe parking
shortages and i have documented on-street conditions over the past two months to illustrate the strain
i did share those photographs earlier today you may or may not have that document
these photographs demonstrate frequent instances of vehicles parked illegally and no parking zones
are on sidewalks. And converting this property to multifamily use will add more cars to an area
that cannot accommodate them, exacerbating safety and access concerns. For the three properties that
were referenced as multifamily in the area, the one that's directly across the street is four
units and has four parking spaces with it. The one down the street is, I believe, two units does not
have parking. And then the one on Fleming Street is actually not very close. It's about a six
minute walk and you have to go up roughly 100 stairs to get there so that one's not very much
relevant. I also oppose the variance request to add to the rear of the building without maintaining
a required setback. As the adjacent neighbor I'll be the most affected by any addition above the
existing one-story extension because 4461 Silverwood Street sits southeast of my home
raising the structure will significantly reduce sunlight in my yard and living spaces
And for these reasons, I urge you to deny both of the requests.
Just some other questions to bring up.
Just some other questions to bring up. You see this fence in the current picture that's up here
that wasn't there until probably summer or fall. Until that point, even though the driveway was
sold off, it very much appeared as if this house still had parking. It's unclear when those
signatures were collected since there are no dates on there. And it's unclear if those people were
aware that this parking lot, this driveway is no longer part of this residence. Prior to that,
I wouldn't have concerns. The people who lived here before frequently parked three cars in there,
so obviously that could have supported the multi-family request here. Unfortunately,
that's no longer the case. Another issue with all of the parking in the neighborhood
is that it's going to get worse. The closest intersection to us is Carson Street. There's a
southern part and a northern part. The northern part does not have any parking on it, and there
are currently three new single-family dwellings that are probably three to four bedrooms. Each
has a one-car garage, but presumably there's going to be more than one car for each of those,
and those are going to have to get parked on the street. The St. Mary's development was also brought
up. The parking lots for those structures are not public, and if any of the people who move there
decide to park on the street, that's also going to increase competition for the parking. And then
And also, I believe there are developments there for those townhomes, I believe, are planned, which is going to bring in more to the neighborhood.
The document that I shared shows lots of parking on the sidewalks over there, as well as frequent illegal parking.
I'd say about 50 to 80 percent of the evenings there's someone illegally parked.
This often leads to delivery trucks going on to the curb and running over our fire hydrant.
Most recently, this happened this month, and usually it takes about a week for them to get there and fix it.
But I believe that's most of the things I wanted to say.
Thank you for your time.
Mr. Nockamson, do you have any questions of Mr.
No, I do have a comment that if the board feels so inclined to grant the use variance for two units, we would have a proviso to meet the minimum rear yard setback.
I think that could be accommodated.
We're talking about a foot and a half.
All right. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience or the audience here?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Wood with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location for the existing single-family residential RSA 5.
There are no unique physical conditions or circumstances of the property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the zoning code.
while there is previous evidence of commercial use on the ground floor and single family above
there is evidence that since that time the property has been used in conformance with
the single family zoning the planning commission recommends the board deny
the requested variance for multi-family and rear yard setback thank you mi 2025
000321 4461 silverwood street i vote no um michael johnson my vote is yes
Cheryl guessed, and my vote is no.
Tayo Nguyen, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
We're going to take a quick break, and then we're going to go back to number one.
We're going to go back to number one.
MI-2023-004-267-900 East Shelton Avenue, Moomin Islam.
Do we see his hand?
Okay, great.
it looks like my videos they won't let me show my video i'm moving how are you sir you've already
been sworn just for the record state your name again and please go on to your video
It would not let me go into my video.
It keeps saying it's disabled by the host.
Could we?
There it goes.
Okay, good.
Can you just read the record?
State your name.
Yes, my name is Mukmin Islam.
I know your attorney, Ms. Emerson,
wrote up that the issue was with our zoning poster.
I apologize.
That was a previous one.
We've been here for at least three or four times.
My apology, I'm not in my office and I'm out of the country, so I do not have access to the current one.
My apologies.
I'm not in my office and out of the country,
so I do not have access to the
I will say, if I could be here very briefly, this petition has been before the board several times.
None of the continues was our request.
The community was not ready a couple of times.
We did not have any meetings.
We eventually did have the meeting, and we met with the board, and we had their approval.
I am asking if I can still present because there is a notice that has been produced I can provide later or we can come back in 30 days and have them produce the community if they want to have it and say so in the matter.
But we are fully prepared to present. That is my mistake. I don't have the proof of posting.
Hillary, where do we stand with this?
I mean, typically, unfortunately, Mr. Chair, if we don't have proof of posting, we cannot proceed.
I mean, if it's the board's call, we can hear and hold it, but typically, we do not proceed
unless we have proof of posting.
All right.
So I would only ask, and Ms. Emerson, you can confirm or not.
Like I said, this has been listed.
I have three or four posts.
I have the most recent one when we came back in January.
I just do not have the most recent one that was just at this time.
That's my apologies.
I did not pull the right one in my file.
If we continue this, is there a better date than what I see here?
If possible.
All right, so here's what we're going to do.
I mean, the date's kind of far out.
So what we're going to do is we'll see what we can do.
We're going to get a hold of you.
We're going to continue it, but we're going to try to get you back as quick as possible.
And Mr. Chair, Mr. Richardson from the council office, I believe he had a comment he wanted to make about the RCO meeting process.
in this case. He has his hand raised. Sure. Mr. Richardson?
Mr. Chair, can you hear me? Yeah, I can, Mr. Richardson. Very good.
You won't have been sworn just for the record. State your name and please help us with this
conversation. The unfortunate thing is that we were never notified that there was going to be
a meeting, so it's very questionable whether
or not any mailing was done and things along those lines.
We were actually trying to reassign this case
to another RCO because of the fact that there
were some issues last year. This has been going on, as he did state,
it's been going on for a minute, but then nothing has ever been done in the correct fashion.
So, you know, we're going to leave it up to you to
get a continuance, but then we'll contact the
applicant and make sure that they do everything that they're supposed to do
and that we have a meeting that we're supposed to have.
I have at least three notices that we sent out
and we didn't meet with the RCO. We've had at least four meetings.
Sir, you've never contacted the council office.
I'm talking
we're going to continue this. We will
be in touch when this will be scheduled again.
I'm sorry, but we just can't do anything with it. Mr. Richardson, thank you for taking the time to call us. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So.
Alan, I think, is this your last one?
I'm glad about that.
uh what do you mean i thought we were doing three and then we were coming back and doing
the other three so didn't we only do the first two no we no he did first two
he's he's had quite a few cases yes as usual okay all right um um so mi 2025 000 384
50 52 50 52 to 56 city at city lineup um mr notton said could you identify your client
the relationship with the property uh yes uh my client is leonard uh pavisky uh he is the
equitable owner of the property by way of an agreement of sale okay so i i just for a point
i i noticed that there's a letter of opposition from winfield community neighbors association
what was 34 in opposition to and support there's a letter from council member Jones in opposition
a letter from council member Gil Gilmore Richardson um and we also have the applicant
has provided a petition in support with 10 signatures three from the block our vice
chair has a few questions thank you good afternoon council do you agree the way to
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to exact?
reason of the refusal, we'll stipulate
to his act.
I do in the sense of, I believe, yes, I do. I think there's a newer refusal that we just got
like a day or two ago. So I have no objection to the newer one.
No, I, I, the only thing I would say is that these are, this is an existing lot
or a parking lot. So I object in the sense of we're not making any changes, but to the lot
itself but okay have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing uh yes i have thank you council
please proceed and tell us about this beautiful project yes um i will ask that if someone can
give me the council member uh richardson's uh letter i did not include that as part of my packet
it. I never received it. So I just wanted, you know, I would also ask that this be a resumption
hearing. We do have a meeting hopefully scheduled with these, with the coordinating RCO and other
members of the community. So we're hoping to, you know, hopefully enter into some type of
community benefits agreement and that one of the members should be on line. You want to make a
presentation and we post the vote that's right that's right okay and and my understanding is
that we agreed to with the dba's administrator for the first wednesday in june which i believe
is june 4th to have this as the resumption hearing date i i talked to mr haggerty okay i i did not
receive that information but doesn't mean you're wrong i don't know if um miss dandy can confirm
that yes all right so this is really not this is a nice project i mean i i don't know how many of
you go down City Avenue. I don't go as much. My wife is from Hevertown. So when we're going to
her parents' house, we'll drive down there. So somewhat familiar. My father-in-law used to be,
well, he was a mechanic before he retired. So his shop was a little bit further down.
So familiar with this area. And actually I've seen this property on many occasions and it's
been abandoned essentially for like eight years. Uh, my client, um, is looking to put a beer store
in here, not a beer distributorship, a beer store, um, in terms of having a more boutique
opportunity, um, to sell a beer and, and, and like maybe seltzers, alcoholic seltzers and stuff.
So Nick, can you just start with the notice of refusal? All right. So this is a CMX two and a
have property um oh my objection is the fact that you know i believe that the use should be food
beverages and groceries i i looked on and see and i looked at other beer distributors there is an
example of a beer distributor actually in my neighborhood on callow hill the 1800 block of
callow hill where it's they had food beverages and groceries as as part of to be a beer distributor
So I would say that if that's the case, my client should have this, the use, forget about the everything else, but the use should be as a matter of right.
Is that that's stones?
Yeah, I think so.
I mean, if you, Mr. Augustin, if you're going to, if you want to make that argument or have L&I reconsider, we'd need to get L&I involved and have Mr. Reuter involved.
The board can't decide to change the use.
No, I hear you. And maybe I'll reach out to Mr. Reuter and give him an opportunity before the June resumption hearing in that respect.
Yes, I would recommend doing that if you're going to contest that the use and the refusal is incorrect.
So maybe we'll have Mr. Reuter show up in June to give a determination. But I do believe that that's a buy-write option.
Now, what my client's doing is he's taking this one-story structure, which last was a furniture store in, I think, 2017-ish.
and he's expanding that that structure and you know so we have some issues in terms of
the non-conformity of the building structure we're expanding it out and that's refusal number one
um the trash collection you know in terms of the loading zone uh is i guess refusal number two
because we're 50 feet from a residential zoning district again the trash area isn't closed
and you know they'll you know we're hoping you know that the board understands that we're trying
to be have a responsible use of the property the third refusal has to do with the use which we can
test but regardless we think that this is a cmx two and a half property it's on a commercial
corridor, it's not out of character to have similar type of use.
And you'll see across the way, there's a wine and liquor store on the Montgomery.
there's a wine and liquor store on the montgomery montgomery county portion of city avenue
then you look at the landscaping requirements to adding about your you know trees and some other
parking requirements i think there was a misunderstanding in the original submission
we were not changing the parking at all in that property we're going to obviously clean it up
like have lighting, have security, but the parking already exists. So Nick, can you go to the next
page? So, and again, there's additional refusals about the parking, which is not changing at all
from its current condition. So next. So again, this is what I looked at the zoning code,
you know, for food, beverages, and groceries uses that sell or otherwise provide food or
beverages for off-premise consumption, which a beer store does, including grocery stores and
similar uses that are incidental and accessory food and beverage services as part of their
primary retail sale business. In addition to serving, you know, beer and alcoholic seltzers,
there'll be like, you know, selling of candy and other things. So it fits within the definition of
food, beverages, and groceries. Now, comparison, the next page, you know, what Ellen and I believes
we fall under is wholesale uh sales and distribution uses engaged in the wholesale
sale bulk storage and distribution of goods um and and it says such issues may also include
incidental retail sales here all we're doing is retail sales you know you know we're selling
you know once in a while a keg but like for the most part i think you want to get this on the
record but i think this will be something you'll have to explain the next yes okay all right thank
you next and that's just the permit from the previous next
and we did meet with the community honestly i actually thought it was a very productive
community meeting um i thought that they there was a good dialogue between us and the community
in terms of talking about like what restrictions we can have in terms of hours of operation
A lot of community benefits in terms of our hiring practices, having a livable living wage, having security, limitations on matters that were life quality issues.
um unfortunately at the conclusion of my presentation uh it was stated by uh council
member richardson while that's all fine and dandy we don't like alcohol in our in our community
period um i you know again there was a previous presentation about a restaurant at that same
location and they were against it because it was alcohol they were against it because there was
consumption of alcohol at the premises. Here, it's a little bit different. There is no consumption
of alcohol at the premises, obviously. And then their second issue had to do with we're near
some universities and we fear that students are going to purchase alcohol here. And again,
we can't sell to minors. So we explained that. Continue, Nick. And then obviously the district
council member fell in line with the community because they're against it but i'm glad that
they're now willing to talk to us about potentially having community benefits agreement next
and then we did try to do some outreach especially with people on that block of city avenue next
and again to do some cleanup here i think there was a submission that was misinterpreted about
how we're using the existing parking lot the existing parking lots to remain there's no
changes to the existing parking lot next
next all right so are we out of character where we are uh in the neighborhood the answer is no
here's across the street on the montgomery county side a liquor store so one of the things that was
mentioned with the community is they were frustrated they're like not only do we not like
liquor, and they were talking about cannabis as well, we feel like everything's thrown on our
side of the street. Well, that's not the case here. Across the street, there is a wine and
spirits store. I will say that Alex Pugman, he lives in Valley Kenwood. He lives blocks away
from here. He's very familiar with this property. He's known he's been vacant for some time.
A little bit of background. Alex and his family have been in this business since 2013. They have
a location in Hatfield, a beer distributorship, more the traditional one that you would see.
They have one in Hatboro, same thing traditional. They're opening up a location in Chestnut Hill.
They have one in Hatboro, same thing, traditional.
They're opening up a location in Chestnut Hill.
And that's a different business model.
That's not the distributorship model you would think of.
It's more of what you're seeing here, where it's a boutique beer store, where you're selling
craft beers.
It's more of what you would go when you go into Giant, right?
Like, you know, down the street from here.
It's more of a boutique.
You're not like getting huge kegs and everything like that.
So I'm just giving you a little bit of background.
about that. Next. Nick, can you go to the next page? Hey, Nick. All right. Good. All right.
Cool. Aerial views. You can see we're on our own little island on like City Avenue. We are near
some residential but it's not uncommon right you have all city avenue that you know backs up to
uh you know there's residential that backs up to that not uncommon next again our building
structure we're expanding out slightly still pretty set back in comparison to say the building
structure to to the left and right of us next and then we're cmx two and a half property commercial
use i think this is a light commercial use and if you think about what's upsetting the community is
to have people who are drinking and driving where there's a problem apparently in this community
in that respect is that the spins is that saint joe's uh i believe so so um but again i think
the concern is is that we're going to sell the students we can't you know he again and and that's
the other thing you know this is a zoning board of adjustment whether the use is allowed you know
or should be allowed we go look at the philadelphia zoning code and whether we met our burden of of
undue hardship he this business is heavily regulated by the the plcb and he's been in
business for you know i guess now going on 12 years at multiple locations there was a submission
recently sent to the ZBA, I think it was last night, about violations by an entity that's
City Avenue Inc. or something like that. My client's purchasing the liquor license from
that entity. He's not that entity. So I just want to make that clear because it was what was
kind of trying to be said between the lines is he's a bad operator and he's not. Those violations
have to do with a completely different, separate entity.
He's a good operator.
And then this is just from a Google Maps perspective.
And then photographs of the property.
So during a community meeting, it was referenced.
What's in it for us as a community, right?
You know, you're putting alcohol in our neighborhood.
So unlike the restaurant,
people are not going to be consuming alcohol on the premises.
He's also heavily regulated by the PLCB.
These are the things that hopefully we'll talk about
in the community benefits agreement, jobs.
So we're hoping that a community benefits agreement
will have a living wage where it's $15 an hour
for the people at least who are working there.
There's sales tax, there's business taxes,
and most importantly, property taxes
and taking a property that's currently dilapidated
and activating it.
That property has been vacant for seven years.
I have Nick Giganti, who is the listing agent for this property.
I'll ask him a few questions of how difficult it is to market it.
The only two people who have been under contract to purchase this property is a restaurant
with seeking a liquor license and this beer store that Alex has been trying to put in there.
Otherwise, there's not much of a market for this property.
And there's just a different angle.
you can see now the the parking lot that's currently there next is alex the owner so alex
he's part of the family so his dad is the one under contract so when we incorporate when he
incorporates you know obviously he'll be working there but alex has been working with them as part
of the family business for you know the whole time 12 years out of the seven years how long
had that family had the property oh so this is not my client's looking to purchase this property
he doesn't own this property he's under agreement to purchase this property and that's the other
thing it's owner occupied so it's a little bit different when you're renting a property versus
when you're owning this property alex lives in valley kinwood and you know i'll ask him how far
he lives from the property um but yeah they're looking to purchase it and make it owner occupied
um but yeah they're looking to purchase it and make it owner occupied this is their first owner
this is their first owner occupation
occupied first owner occupied location i i believe he rents the other locations well we'll ask that
question real real quick are you running the same issue with chest on hill for the classification
as this no because it's in a shopping center and and and the zoning is different so that's why we
didn't run into that yeah so thank you yeah i think it was like ca3 or something like that
something crazy um next and then this is city avenue to the right of the property deceiving
most people would recognize the cvs over there uh next
to the left of the property next our plans and drawings so this is just a rendering of how we
envision the property you can see it's much nicer and better but again we're repurposing
the parking lot next and this is how we envision the inside of the property again i kind of equate
it to like what you would see on at the wegmans or something like that um again more of a boutique
not a beer distributorship next uh that's just the site plan next and then you by the way hold on
go back you see the bottom part that's the addition right so you know we currently the
building structure is 4,274
square feet. We're adding approximately
like 2,000 square feet
in the back to square it off. Next. So will you be
cutting into the parking? No.
No. The parking is... Go back, Nick.
Parking is to the left. A few other
businesses that is inside of that plaza are there.
So you're going to share parking with the businesses
on the side? That's our land.
there's only 12 parking spots there at least there is i think currently eight parking spots
so you're saying between that and the businesses on the side no but this is just we own we're just
purchasing this property which will have eight parking spots we don't share any parking with
anyone else so this will be completely solely my client's parking lot yeah so and again we don't
see people who are going to be like staying there a while they're just going to buy alcohol and
leave this you know the point the transaction is not that long so next and then this is the
inside from a floor plan perspective so if you go left to right start with the left you you're you
know you got the check you got the main checkout area and then you have aisles of of like you know
whatever six packs and such there are warm not cold and then you have the coolers to the right
hand side and by the way near the checkout too is kind of like you know candy and other things just
potato chips i'm sure food um non-perishable stuff and as you go further in the back
there's a beer cave i guess maybe a little bit more exotic beers um and then you know to you'll
see two ADA compliant bathrooms. There's some storage in the rear. Again, it's more open.
It's not expected to be a huge amount of actual volume on the shelves. Next. So we met with
the community on March 5th at 630. Next. Next. Next. There was only 24 addresses. It was
well attended i mean so um next our application for appeal um next notice of refusal project
information form the agreement of sale which we're under you know you know for a while next
and then our um tax clearance certificate uh with that being said i'll have a few questions
for alex and then um i know that nick giganti who's the realtor will give some testimony as well
all right could you please come forward make sure it's on and pull close here
could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer uh
okay real close um my name is alex bugman could you spell it please for a l e x last name bugman
P-U-G-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
I don't.
Please proceed, counsel.
Alex, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning
matter.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
I would ask that Nick Giganti virtually raise his hand.
Alan, would he service his own location?
What do you mean, service?
What do you mean service?
In other words, he had other beer distributors.
In other words, he had other beer distributors.
Would his beer distributor be the delivery to that location?
Would his beer distributor be the delivery?
They buy from wholesalers.
We purchase our beers from approved wholesalers.
Okay. All right. All right. Thank you.
Hi. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Sure. My name is Nicholas Giganti, N-I-C-H-O-L-A-S, last name Giganti, G-I-G-A-N-T-I.
You swear we're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes. Mr. Giganti, what real estate brokerage do you work at?
I work out of Keller Williams and Power.
Okay. And is Keller Williams in power, the listing agent for the property at 5052-56 City Avenue?
All right. And how long have they been the listing agent for this property?
Since October 22nd of 2024.
for. Okay. And during that time, how many offers other than Mr. Hugman's offer has your office
received? So we received two formal offers. One was with a developer who wanted to basically
redevelop the property. That contract was terminated. He did not move forward. And then
the other one was with Alex Pugman. Okay. And then do you have any knowledge of how long this
property has been vacant or last occupied? I believe it's over, as far as I know, over six
years. Okay. And do you have any knowledge of, of any other offers that were submitted
with this property prior to your, um, engagement? No, I do not know of any. Okay. Um,
has it been an easy listing of this property given its, its, its location in Philadelphia?
you um no it hasn't for the main reason of the condition of the property um it's a very onerous
task for someone to take this property over in the condition that it's in um unless there's the
right use uh the first person that wanted to do the redevelopment after he ran his numbers and
you know put pencil to paper he realized that the the building wasn't uh feasible for him
to uh to do that redevelopment um we've had several people call about it we've probably had
roughly you know 50 leads that came in pondering about the location but again once they really
start to dig into um what you know the the building um uh condition no one has really
moved forward other than you know that first person which of course didn't go through and
and obviously now we're with uh alex all right all right thank you okay i do i do have some
questions for Alex. I stated that you have multiple locations in the Philadelphia region.
Can you just explain those locations and typically what would be your hours of operation?
We have one location in Hatfield, Pennsylvania. One is Hudborough and we are opening a brand new
that we're planning to start operating probably by June in Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia. So
So, Hetfield location is our first location.
It's on a shopping center.
Hadbar, we own property there.
And hours of operation, 9 to 9, Monday through Saturday, and 10 to 6 on Sundays.
And would that be similar to what this location would have, the hours of operation?
And then in terms of security, do you have someone on staff during hours of operation?
In those locations, we don't have a need for security.
There is no need for that.
Okay, but I guess there was a discussion with the community of having security there. Would you have any objection to that?
Okay, but I guess there was a discussion with the community of having security there.
Would you have any objection?
Thank you.
No, I think Cedar Avenue, it's common practice living in the area. It's common practice. Most of the businesses on City Line Avenue corridor, they have security, and there is a reason for that.
Okay, and then, and there's pre-existing parking on this lot, right?
Yes. And then how many employees would you expect to have at any one time
during the hours of operation and in total? Probably a security person and two employees.
So at any given time, it should be three employees. Okay. I have no further questions.
Thank you. Questions from the board. Yes, I guess my question is, given that like in Philadelphia, beer distributes are a known nuisance property to most community groups, and this had already had two previous approvals as a restaurant, had you at all considered something that might be more in line with what the community was interested in seeing?
so i will answer that the last application was for a restaurant with a liquor license
and and the community uh strong-armed in a way the operator out of actually opening up
this is the 2024 the 2019 29 i think it's there's two there's two different listed
permit approvals that were approved i my understanding is that what because i and
And I've seen a community meeting video on this.
I believe that there was something that I think they never got past the PLCB.
And I think that was the issue.
So they couldn't get the approval.
So with the PLCB, so the operator eventually gave up.
And then for the location that you've mentioned at Chestnut Hill, have you already made it past that stage for that one?
Yeah, everything is approved to be about to start operating.
It was a by-ride option given the zoning classification of the property.
But again, it has a similar business model, right?
Right.
Yeah, that's where our experience and expertise coming from in operating beer sales,
not being restaurant owners or any other business experiences.
That's what we know.
Gotcha.
Where does the numbers pencil out from being 250 feet away from the wine experience?
50 feet, I think it was.
I'm not a liquor control board attorney.
So based on your question,
it sounds like there may be a requirement to be so.
So again,
my client is represented by John McCreish who,
who is going through that process concurrently.
I have not heard of any issues in terms of that.
So I'm assuming that we are 250 feet.
at Hatfield location we are next door to Giant and Giant has a liquor license and we have
so being across the street definitely shouldn't be a problem with PLC. One is a distributor's
license the other is a liquor license y'all going at the both distributors it's a safe requirement
250 feet and it was yeah again I'm I defer to you know my client again but that's the whole reason
right if if these are issues that you would discuss at a plbc hearing the zone and i and i
and what happened with the previous operator proposed operator they got tied up at plcb but
this is a responsible use of the property from a zoning perspective whether my client ultimately
gets approval in front of the plcb that's another matter he does have a great track record at
multiple locations so it's definitely more than 250 feet so i do have a question so
she's the ward leader of the 52nd ward am i right she's writing it as the ward leader not as a
councilwoman i believe give me one second i believe she wrote the letter as in her position
as council member give me one second yeah i don't have the benefit of the letter so i can't i did
just send it to you okay is she she wrote in as as a council member thank you so my my question
is a little different i guess i'm i'm i'm not sure how you um i i i understand beer distributors
where you're selling a beer buddy case and what have you.
I'm not sure if I understand your model.
So you're selling what has been described here
What has been described here as like craft beers, what does that mean and why is that so different and what kind of business model is there? I mean, how many of these bottles can you sell at a time and how does that, how does this whole thing work?
as like craft beers.
What is that?
I think it's a very good question. PLCB classification of licenses goes back to, to my knowledge, over 100 years ago. So back in the years, beer distributors were primarily selling kegs and cases.
now the model in 2025 is changing and changing rapidly and it's changing more in suburbs and now
it's moving into philadelphia the model is like younger generation and even middle age and
everybody else looking to buy six-pack singles to have a variety and also the trend is changing
people want to buy craft beers actually philadelphia is known for craft beer philadelphia
is a home to about 35 breweries inside philadelphia and about up to 100 philadelphia and
suburbs so what we are looking to do like uh make the store more like a destination store for local
beers of course we'll sell uh big names like budweiser engling and so on but also uh to have
people choice to buy a lot of craft beer seltzers ciders uh probably my rough estimation 40 percent
of buyers are ladies it has to be well lit store good security big uh wide aisle so ladies will
come and comfortable shopping in this store so it's it's it's a different model and also comparing
to Giant or Acme, they have a small selection. They carry big names like Guinness, again, Budweiser.
We're going to bring all, in addition to big names, small names, local names. There are breweries
owned by great entrepreneurs in this area. There are minority-owned breweries. We want to have
full presentation uh there are a lot of tourists in philadelphia even in suburbs we have a lot of
people come and say show me local beers i'm visiting my family here in hadfield in harborough
show us local and i think being in philadelphia and city avenue will give us a great opportunity
to present the whole array of philadelphia beers yeah and i want to mention it sounds
like when you're saying i'm going to buy one bottle of beer what i what i do personally is
like you get when you go to a giant like for instance you mix and match you they literally
if there's these like why don't you explain what that what i mean by that right so uh again market
is changing like back when we just started 13 years ago plcb regulation people had to buy if
somebody wants to buy beer, they have to buy a case. Now it's changed. Everybody can buy anything
from a single can or bottle to a case. And when people buy single bottles, they can mix and match
six different bottles of one can. And also like some people say, if I'll buy a six pack or case,
I may drink it all in a couple days. I would rather buy a couple today, a couple tomorrow.
So it's not a bad thing to sell singles. Singles are good for some people. So it's good to give people different choices in price range, in craft versus domestic, foreign. It's a different market.
It's ciders, seltzers.
People want to pick and choose what they want.
And again, gas stations, vavas, or supermarkets don't give this opportunity.
They have relatively small sections versus us.
We'll have big choice to choose from.
And also, us buying in bulk, we can compete in prices.
We can offer people better prices than supermarkets.
Can you also explain the training you do to make sure that you're not serving to underage kids and things like that?
Absolutely. So it's highly regulated industry. PLCB requires and it's a new regulation that every employee is a ramp certified responsible alcohol management program.
So every employee must pass the program for us to be in compliance. So it's it's a two or three hour program online and everybody has to pass a test.
and i'm taking this test every two years and i have to pay attention to otherwise i'll fail the
test so it's not that easy everybody has to pass everybody goes through orientation through us
sign papers and we explain uh we are the business responsible for alcohol sale but every employer
We are the business responsible for alcohol sale, but every employee is personally liable not to sell to underage.
Everybody is responsible to sell alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person and so on.
We take it very seriously.
PLCV take it very seriously.
We are also overseen by state police.
approximately every six months state police sends undercover people either like younger than 21 and
if we don't check the id properly if that god forbid transaction happens there is a fine for
that if three transactions like that happens license revoke so it's very regulated and
state take it seriously and we as operators of your business take it very seriously otherwise
we'll lose the business yeah i think i think we can acknowledge that i think the issue in most
places in philadelphia where these are considered nuisance businesses has to do with trash has to
do with like people coming in buying single consumption things and it causing debris in
like a very short distance around that business and in people lingering outside of them and so
I think like to I think understand how you want to mitigate those very specific issues that
neighbors might be really you know concerned about is like the major thing I think the second
piece I've often heard from communities is deliveries right like the volume and the number
and the types of deliveries that have to service these businesses
and how do you set that apart?
I think a question that I didn't get to was with your addition,
you've taken away a lot of the space that it looks like
the previous commercial space is used for deliveries.
It looks like it was perfectly formatted to be the space
that a truck could pull in and then comfortably pull out.
So with the addition, how do you plan to manage deliveries
with that very narrow drive aisle for your eight parking spaces?
uh so uh we get literally three deliveries a week from three main wholesalers uh deliveries will
happen off rush hours probably late mornings uh they bring pallets of beers and those pallets will
be still uh even with the addition there will be approximately 20 feet in the back
those pallets will go into the back and or directly inside the building so in a matter of
minutes those pallets will disappear and truck will be out of the parking lot
that's what we do at other locations that that's how it's done it's very efficient
it's built those pallets will get in with that's building space in the back it's in a storage
that's where those pallets will get in okay so i want to try to move on because there's a good
chance we may have some people in the audience that want to say something right uh our attorney
hillary emerson i i don't have any questions at this time mr chair all right questions or
comments from the virtual audience or the current audience okay we'll get to you sir
hi um my name is kaya how are you could you please kaya could you please state your name
been spelled for the stenographer. Oh, yes. So my name is Kaya. His spelling is K-Y-A-H.
Last name? Brown. Right. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Could you turn your video on, please?
Thank you. Are you a neighbor? I'm the property manager at the Premier
Merritt City Line Apartments. Address is 6100 City F.
Okay, please proceed.
So I just wanted to chime in. We have about 302 apartments here. That's probably over 400
residents. And I think that it's safe to speak on everyone's behalf that this is the sort of
project that we would essentially support. That building has been vacant for quite some time. And
I feel like our residents should be able to have the same privileges as other people. I do feel as
though this project would bring some safety, some lighting, and some jobs to the area,
and it is something that we support and hope that gets approved.
Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? How many of the hands do you have?
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello? Hi. Sir, could you please
state your name and spell for the stenographer yes stephen riley um s-t-e-v-e-n-r-i-l-e-y
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
yes i do do you live in the area no i'm um just like uh miss brown uh property
Do you live in the area?
No, I'm just like Ms. Brown,
property manager for Bylaw Apartments,
which is pretty nice.
Please proceed.
Yes, well, basically,
I just wanted to say
the exact same things
that she was saying.
She literally stated exactly
how I feel about my property
that I manage.
It would be a huge benefit
for my site, for the resident,
to even be able to just walk outside
and be able to enjoy.
So, yeah, for us, we vote, yeah.
All right, thank you very much.
You with the Bala on the Bala side or Philadelphia side?
That's Philadelphia.
Okay, other hand?
Steve White.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Can we see his hand?
here is mr white hi mr white could you state your name and spell for the stenographer
my name is deshaun white is uh d-e-s-e-a-n last name white as the color w-h-i-c-e
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes sir are you a neighbor yes i stay at the premiere um
all right do you give us your thoughts on this project yeah um i think it would be good for uh
everyone um whether you live on city avenue or you are a visitor of city avenue because
it provides a space or comfort of where you can you know reach your peak you know um wine and
spirits is not just a violent it's nowhere near a violent act you know wine and spirits for you
to feel yourself you know sometimes you have a hard day at work you know you're going through
it with your kids sometimes you want to relax and you know just chill and um i think this is
a perfect situation because we don't have to go too far to get the accommodations that we need
being as though we we're staying up here we're paying so much in rent or whatever the case may
be and this is the perfect outlet for all of us um not only that um they're going to provide
jobs for those that's attending the saint joe's university on scholarships uh whether it's
academic or athletic you know i've been in college and i know how how it feels to uh not be able to
provide for yourself you know and they're going to provide jobs in which you'll be able to provide
for yourself so you come there the kids at st joseph's um that's the only college that's the
only university around uh the area so yeah they'll be able to come from st joe's and be able to
provide for themselves
you know they won't have to eat noodles every night
you understand what I'm saying
alright thank you very much for taking the time
the calls do you have anyone else
is that the last one
Dee Dee
she's from the RCO
Mr. Chair
good afternoon everyone
good afternoon
could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer
Sure, it's D. Dukes, first name D-E-E, last name Dukes, D-U-K-E-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
So I'm going to reserve additional, more lengthy comments because I am on my cell phone and I'm just afraid my battery's about to die.
I am the president of the Winfield Community Neighborhood Association.
I just want to be in agreement.
If there is an opportunity for us to come back, we are definitely in agreement to having a further discussion.
So that is one.
Number two, I'd like clarification on the parking spaces.
In our meeting, it was indicated additional parking spaces to total 14.
So I just want to get clarification.
Are we remaining at eight, Mr. Nogamson?
I just want to be clear about that.
So that's the second point.
And then if I could just shed some light on the past RCO public meeting with the previous proposed owners of that property who wanted to bring in a restaurant, we were not opposed to a restaurant.
We were not opposed to a restaurant.
We were opposed to the sit down.
We were opposed to the sit-down alcohol portion of it.
And so they chose to withdraw.
We were not aware of the liquor license that they have applied for.
We were not aware of any of that.
But that was the reason that we were given.
But I will reserve any further until we have an opportunity to come back.
All right.
Thank you very much.
We appreciate your taking the time.
Anyone else?
You're welcome.
Is that it? Rabbi, you want to come up?
I'm going to get up.
You want to get up for a second?
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for this
stenography? Good evening, Nathan Ward. Just real close
to that if you can, so we want everybody to hear you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.
Nathan Ward, W-A-R-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I'm not a neighbor.
All right.
Please proceed then.
So actually, when we first moved to Philadelphia, we lived right off of City Line Avenue, right near there.
But today, my family lives in New Jersey, and we do spend time still and still have residence in the area off of City Line Avenue where there's a large Jewish community.
I'm here on behalf of some of our clients that own over 1,000 units in the area.
The clients are Rushmore Management, Chelsea Management, Premier Properties, Montium, and Rose Valley Management.
City Avenue is an active established corridor that's seen steady investment.
But the subject property, formerly a furniture store, has remained vacant and boarded up for many, many years.
It's a visible exception in an otherwise healthy stretch.
This project addresses that gap.
The proposal is for a family-run production facility with sealed carryout retail.
There's no on-site consumption.
It's not a bar.
It's a clean, focused use that fits the corridor and adds lighting jobs and long overdue activity to that site.
The stakeholders, Recompliant represents, collectively own over 1,000 residential units.
There's the Premier City Line Avenue, Mansions at Bala, Lincoln Green, Bala Apartments, and then they have, I think, about five or six buildings in the vicinity there as well, and Rose Valley, which owns Mansions at Bala.
All long-term owners with direct interest in the strength and safety of the neighborhood.
We also represent Yeshiva Katana Philadelphia, which is like an elementary boys school, and the Talmudokul Yeshiva Philadelphia, which is a secondary school, a high school, and a graduate school for Yeshiva students.
the yeshiva has been in the neighborhood for approximately 60 years
and these institutions want to see the continued reinvestment and want to see this through
and we hope that it can be fruitful for the community for the proprietors and for all involved
thank you very much for taking the time to pause um anyone else planning commission
amy board with the planning commission um planning commission is also going to hold
and submit our testimony in the form of a letter okay um hillary we're gonna make this how are we
gonna how do you want to we can we can have a resumption hearing on 6425 at 2 p.m um and we'll
leave the record open in the interim right okay and that's good for you thank you yes thank you
very much. Thank you. Have a good night.
Number 11.
Number 11.
Number 11.
MI 2025
000392
167 West Allegheny Avenue.
Ed Rick
Roseman is the attorney.
His letter of enthusiastic
and unqualified support from the
seventh word RCO. Wow. Okay. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Could you please state your name and
spell for the stenographer. Yes, Mr. Chair. Eric Bodzin, B-R-I-C-B-O-D-Z-I-N.
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 this property?
Yes, my client is Maria Gonzalez of ASE. She is the president of ASE and is here in the virtual audience today.
Yes, my client is Maria Gonzalez of...
Okay. All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Good evening. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, council. Please proceed and share your screen.
Absolutely. I hope my screen is showing up right now.
You're good, sir. All right. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. As you mentioned,
we're pleased by the enthusiastic and unqualified support of the seven-born RCO.
We don't get that much, but that's fine.
We're enthusiastic to be here, so I'm going to be brief. As many of you know, ASE is the city's
longtime nonprofit leader in community and affordable housing development. ASE is the
owner of 167 West Allegheny Avenue, where you'll find this existing building known as Vias del
at eBay. I'll be as brief as I can as ASEI's application today is limited to accessory
signage only with no changes whatsoever to this long-standing building which is 23,000 square
feet more or less. I'll start with the notice of refusal. The zoning application is limited to
two small building identification signs. I'll pull up the plans in just a moment. One would be
located just above the second floor windowsill and one just below the second floor windowsill,
as you can see here and here on that photo of the property. The reason for the refusal is for the
one of those two signs that would sit just above the second floor windowsill on the basis that a
sign located even slightly above a sill requires a variance in the I2 zoning district. That's the
issue and the reason of course for this placement is it's the only area on this building that would
afford reasonable visual identification on this existing building for the sign that I'll pull up
in a moment. For this building, which I should note, sits alone on the block in the shadows of
much larger building. We'll share some photos in a moment. And on a very broad streetscape
of Allegheny Avenue, which runs from Broad Street through Kensington Avenue all the way
to I-95. So I'll pull up and run through the maps and photos quickly. This is the zoning map.
zoomed out and zoomed in here. As you can see, it sits in the middle of the Allegheny
Street corridor that bridges several neighborhoods between Broad Street and Kensington Avenue.
This variance would actually not be required at all in the I-1 rather than I-2 district
or along the nearby ICMX and CA2 zoning districts.
However, I-1, I'm sorry, I-2 does require a variance
for a building identification sign above the second floor windowsill.
Here is a aerial of the neighborhood,
again, showing the commercial corridor of Allegheny Avenue.
It's a major arterial.
along uh this st hugh and fair hill neighborhood and here are site photos again um in short we
submit this small variance um would you know allow a small sign to fit um just above the window so
to afford reasonable visual identification of this existing building um particularly as you can see
in the top left here on a broad streetscape of Allegheny Avenue. It has bike lanes and
several bus lines along the avenue. Here in the bottom left, you can see the scale of this building
relative to its neighbors. Again, here in the top right, this building right across from Hancock
Street is Casa Caribe. It's five stories tall. Across the street on the other side of Allegheny
is Hancock Manor. That's seven stories tall. And this large building also next door in Allegheny
is the two-story Salvation Army with a slightly larger tower. So certainly we said
is the two-story Salvation Army with a slightly larger tower. So certainly we submit that the
Thank you.
building identification signage on this one building that stands alone on this block
is appropriate, reasonable, and a minimal modification of the code at issue. Here again,
you can see a street level photo of where the building stands. And here is the site plan and
design of the signage. I'll pull up the signage design specifically. As you can see, each sign
has static illumination from within, so they can be turned off at night. Nothing blinks or draws
unwarranted attention. Below the sill is the word ASEE, backlit with wall-mounted acrylic letters in
blue, about one foot tall and four inches deep. Above the sill here is the five by seven ASEE logo,
which is very well known here in Fair Health, where it's placed on all of these four
Caribe development buildings that I'd be remiss not to note with Maria Gonzalez on the line
that Ossie and the city have worked together over the past three decades to transform several
blighted lots in the Fairhall neighborhood into about 200 units of affordable senior
and community space, including 81 units here at Villas del Caribe. The 7th Ward RCO met virtually
on March 12th, with 23 individuals in attendance, voted unanimously as an enthusiastic and unqualified
support of approving signage for V.S. del Caribe, again, to afford reasonable visual identification
of this pre-existing standard bearing center for community and affordable housing in Fairhill
and North Philadelphia and across the city of Philadelphia. Mr. Chair, for all these reasons,
I'll just pull out this photo again.
We submit that the grant of this variance is consistent with the spirit of the code,
represents the least possible modification of the regulation of issue, will not alter
the character of the neighborhood, and will rather benefit, not detriment, the community
with no adverse impact on congestion, safety, transportation, welfare, and the environment.
And with that, bring your client on.
Absolutely.
Absolutely. My client in the audience is Maria Gonzalez.
Sure. Thank you.
Ms. Gonzalez?
can you hear me i can i can could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
yes maria n gonzalez m-a-r-i-a n-g-o-n-z-a-l-e-z do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed counsel thank you mr chair uh
good good evening maria i have just a few questions um first have you heard my testimony
in the description of this application today yes i have and the information that i provided
is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes it is and would you now adopt
and affirm this testimony as your own yes i do thank you very much questions from the board
questions. Yeah, just about the, you said that these will be internally illuminated
signs. Is that what I heard? Yes, that's correct. Okay. And then, is this going to be
are they on a timer? Is this going to be 24 hours a day? How is the illumination going to work in
terms of, you know, how they're not, you know, will be? Yes. Thank you, Chairman Gaston. So
they're, they're internally lit so that they can be turned on and off. And as I mentioned at night,
They can be, you know, it's on the Allegheny Street corridor, but, you know, they can be turned off to, you know, keep the lighting.
Do you have a plan for that? I mean, is it going to, like, come on at dusk and go off it, you know, or is this going to be an all day, all night?
you know or is this going to be an all day all night thing or how is this going to work
so i don't believe it was raised at the community meeting but um you know maria's we discussed this
she's happy to turn the lights off each evening um at you know at dusk no i'm just i'm just asking
if there's a plan for it or whatever I don't I don't know whether it will be a problem for
the community or not but just you know if there's a plan for you you have the lighting so the question
is you know is there a plan for um I see these signs will be illuminated and Maria I see your
a timer or whatever just asking yes how are you miss gonzalez hi how are you good to see you again
good i'm good um yes we do plan to have a turn off switch um just to make sure that yes we are
saving energy as well and we plan also to have a timer so it just gives us various options to turn
up the lights when we need to, for whatever reason, is it repairs, you know, to replace
bulbs and things like that.
All right.
Thank you.
I have a question.
It looks like there's a number of single-family homes across the street.
Just wondering if they attended the community meeting, and specifically if you know if they
gave their support.
um i'm not aware as to whether the the neighbors across the street attended the community meeting
and and maria um jump in if you are aware as to whether any of those neighbors attended
i understand you know the sport was unanimous but i don't know if they were in attendance
right um we did invite the residents across the street um i do not have the signing sheet to
affirm whether um some of those residents did attend um i know that we do uh actively and widely
um inform the community about meetings especially as it relates to zoning issues but i can't really
definitively say whether they um you know they attended they were invited but i don't know if
they attended okay thank you all right other questions from the board questions from our
attorney, Hillary Emerson. Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Questions or comments from
the virtual audience?
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the current I-2 medium industrial zoning at this location. The existing
building corner sign and configuration
would not allow the sign to be placed in conformance with the zoning code.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested variance for sign height.
Thank you. MI 2025-000-392-167 West Allegheny Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Ioan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Counsel.
Thank you. Thank you all for your time.
Number 12, MI-2025-000394-2026 South 5th Street.
I'm going to do back-to-back here.
Hi, Vern. You've already been sworn. Just for the record, state your name.
Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Vern Anastasio. On behalf of Mohammed El Saeed.
Okay, and just for a point of information, we're going to hear you back to back. You have another one that's one away, but we'll hear you, your two right away, together.
Yeah, the next one is a hear and hold, by the way.
Yeah, I agree. All right. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Good evening, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
And I see the council member, Squilla, is in non-opposition.
Yep, he sent a letter of non-opposition.
Yep, he sent a letter of non-opposition.
I'm sorry, this is the wrong property.
As did the community.
Overwhelming support.
Vern, just for a point of information, we do not have...
You got the letter from the community?
No, we do not have the letter from the community.
I think Council Member Squilla's office does, but we do not have it.
I'll forward it to you if you'd like.
All right, thanks.
i thought they sent it i'm sorry that's okay i have it here and i'm going to move this into
evidence 55 pages 54 pages here's the letter from the rco you never get a leader from an rco to
actually put pen to paper and it's very clear that the applicant here says it's quote presented
a well-rounded case members of the community who were not present who are present spoke highly of
Mr. Mohamed dedicated to the community. Structure needs no new modification.
And they voted overwhelmingly on his behalf. So that's that's that document.
And let me show you here. We've got the letter of support with the vote breakdown.
and as you said you already have councilman council member squill is a letter of non-opposition
the application is for a two-family dwelling in an existing structure
and it's a two-family dwelling already so that's that's pretty much why why we're here
so let's show you the plans i'll pull out
and i'll pull in a little bit okay so we have uh the basement here is basically mechanicals
hot water heaters hvac there is a restroom down there and just a powder room and some
closet and some storage space the first floor you come up the stairs uh into down the hallway
you can go up the stairs to the second floor unit or you can make a right in this case let's
for now let's take a right go into
unit number one
and you'll see a living room a kitchen you'll see a bedroom in the front and a bedroom in the rear
and a full bath
and then unit number two 860 square foot two bedroom apartment again the center is the living
dining, eat-in kitchen sort of area. And then you've got a bedroom in the rear and a bedroom
in the front. Go down here. Here's some of the photos. Very well appointed.
proof of posting here's the letter that was sent to all immediate neighbors
here's mr squilla's letter here are the addresses that were mailed
i've already been through that and here's 181 individual households that got our notice
Here is proof that the property is being taxed as a multifamily property and assessed as a multifamily property to family.
And, of course, we've got the tax clearance in our deed.
And then we've got aerial shots.
And here, for those who could not attend, we've got a full page and a little bit extra of everybody in the immediate area.
both Mercy, Emily, McKean, and Fifth Street.
So it's all there, and my client used the addresses
given to him by the Planning Commission to go door-to-door.
And with that, I'm going to ask my client, Mr. Mohamed Elisi,
to raise his virtual hand.
What's the rest of the neighborhood look like?
Is there multiple?
yeah there's uh yeah well it's fifth street right so and as i'm sure you know down there at least
uh the numbered streets are where the where the apartments are for the most part right so it's uh
there are single family homes on fifth street but there's also two three and four family dwellings
up and down south just like six seven eight nine
Up and down.
Just like 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th.
And I hope Mr. Muhammad's still here.
It's been a few hours.
He's coming in as a panelist.
Great.
Hello.
Hi, Mr. Muhammad.
Could you please state your name and spell for this phonographer?
Muhammad Elasi.
M-O-H-A-M-E-B.
Last name Elasi.
E-L-L-A-I-S-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Alessi, did you hear my presentation to the board today?
True and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Are you adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I have nothing else.
Questions from the board.
I have a few questions.
One, at what point was this subdivided?
Because all of the documentation for L&I as recently as 2024 show it as being approved as a single family home and only having a rental license for a single unit.
Correct. Mr. Alessi, do you want to talk about your history with the property?
Yes, I purchased the property in 2023 and with a squatter in it.
That took me a very, very long time to get him out.
Can you guys hear me?
We can hear you.
And it was a two-family?
And as meter, two electric meter, an upstairs apartment and a downstairs apartment with a squatter.
That took me almost a year to get him out of there.
And the only way I can start the eviction process is by literally getting a rental.
So I have to do what I have to do, which is, you know, based on what the L&I have it in
record as of just to get the rental license so I can start the eviction process.
That's how that worked out.
Makes sense.
Thank you.
Questions?
So you're saying you purchased this as a two-family
dwelling in 2023? Yes, that's his testimony
with a squatter.
Okay. And so, okay.
All right. Confirming or stating for the record that that does not match any of the
many L&I records for this property that go back as far as
2004, most of which happened between 2017 and now. So in very recent history, Ellen, I did not
consider this at all a two bedroom. I also have a question related to the floor plan. There's a
bathroom in the basement that is like, you cannot functionally access the bathroom. So one, is that
an existing bathroom? Yeah. First, to your first point, I just want to make sure that we're clear
on that. That work was done, obviously, if there's no record of that work being done,
whoever owned the property prior to my client did the work without the benefit of permits,
I would imagine. Well, the reason I ask is because it seems that the work was done by your client,
because Elle and I both caught them for not having architect and having work done
for installing improper materials and for installing more plumbing fixtures than was
listed on a plumbing permit. Right, but that's irrespective. Which would account for the second
bathrooms that we're now no that's yours that's completely separate from the from the two family
use that was in existence at purchase so that's i just want to make sure i'm questioning why
how was it considered a two-family use at purchase because it appears that the things
the kitchen and the bathrooms that make it now two uses were installed by the current owner
Good question. Mr. Alessi, do you want to explain what there was?
There was two kitchen in there and two bathroom in there.
And what you did was just take out the garbage and put some something nice, right?
Yes. Yes. And also another point that the city has been collecting trash refusal ever since, I think, 20 or over 10 years now.
more importantly more importantly the city has been billing you and you've been paying for a
duplex trash is that right okay and more importantly you office of property assessment
has been taxing you as a two-family dwelling is that right multi-family yep okay because you
we have that in evidence that we've moved so that that issue is done and i'm sorry what was
the second question about the powder room yep uh the powder room in the basement because there's
a powder room in the basement mr elise do you want to talk about that that was existence okay
that was existence okay what are you saying here what the it was he said that that that was
what he's saying here what the it was
pre-existing that was there that toilet was there that uh powder room was there at purchase
okay all the questions questions from our attorney not at this time questions or comments from the
um the virtual audience
planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change the
existing single family zoning at this location the conversion was done without the pet of the
sorry the conversion to two family was done without the benefit of permits in fact a 2024
building permits described the property as single family around the time the two meters appear on
cyclamedic imaging the planning commission recommended that the board deny the requested
variance for two-family. Vern, I'm going to sit and talk to the members of the board about this.
We're going to vote on this next Wednesday at 2 p.m. That's fine, Mr. Chair. I just want to make
sure for the record, just in case, is there a unique physical condition to this property
that causes compliance to a single family impracticable? The answer is yes. Did my client
create that two-family dwelling or did he purchase it that way? The answer is the latter. He purchased
it with two kitchens, all those baths, two separate entrances interior. He did not create
that hardship. So that's very, and for those reasons, and by the way, because he literally
saved the building from complete collapse, he has overwhelming support from everybody on that block
in that RCO, including the council member. So I hope that all is under consideration. Thank you.
Thank you. So number 14, MI2025-000432-5118 North Broad Street. Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
We do not, we still don't have an RCO letter, Hillary.
That's correct.
This is going to be a hear and hold because I think the movie was just held this week.
So Vern, just for the record, state your name.
Vern Anastasio.
And could you identify your client's relationship to the property?
yeah the owner is Jason Tran and I represent Mr. Tran all right our vice chair has a few questions
thank you counsel do you agree to weigh the read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy
yes sir have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibit that's needed to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes sir thank you counsel please proceed
thank you so this property is here's a this probably is a very large property here's proof
of posting and we'll get to the application currently is for uh use as an office and
professional space on the first floor with a four-family dwelling above and obviously this
property is rsa3 and those uses require variances so now we're going to go to the plans
the proposed office space is about a little under 900 square feet
come up to the porch enter the uh the first floor and as you can see it's just one large
It would be one large office space with a powder room.
Here's the entrance here, foyer.
And we have a trash room.
Just as you walk into the foyer, there's a separate place for trash storage for the units because the units are relatively small.
You have two junior one beds on the second floor, two junior one beds on the third floor.
there's exterior shots again and here's the interior photos of the apartments
here's the rear yard
This is the letter that was mailed to all the interested parties.
Eighty five individual households were mailed.
We did meet with the community, but they asked us to return.
So here's the history of the property, it being commercial mixed use for a very long time.
There was a doctor's office on the first floor living quarters above.
Living quarters above.
There we have our deed.
It's literally 30 feet away from RM1.
So if that means anything.
And I want to go back.
I don't think I walked you through the junior one beds.
So we're going to do that next.
It's our understanding and communicating with the RCO that the number of house apartments
may in fact decrease as a result of our meetings with the community.
But that will be reflected in a CBA or a letter between the parties.
but for now the second floor has an apartment junior one bed of about 250 459 square feet
we're at the eat-in kitchen uh and then the living sleeping space it's kind of like a
little alcove here closet space and then we have another one here and it's identical on the third
floor if i could get to the third floor
there it is backwards for some reason 472 square feet for the one on the left and about 400 square
feet on the right i also think uh andy barrios who is the architect is here as well in case
there's any design questions he can make himself available how about your client
Jason Tran, can you please raise your virtual hand?
There's nobody with that name.
He may be gone.
Since we have to do a resumption hearing, I'm assuming it'll be sometime in June.
I just asked the opportunity to have him just adopt my presentation at that time, if that's okay.
Okay, sure, sure.
Thank you.
I have nothing further.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
I have a question about trash storage.
So I see for the commercial unit that there's a dedicated trash storage, but what about for the four efficiencies?
That trash room is for everyone.
For everyone.
That's correct.
can you walk me through how the four units will have access to it like will they have to go through
the commercial space to access no when they come down they they empty into the foyer okay
and then they would turn right here uh i'm sorry if you could i hope you could see my
we should we see okay cool thank you other questions and then is the office space the
only space that will now have access to the porch?
Oh, good question.
I think so.
And then for the residences, the residents are now only entering from the rear?
If Andy is on, this would be a great time for him to raise his hand.
what's the name uh andy barrios the architect he's the architect yeah there's no one in the
audience with their name okay thank you i guess you would have raised his hand by now
hearing am i right hillary
yes we can we can hold over is there any other questions yeah um just um right now
How many units are in this building?
I mean, on the second and third floor, or is it just a single family dwelling
and you're now proposing to use it this way?
No, the only proposal is the office space.
Everything else is existing condition.
oh when that
okay so there's no refusal here for the number of units yes there is there is
oh okay it's right after the commercial right yeah that's what i'm looking at so
commercial too right yeah that's what i'm looking at so this has already been converted
yes these this is existing conditions on the second and third floor
okay all right and and when was that done or
good question
hold on for one second
I'm going to take a look at
something
this property was purchased
in 2021
again my client isn't here but
what he explained to me is that
when he purchased it in 2021, it was divided into four units. I do not believe the fixtures
that you see, however, were present at purchase. Okay. Zoning records for this also only show this
ever being used as a single family home with the doctor's office on the first floor where the
office is now being proposed. Yeah. And I move all that history into the evidence.
All right. Thank you. Other questions for the board? I still want to clarify. So the tenants,
all four tenants are going to only enter through the rear? It's my understanding that that's
correct. Do you know how wide the side yard is for them to access the rear? There's no dimensions
on the side yard and i apologize for the architect not being here to explain it okay and then uh do
we know where the mail is going like the mailboxes will be for the individual units if the foyer is
at the rear we'll get you that answer thank you for the resumption appreciate it questions
No problem. I'll also get you the answer to the rear and also the side sort of area there.
Hillary?
I don't have any questions at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Planning, do you want to take a...
the planning commission's position might change because i don't believe the four the proposed
four family dwelling is going to survive the rco process okay yeah hi mr richardson good afternoon
again mr chair no good evening rather probably now it's good it's good evening good night right
And I notice you're back here again late at night.
As always, seemingly.
Just for the record, could you state your name?
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
The council is going to reserve her opinion until after the next meeting.
And hopefully the number of units will come down and we'll have a better idea of what they're going to be doing.
OK, thank you very much.
Planny, do you want to take a position now?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission will be holding for the resumption as well.
All right. Thank you.
Hillary, what do we want to do for a date for the resumption in July?
You should, I believe there's a date up there, Mr. Chair, that would use that date.
Thank you.
July 15th, 2025 at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you.
Good night.
Anyone in the audience whose case has not been called?
Mr. Chair, we do have one other matter on the 2 o'clock list.
Go back one, one number.
Which one's it?
Oh, God.
Okay, thank you.
I, I, I lost him here.
MI 2025 000415832 Wynwood Road.
Oleg Sokoloff is the attorney.
Recommendation support from the neighbors of Overbrook Association.
Vote was three to one.
and there is also a petition of 18 signatures.
Mr. Sokolov, could you please state your name
and spell it for the stenographer?
Yes, good evening, Mr. Bergman,
members of the board, Oleg Sokolov
on behalf of Alicia Terry, O-L-E-G-S-O-K-O-L-O-V.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, Mr. Sokolov.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
or stipulate to his accuracy?
Good evening, Mr. Shahid. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all of the required documents and exhibits
required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this?
of this hearing. Yes, we have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much. Members of the board, what we have here is a legalization of an existing use.
The property was purchased as a four-unit by my client, Ms. Terry, in October of 2024,
So very recently, upon finding out very immediately that it was not zoned to be a four-unit, undertook this zoning process.
So I will attempt to be as brief as possible, pausing in a few places of the exhibit packet just to go over a few things.
We have our refusal here.
Here's our deed from 2024 in the name of Ms. Alicia Terry, who's on the line in the virtual audience today.
Here is an image of the property. This is a very common type of property in this area. As you'll see, they're incredibly large, very old, originally single-family homes that most of the block now has been converted to various types of multifamily use.
I'll get to it in a little bit, but just want to mention that this property has a zoning approval for three family, and the previous ownership, unbeknownst to Ms. Terry, undertook the renovations to include a fourth apartment on the second floor.
I also would like the board to know that Ms. Terry purchased this and intends to move into one of the currently four units of the property.
We have some pictures of the properties just so you can see they were newly renovated prior to Ms. Terry's purchase.
And just some exemplar photos of, you know, the very well done renovations, very well, new countertops, new appliances, new cabinetry and all of that, new bathrooms, new plumbing fixtures.
And the property also did have two tenants that were in the property at the time of Ms. Terry's purchase.
The two units, there are two remaining units that are vacant, and as I said, Ms. Terry intends to move into one of the units.
Here's just a picture down Wynwood in one direction, and the other, as I was explaining, it's a very typical type of home on this property, the twins side-by-side with porches that adjoin, and they're also raised properties, so the basement is actually somewhat above grade.
We have no request for any basement living. The basement only contains a mechanical room washer and dryer for the board's reference. And I know that it's going to be a question that's asked later.
the access to the basement. The first floor unit has direct access to the basement from
the property, and the second and third floor units are both accessed through a side door,
which I will show. The house has a large side lot, so the first floor unit is accessed through
here and they have access to the basement directly the second and third floor units are accessed if
the board if i can zoom in a little can see that stairwell right there that is access to to the
second and third floors and then there's also access from externally into the basement along
this side yard as well just an aerial of the property and once again just reiterating that
this is the the typical property on this block they they were enormous enormous single family
homes during their time a little bit on the history of the property i i know this is a very
old zoning file but at one point this property was converted i believe in in the 50s to a
four-unit from the three-unit that it was even at that time, so sometime before, I guess,
we'll just say 1950. I guess it doesn't matter what month in 1950 it was that it was done,
but it was a single-family dwelling prior to that, was then converted to
three apartments, and then, per this zoning permit, was converted to four.
As I said before, this block, this area, most likely because of the size of these properties,
has had a lot of multifamily conversions done, everything ranging from three to nine.
multi-family conversions done everything ranging from three to to nine units and we've mapped it
for you board so you can see that they're all within basically a two-block vicinity of the
subject property these are all properties that have been approved by variance as they're all in
a number say three just our zoning map here our application for appeal obviously no changes to
the height or any kind of dimensions of the property. No additional construction is requested.
This is, again, just an attempt to legalize a use that Ms. Terry unfortunately purchased
in its existing condition without knowledge of its nonconformity. In furtherance of this
application prior to the RCO meeting, Ms. Terry walked around the neighborhood as Chair Bergman
mentioned, got 18 signatures for her petition. I do want to point out we've changed our petition
a little bit and no longer use any kind of form letter. We want to be very explicit
about what exactly we're asking for in the petition itself. So we write out exactly
four dwelling units within the structure and give people the chance to review any plans or documents
related to the project. Also, as mentioned by the chair, we met with the RCO, NOAA, in March 25th.
It, you know, it was, I don't want to say, I guess we didn't get, what was the term from the
previous, overwhelming and emphatic or overwhelming and enthusiastic support, but nonetheless, we did
receive support. And chair, I just wanted to correct, it was only one vote in opposition,
The others were non-opposition.
And then here are notice mailers to 129 nearby residents.
Our proof of tax clearance.
And our notice posters hung both at the front and within the property itself.
At this time, if I may bring on Ms. Terry to...
So before you get your. So in 19, there was a request for three units and now we want four.
That's correct. OK, bring your client on. Thank you.
And if I may, chair, that that request was not made by us that proceeded.
I'm aware. I'm aware. Miss Terry, if you're on the line, could you please raise your virtual hand?
hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
miss terry hi valisha terry v-a-l-i-s-h-a-t-e-r-r-y do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Olak, please proceed. Thank you. Ms. Terry,
did you hear my testimony before the board today? Yes. Okay, and would you adopt it as your own?
Yes. And I know I mentioned that you intend to move into the property. Was that always your
intent when you purchased it? Yes. Okay, and are you able to afford the property if it's not
four units if if you were only renting two of the units at the property
it's a hardship it will be a hardship understood um and when when is it that you intend to move
into the property um okay this month okay and members of the board one thing i i just didn't
go over the the layout so the first floor is uh is just one unit which is a three bedroom one bath
The second floor is, there are two units, a one-bedroom, one-bath, and a studio.
Ms. Terry, it's correct to say you intend to move into the one-bedroom unit on the second floor, correct?
Yes, that's correct.
And the third floor is two bedrooms and one bath.
All of the trash is stored along the side here in this little access alley.
And Ms. Terry, there's no living in the basement, correct?
It's just the mechanical room?
Right. No living.
And there's a washer dryer down there for the residents. Yes. And all of the residents are able to access the basement through the external door on the side, correct?
Yes, through external. Yep. Is it maybe I should have clarified, is it one door to go into the units and then one door to go into the basement?
they're separate doors or are they both once you enter the basement is connected to the first floor
unit so she that tenant can access it through that and or she could go through the back door
Or she could go through the back door as well as, like, the second and third floor.
as well as like the second and third floor
No, I mean for the second and third floor.
Are there two separate doors to go into the apartments and to go into the basement?
Or is it, like, you go in?
And because the access for the apartments is up the porch and the access to the basement is just on the side of the house, correct?
Right.
Thank you.
Nothing further from us, Terry.
questions from the board yes i have uh similar to the last one i have a question about trash
storage and i know you said it's on the on the side but how wide is that side alley or walkway
i am sorry i do not have that answer for you but i can go to eclipse and try to ascertain it quickly
okay so from the property line it's if i if i may show the board what i'm looking at on atlas as as
you can see you know the property is a is not a perfect rectangle um and then from the property
line which it appears that the neighboring property might be crossing it but
i mean i think you're looking at the shadow cast the reason i ask is because the neighbor
both properties have a paved area and they have a grass area and the paved area it looks thin on
both sides and i'm just trying to determine are the is the trash going to be stored on the grass
area or the paved area because it is a very narrow walkway and it is the only form of egress from the
rear of the building which it sounds like where the main entrance is going to be for the four
apartments and it's the only access to the backyard so miss terry perhaps you can shed some light on
exactly how the uh where because this is existing as the board knows so the trash cans have been
there for some time um miss terry if you could just shed some light on exactly what's going on
there on the side yeah there is a pave the trash cans are stored on a paved area and it doesn't
connect to the grass area so there's enough room even though it looks tight where you can just walk
freely by the trash without actually actually being in the grass you can walk freely on the
pave way without being in the grass if that makes sense and are the trash cans be hot like towards
the back of the house after the door or are they um closer to the street there's like a there's
like a crawl space so it's kind of like tucked in on the side almost um would that be like this
little area here for this i'm on the wrong screen let me see here also it'd be really nice if there
were photos that uh explained all of this understood of course yeah um so um what were
you asking oleg i'm sorry i was asking is it one of these like little jut in areas or yeah so that
one it's more so that one than a crawl space yeah how many how many cans are you gonna have for the
four units total so um so there should be four cans when i when i bought the um home there was
actually three tenants living in so there were three cans that was only approved for three
yeah previously right okay other questions and miss win if i may um just as i stated before
so the only part portion of the property that's being accessed along that side alley i'll call it
where the trash cans are being stored is is the basement the access to the the units themselves
is actually from the porch on the side so everybody's coming through a common foyer at the
front for all four units no no no no so unit one goes in through this blue door yep and then that's
the first floor unit the units oh they're coming through the the porch i will say so the second
and third floor go to the side of the house and if you can see that railing
yes back there so to access the residences nobody goes past the cans the only time to
go past the cans is if they're going to the mechanical room or the washer dryer in the
basement okay and then on the on your atlas overview can you show me approximately where
the door to the basement is that everyone can access oh on my atlas view yeah sure um
Ms. Terri, would you, if I move my cursor, can you see it?
I don't see it right now.
I don't see it right now. Okay, yes.
Okay, yes.
So is the door that accesses the basement, is it in one of these cutouts?
So is the door that actually...
Is it in between it? Is it a little closer?
No, it's more so where you were. I'm sorry.
Right here.
I'm confused now. Okay, this is the crawl space.
So it's further back to the rear of the house.
Yeah, right in here. Yes.
I have no further questions.
I have a few questions. When did you purchase this property?
October of 2024.
Okay. And at the time you purchased the property, there were three units?
No, no. At the time, Ms. Terry purchased the property.
oh yes so there were three units at that time there were four units
and miss terry it was represented to you as a four unit correct when you purchased it
yes that's correct and who represented this to you
the i guess the the relator of the seller i think yeah
Okay. But OLAG, if it was in 2019, it was approved for three. Am I correct?
That's correct. That's correct.
Right. And then now she wants four.
Correct. She wants to just, she purchased it after, I think they approved it for three, did an additional renovation that they didn't receive approval for, and then sold it to Ms. Terry. And we're just trying to legalize the existing condition.
And is any of, are any of these units located in the basement? Is there any household living in the basement of this property?
There's absolutely no basement living. It is just mechanical rooms and a washer dryer that's accessible to everyone in the building.
So we're certainly, it's already in existing condition, but any proviso of no basement living is more than acceptable, of course.
and you're not showing any floor plans
so that we know how these really are.
You're just showing a few pictures.
That's correct.
We were, you know, after the expense of this,
we were just attempting to save Ms. Terry some money.
I see.
You're going to take a few more pictures, though.
Fair enough, Mr. Johns, I hear you.
and that note will be taken for any future time
that I have before you.
And then I'm still having a little problem
with understanding how we get into these four different units.
So you said that there's a three-bedroom unit
on the first floor?
That's correct.
And that one is accessed through this front door directly.
And then on the second floor,
how many units are there? There are two units on the second floor, one of which is the one that
Ms. Terry intends to live in. Okay. And how many bedrooms, how many baths for these two
units on the second floor? One of the units on the second floor is a two-bedroom, one-bath,
and the other one is a studio with one-bath. Okay. And then on the third floor, there's a
two bedroom and one bed that's correct okay all right and how do we how do we get into those
units so if you said you're pointing to some railing over here on the side so are there
stairs there or what i mean without without any kind of floor plans a little hard to
sure so this this railing if you can see i i apologize for the the lack of additional pictures
or floor plans but this railing if you can see is a bit raised from the porch level so it's about
three steps up that leads to a side door oh okay so so let me say something uh olag there's just
so much of this we can't see we don't know i mean i'm gonna we're gonna put this for in for a
resumptive hearing because we just you know you can't see the side you can't see the units and
And I'm not I'm not complaining, but it's just hard to understand it.
Like, you know. What should you know, show me what it looked like when there was you know, when we knew there was three units and then somewhere along the line, it became four.
What does that look like and where was that at?
So I'm going to right now, we're going to continue this and bring you back in.
And I think you have to make it clear to show some shots on the side, show some floor plans.
You have to show some shots on the side, show some floor plans, so that we at least know what's going on.
So there will be at least no...
And it's just really hard to figure out what's going on with this, right?
Understood, Chair. And if I may just ask, do you plan on continuing it or just having a resumptive hearing just because of the difference in notice posters and things of that nature?
We will have a resumption hearing.
We're going to have a resumptive hearing, and it'll be July 15th, 2025, at 9.30 a.m.
Understood.
Okay, and, you know, we just, we've got to move on, okay?
Understood.
Thank you, members of the board.
And just so you know, if you have any questions, call the office about what you think you need, but I think you understand what we're looking for.
Certainly, we'll certainly have additional pictures, and we'll get some rudimentary floor plans.
All right, thank you very much.
Thank you.
okay is there anyone in the audience whose case has not been called
what do you say for the two o'clock list for the for the two o'clock list
okay so now we're heading to the 3 30 list
thank you so much
Okay. All right. So, let me start here. Good evening, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the meeting of the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment. With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Sheila L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member, Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member, Taya Wynn.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, our zoning board director, Ian Haggerty, and our board administrator, Lakeisha Dandy.
Recording of this hearing will be posted on the ZBA website.
By participating, you consent to be recorded.
This is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities.
Whether remote or in person, if you're called to speak, you must state and spell your name, then wait to be sworn in.
Once you've been sworn in, please state your name each time before beginning your testimony.
Any person may enter their appearance to become an interested party to a case.
There are three ways to enter your appearance.
You can identify the case property address on your Zoom webinar.
You can see a staff member, or you can call the ZBA appearance line by the close of business tomorrow.
Call 267-270-5548.
Leave a message that includes your email address and address of the property of the appeal case.
The following guidance is for remote attendees. First, when directed by your chair, you must raise your virtual hand in order to be recognized to speak. Second, if you're called to testify, you will be prompted to join as a panelist. Please accept the request and turn on your camera.
Third, the webinar Q&A for questions about the hearing.
Do not comment on cases in the Q&A.
Fourth, if you are participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
For our in-person attendees, please refrain from talking, eating, or drinking during the hearings.
Verbal and physical aggression will not be tolerated.
Restrooms are crossed from the elevators.
By the way, there's nobody here.
so so i'm so so i'm going to uh see what our schedule is like right now
so i have three cases that are um together that um so number five mi 2024
4-0-0-7-3-8-5-5-30-North Preston Street, number 6, MI 2024, 007-386-532, Preston Street,
and number 7, MI 2024, 007-387-534, Preston Street. In all three cases, the lawyer and also
So the the council person has requested a continuance.
Those cases will be continued until 10, 8, 25 at 3.30 p.m.
We also have case number five, MI 2024, 007377, 4636 Oakland Street.
Lyra Cupid is the listed applicant.
um lyric b cupid the living trust is the listed owner there are no exhibits this is the first
listing this may need an attorney lira cupid okay so mi2024 007377 the case is continued
The case is continued until 10-08-25 at 3-30 and marked must be heard.
until 10 08 25 at three
We're going to go to our first case, MI 2024-007-169-2200 South Kroski Street.
Destiny Sharice Royal is the owner applicant.
Hello.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Destinee Sharice Royal. First name is D-E-S-T-I-N-E-E hyphen capital C-H-A-R-I-S-S-E. Last name is R-O-Y-A-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
This is for change of use to a two-family household living in an existing structure. One-use refusal, two-family household living without commercial space is prohibited in the CMX2 zoning district. There is a letter of support from the Tasker Morris neighbors, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good evening. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have, sir.
Thank you. You may proceed and share your screen.
Yep, you're up.
You all see everything? Okay.
We do.
Great. Okay.
So why don't you tell us what you want to do?
Yeah, so this is an existing property, CMX2, two-story,
and I would like to turn it into a two-family home. By right, it would be able to be a store
on the first floor, but it's not set up to do so. The property is an existing residential
structure, and it is too high up to be compliant with ADA to get a ramp, and it's not set up to
be a commercial unit. This is the zoning for it, and it's the original plan that was submitted
to L&I. As you can see from the schematic on the right, there are stairs on the Jackson
Street side that go into the property, and the elevation is quite high. It's almost four
feet. So there's several steps you have to go to to reach up that way. And so I'm seeking a variance
to alter the interior of the two-story property to two-family. This is a block in a neighborhood
full of RM1 structures with residential duplex conversions allowable by right. The subject
property is zone CMX2 like other corner lots, but unlike the other corner lots, the existing
structure was originally built for residential use, and it was never set up to be commercial
storefront, and it's close to gray commercial entrance. This is a close-up of the zoning map.
You can see the project site is my house. It's a CMX2. Everything else around it is RM1.
This is similar to what I just said, but it's approximately three feet, eight inches elevation,
And it has six steps up to the first floor level.
This makes it an unnecessary hardship to make it compliant with the ADA, Americans with
Disabilities Act, to provide wheelchair accessibility.
This is an example, one block just to the east at 2200 South 22nd Street.
You can see that there are only two steps there, which would make it easy to be more
accessible and the windows are quite low to the ground. This is the view of my house, and you can
see that the stairs go up several steps. So again, the configuration is not set up for commercial use.
Existing wall and floor assembly, and I'll show you some pictures, do not currently comply with
the rated assemblies required in past building codes. So I'm requesting a variance or special
exception for change of use permits that are necessary to convert the property to a residential
duplex. This is the entryway. This is facing out to Jackson Street. This is the main entrance to
the house. So you see the view looking out, you see the view looking towards Krosky Street,
side, and you see the view that is towards the party wall.
This is the upstairs.
These are where the stairs lead to.
This is the hallway with the view towards the back of the house.
And then towards facing Kroski.
And this is the front room that faces Kroski, where the triple window is.
and this is the front room that faces Kroski where the triple window bay is.
This is the basement. These are the stairs to the basement. This is the view towards the
Kroski side in the middle and towards the back of the house on the Jackson Street side.
There are several windows. One of them is actually obscured by some film tape,
but there is quite a lot of light with it being a corner property and the windows being so big.
This is a view from the Jackson Street side of that same 2200 South 22nd Street, which is a block away.
Mine, in comparison, again, the windows are much higher off of the ground, as is the main doorway.
You can also see the back of the house, which has a little patio area, and there is an exterior door there.
This is the site plan for my structural engineer. This shows what it could look like with changes
to convert it to a duplex. Here you can see on the bottom right that there is a staircase added
on the Krosky Street side where the bay is and one of the windows would be converted to a door
and a stairway would hug the party wall
going upstairs to the second floor unit.
Also, there would be living space in the basement
and these on the left side,
you can see a new staircase exterior
going to the basement
and the existing stairs would be removed.
This is, oops, sorry about that.
This is a drawing of the interior to see how it could be changed to be a duplex.
Again, the short side is the Krosky side.
I'll do the first floor first, which is to the right.
There you see the stairs hugging the short side, which is Krosky, going up into the first floor.
And then the stairway hugging the party wall going up to the second floor, which would be a two-bedroom apartment. There's two bedrooms. I'm sorry. Upstairs would be two bedrooms, yes, but this is the first floor plan.
So there would be two bedrooms on the first floor, a bathroom, and then the basement would be the living space, and it would have a half bath, some utilities, and also the kitchen.
So this would be the main living space.
The idea is that the first floor would have easier egress for occupants in case of an emergency.
And there will be a lot more light than having a basement with bedrooms.
This is a close-up.
I've drawn these arrows here to show the exterior stairs from each of the angles,
from the first floor and also from the basement.
This is, again, the exterior on the Krosky Street side.
So just having them side by side, seeing the addition of the stairs.
on the Crosky Street side and the conversion from a window to a door.
I'm not an attorney. I'm doing this all by myself. I wasn't sure exactly what you all did.
You're doing a great job. You're doing a great job.
Thank you.
I thought maybe you were an attorney personally.
No, I just followed the directions. The attorneys could take some notes.
I'm just following the directions. I wasn't sure if I was meant to do the revised proviso plan
because what I submitted to Ellen, I initially, the site plan was not part of that. It was just
the zoning plan. So for the site plan, I wasn't sure if that needed a revised proviso, but just
in case I filled one out. But this just explains the things that I discussed just now. This is
the refusal that I had on the left. And it was saying that because it's a CMX2 property, which
is typically just commercial on the first floor. That was the reason for the refusal. On the right
is the letter from the Tasker Morris Neighborhood Association, which was support after the community
meeting. This was my application for appeal. Everything on here is I'd drawn already in the
presentation. This was my tax clearance certificate, which I got twice now as my case
my case was continued. On the right is the beginning of my deed from 2020. These are the
additional pages of it. This is the posting of my zoning notice for this hearing. And
And this was the letter I sent out to 235 neighbors and community members.
this was the letter I sent out to 230.
This is the certificate of mailings for all 235 of those mailings along with those addresses.
And that concludes my presentation.
Questions from the board?
First of all, I appreciate that you're asking for a zoning approval prior to doing any work.
this is the first step so appreciate that um the uh the the depth of the basement below grade
there was a section i believe it's five foot if you can go back to that section
or that that shows that um you mean the site plan yeah the site plan and on your basement plan it
looks like four foot something are you eliminating windows because on your basement plan it looks
like the when some a lot of the windows are gone no the um the only window that might be compromised
is the one by the um stairs on the krosky street side like i i would love for it to stay in this
just be a metal stair but um the way it's drawn now that um is the one that possibly could be
eliminated but the others um would get to stay i think the one that's by the the door i'm sorry
by the stair the exterior stairs would become a door or it would be like converted to a door
i think that's how that that is set up
okay do you want the i think i have a closer up version but i don't know if
that's helpful it's just the top of it it doesn't have the no i was looking at the basement the
walls of the basement look like when i looked when i saw looked at the the pictures it looks
like there are more windows on the basement on the at the basement level than you show on your
plan so but if you're not planning to take out any windows oh that's no i mean the point um is to
have as many windows um as much light as possible giving us a corner property i'm not trying to
take any of that away if i you know if it can be helped if there's a structural concern after
you know opening up the stairs or something you know then that would be the compromise but
as it is now it would be try to keep as much light and air down there as possible. Okay and only that
that only that basement first floor unit has the access to the rear yard. Yeah as it's set up now.
Other questions?
Questions from our attorney?
Just a just a brief comment just to clarify for you. So this is a change of use application so
plans were not required. I know you submitted them to L&I and that was fine, but just you don't need
there's not plans attached to this application that'll be if this is approved to your building
permits and all that moving forward. So I just wanted to clarify that for you. Okay, thank you
so much. I wasn't sure, but I knew that when I went to the community meeting after I was speaking
with Mr. Reeves, he's like, you know, people kind of want to know what it looks like and stuff. So
you should have something. So right, right. I just want to clarify for you. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I know
All of this is, I guess, subject to change. It has not been submitted to L&I. I wouldn't do that until I got zoning approval for the space. So thank you for coming.
No problem.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Planning commission.
Amy Boyd with the planning commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from CMX 2 commercial mixed use to RSA 5 residential single family.
The property has a documented history as a single family dwelling with no ground floor commercial.
A second unit in the place of a commercial space is more in line with the spirit of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variance for no ground floor commercial space and for two units.
Thank you.
MI 2024-007-169-2200
South Crosskey Street, I say
an enthusiastic yes.
My vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Taya Nguyen, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, by the way. You did a wonderful job, seriously.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
Do I need to do anything else here?
no you're good okay so i will uh exit the meeting thank you so much thank you
number two mi 2024 007374 12737 ella nora road jennifer betzillo is the attorney
there's a letter of support from parkwood civic association the vote was
32 in support 10 in opposition and a letter of non-opposition from council member o'neill
The applicant also has 17 letters of support from neighbors off the immediate block.
from neighbors off the immediate block.
Hi, Jennifer. Hi, please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Sure. Jennifer Bazidlow, B-A-Z-Y, D as in dog, L as in Larry, O as in Oscar.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Sinclair Velasquez, and he is the property owner.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Please proceed and share your screen.
so i'm gonna try to keep this quick because i know it's been a long day and i think that
that will be generally have support here so um i'm just going to go through a couple of exhibits
here um like i said uh this is a single family home um for sinclair velasquez he lives there
with his wife tiana his two kids and um his mother-in-law as well um basically what happened
here i submitted uh refusal deed proof of tax payment just so we can scroll through quickly
here there's the zero tax balance um letter of support from parkwood um and let's see okay we'll
keep going from here uh there's also a bunch of other stuff but you've seen them so let's just
get to the photos. All right. So what we have here is, um, one, two, seven, three, seven El
North street is that end of a row, uh, RSA for property, um, that, uh, single family home. Um,
and in that, uh, the Velasquez's have lived in since I believe 2020, um, last fall, uh,
They constructed this carport, not realizing that having a permanent, they had had a temporary carport there and not realizing that when they made it a permanent structure anchored into the ground that that required permits and they received a violation.
And within a few weeks, they had taken action to correct that violation and go about the permit process, hiring me and an architect within a few days to try to remedy the problem.
I will note that Mr. Velasquez is a Philadelphia police officer, so he is attempting to follow the rules and laws of the city and just didn't know that this was one of them.
So when we submitted to L&I, the issue basically is, when we look at the refusal, is that the carport is in the required front yard.
The front yard here, the existing building is set back 19 feet, and the required front yard is 15 feet.
There is nowhere to put a surface parking spot or the carport that is not in a required front yard space.
So we don't have any further construction planned.
It would be approving what is there.
obviously we need to go back through and if a zoning permit is obtained go through and get
the building permits and make sure everything is done to code only modifications that would be made
would be if if there was somehow an additional requirement necessary
in order to make sure that this structure was code compliant
single family home going to maintain single family use
um so i just wanted to say too that prior to meeting with the community group mr velasquez
did um go out and specifically talk to his neighbors um it's a rather small block um and
he was able to talk to a lot of them i just wanted to highlight this one um from danielle
his neighbor danielle who lives across the street specifically noting that he's a really great
neighbor and that they enjoy looking at the carport. They think it's an improvement, not
a detriment to the aesthetics of the neighbors. And with that, we did go to meet with Parkwood
Civic in March. It was a very well-attended meeting. There's 50 people there. I will note
but none of them were the neighbors from this block.
So when we look at these numbers,
you can see a large amount of support
You can see a large amount of support from the overall community, and that is in addition to the support of the near neighbors as well.
from the overall community.
And that is an
And really, the people who were in opposition were nowhere near this property, and in general were just opposed.
I'm not exactly sure what was going on, but they weren't near neighbors.
So with that, I just want to say that, you know, again, this is going to be we're going to make sure it has all the permits correct and that everything is brought up to, you know, is or is brought up to code.
You can see the plans here we have drawn.
So the hardship is really we have no other place to park this car.
and even parking on the surface spot requires a variance because it's in the required front yard
even though that is pretty much what people on this block do you can see all the cars parked
in driveways in front of these houses on this block I will also note that this is a end of row
so there's additional parking for this particular property and some of the other overflow on the
corner here um there we go um minimum necessary uh is we're just asking to park the car in the
driveway and have this open air carport it's not blocking light and air access it's open on all the
sides um so it's not blocking sight lines views air flow anything like that um won't harm the
neighbors use the property as this is pretty much in line with what other neighbors are doing as
well and remaining a single family home and this is well supported by both the local neighbors and
the overall community. Why don't you bring your client on? Sure Mr. Velasquez are you here can
you raise your hand? Hopefully he's here he's been talking to me.
He's coming back and he's a penalist.
Okay, thank you.
Can you guys hear me?
I can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good evening. My name is Sinclair Velasquez. My first name of spelling is S-I-N-C-L-A-I-R. Last name Velasquez, V-E-L-A-S-Q-U-E-Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you try to put whatever your video is, could you put it on yourself because we're seeing the floor right now?
in your hand there you go hey okay all right please proceed counsel uh mr velasquez i just
want to um double check with you you are the property owner and you live at this property
correct yes ma'am and you heard by testimony here today and believe it to be truthful and accurate
yes ma'am and you would adopt it as your own yes thank you questions from the board
Yes, I have a question about the sort of columns on the carport.
And do you know if there were foundations for it to anchor them into the asphalt?
Mr. Velasquez, do you know the answer to that question?
They were lag-boated onto the foundation of the concrete and lag-boated to the posts of the pillars.
And then what's the material that the over that the roof is or the covering is made out of that is made by by wood and underneath is is just the bottom portion of like of like porch.
And then what's on the top?
top it's it's uh yeah it's a special made uh like a rollout roof that's supposed to it heats up for
snow and then did you get an engineer to come in and measure it for snow load well just me me my
brother my brother he's um he was actually giving me advice and and helping me because he's also a
He was actually giving me advice and helping me because he's also a contractor, but he was just telling me, guiding me through the process as he helped me build it.
contractor.
Was this custom built or did you order it from, like, was a shop drawing done by the manufacturer or did you get an engineer to come out?
You have a very nice car.
I'm just, I want to make sure that it doesn't, the snow doesn't, you know, collapse the roof onto your car.
yeah i will also add that we will go back through and make sure that it's building code compliant
because that'll be part of the process of resolving violations sorry i didn't mean to
cut you off sinclair um i just wanted to add in that that go ahead and then my other question is
uh do you at the point that you purchased the house did it not have a garage because it does
look like a lot of your neighbors have
garages off that driveway?
Some of the houses had
garage. It just had the
garage door, but then it would just use
for my property, it would just
use for storage.
They minimized the garage
and made it into
a bathroom.
driveway and the fence
were existing. All you added were
the covering.
And the four posts. Yes, ma'am. OK. Other questions?
Just out of curiosity, where did you get the idea to do this?
The idea was, well, I was looking around the neighborhood and I've seen people did curb cutouts.
But then I talked to my neighbors and told them, hey, how would you guys feel instead of a curb cutout?
how about a carport because it's being considerate of taking up another parking spot especially a
corner property now you have two driveways which is and i was like you know so the neighbors were
more or less in agreeance with oh carport's cool because you say it was a parking spot because a
lot of neighbors on my that live in my area have two to three cars so there was more considerate
of the carport then okay all right other questions for the board
so there is there where is the curb cut here no that was another that was just another route
yeah it was existing right here and he was talking about instead of putting this carport here
putting it somewhere else on his property um instead of just using the existing driveway
with the carport over it um so this is an existing curb cut that's already there
okay because it was a driveway before right correct okay all right uh questions or comments
okay and and you didn't get any kind of um refusals for all this fencing around here
no the the fencing is rather low and open so um when you say low and open
are you talking about the black railing fencing yes yes so that that is um the black railing
fences is you know uh code compliant fencing that was already there okay and when you say
code compliant how high is this fence four feet and more than 50 percent open um open
that fencing is four feet
because if you look at the other fence that it backs up to this is a six foot fence
all right thank you questions or comments from our attorney
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing single-family residential RSA-4.
There are no unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the zoning code.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variance for a carport required in the front yard setback.
Thank you.
MI 2024-007-374-1273, Eleanor Road, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, I vote yes.
Cheryl Gaston, I vote no.
Taiwan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
You have your vote, sir.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
I want to say thank you to everybody, you know, for actually listening to my case.
And I really do appreciate you guys and what you guys do to keep the city in compliance.
I really do appreciate you guys and what you guys do to keep the city in
compliance.
Thank you.
I just like the car.
Cool car, right?
All right.
Have a good night, guys.
All right.
So long.
Right.
Good night.
So number four, MI 2024, 007382, 736 Medina Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Unanimous non-opposition from Passion Square
and a letter non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Good evening.
Council, you are our last case of the day.
If I remember, you were already sworn this morning.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Ms. Reagan Cooper, who is the owner of the property.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I'm going to share with the board what was previously submitted as exhibits.
This is an application before the board for dimensional variances relating to a property owned by my client.
She's looking to expand the property, the actual building to the rear to give themselves a little more space.
The dimensional standards for RSA 5 trigger two refusals, one of which is a rear yard setback of nine foot.
We're asking for six feet and a proposed occupied area of 76.19% where 75% is permitted.
This property is a very small property.
It's part of the reason why we received unanimous support from the community.
If you look at the zoning map, actually, it gives you a good feel for what we're seeking.
This is a small lot on a small block, and this is our building, my client's building.
As you can see, it has never been extended.
It came with its original small size.
Most of the block has had some kind of extension done.
What we're asking for is actually less than what many have already done on the block.
This is the property in question.
Here's the front.
this is the rear. An extension would actually put it kind of in line and not even past the
building that's already present there. And then the next door's first floor would still extend
all the way to the property line, which is further than ours. But there's still a little
side court between the two. This is my client's rear yard interior. Now, my client does have some
medical conditions that's making it harder for her to go up and down the steps to her second
floor. One of the main reasons for the extension is to add a bathroom on the first floor and also
to allow the second floor to have a little more space. I'm going to jump to the plans and
show the board what we're looking for. So from an extension standpoint, we're not extending
the basement. That'll essentially be a crawl space, not an actual basement. And then the extension
really covers this portion. These two-floor extension allows the bathroom to be added and
extends the bedroom. One of the things here I want to point out to the board is that under the zoning
code, had my client's lot been 45 feet deep, then we would have not had the occupied area refusal at
all, and we would only need to have a one-foot variance for the rear yard, my client's property
happens to be 45 feet, one inch, and five-sixths too deep. So it's one inch too deep, essentially,
which trigger both refusals. I want to point out that it really is a hardship to have enough
living space for my client without the extension, and the dimensional variance would not negatively
impact any of the neighbors. As you saw from the earlier map, most of the neighbors are actually,
their properties are deeper than my clients. So given that we're asking for the board's
favorable review of this request for a dimensional variance for both the rear yard and the de minimis
occupied area change. I'm happy to answer any questions and my client is here to verify my
testimony. Why don't you bring your client on? Sure. Reagan, can you please raise your hand
virtually to be identified?
They have been promoted to
penalist.
Aye, Reagan.
hi Regan can you unmute Regan sorry hello hi how are you could you could you turn your video on
please yes I just did sure thank you very much could you state your name and spell for the
court stenographer um it's jennifer reagan cooper um reagan is spelled r-e-g-a-n and cooper is c-o-o-p-e-r
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you uh reagan did you hear my testimony before the
board and see my presentation on the screen? Yes, I did. Can you verify what I have represented
is true and correct and adopt my testimony as your own? Yes, I do. Thank you. Questions from
the board. I just want to confirm that we're no longer doing the roof deck. There's no roof deck
on the plant. I don't believe there was
a roof deck
proposed.
On the second floor,
there's going to be a small...
I'm sorry, there is a balcony.
Yes, the balcony is still
included in the plants.
There is.
And there's no refusal for that.
There's nothing on top of it, though.
It will be
essentially like
a small balcony outside
that's uncovered so it is open to the sky um if that would arguably can be considered a deck
it is not part of the refusal on the that's not what the notes say well yeah so if you go go can
you mind going back to the plans let me go back to the plans because the refusal the refusal says
a two-story edition and then a one-story edition with a roof deck like on top of it
yes that's access from the balcony
that's well that's access
from the second floor
so that's the balcony
right there yes that is essentially
the roof deck as well on the first floor
there's something
there's something under it
it's on top of this part of the building
got you okay
it's part of the extension
okay other questions
questions or comments from our attorney
not at this time
questions or comments from the virtual audience
no chair
planning commission
Amy Boyd with the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends
no change in zoning at this location
from the existing residential single
family RSA 5
the requested occupied area
occupied area variance is de minimis
and requested rear yard depth is
characteristic of the block. The Planning
Commission recommends the board grant the requested
variances for occupied area and rear yard depth.
Thank you. MI 2024
007 382
736 Medina
Street. I vote yes.
I vote Johns. My vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston. My vote is yes.
Tayewan. My vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid. My vote
is yes. Thank you.
Have a good evening. Thank you, counsel.
is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called
no he is here and we're getting done early tonight this is great
baby said said to the father the other night could you tell that good night