I'll bring up the elevation so you can visualize this, the building height is just under 51 feet
high. So at that point, really just a de minimis deviation from what the code would allow.
As the board has likely heard in many other cases, the Planning Commission has recommended
CMX 2.5 zoning along much of the Lancaster Avenue corridor, which would permit height of 55 feet
high. The point here is merely that the Lancaster Avenue corridor, as a commercial corridor, continues
to improve, and this application's appropriate contribution to the corridor requires a much
more substantial commercial space than the applicable 45-foot height maximum can reasonably
accommodate. In support of this, I will point the board to Exhibit 11, which again supports that
this property sits among a very important commercial corridor that you can see from
the photographs is suffering to practically non-existent at this point. And then the city's
vacancy map, which you can see on the next page here, further supports this notion, showing both
the swath of blue and red indicating both vacant land and vacant buildings that surround this
particular property now again the board might recall that you have granted many other variances
along this same corridor for similar height relief such as 4151 lancaster avenue at 66 feet tall
4237 Lancaster Avenue at 62 feet tall, and most recently, 4320 Lancaster Avenue at 66 feet tall,
just like the proposal today. These projects all involve similar height variances and will
continue to mark a dramatic shift in this commercial corridor, allowing for benchmark
large-format tenants to participate in its recovery. The West Park District Plan does
further support the upzoning here to concentrate commercial activity to key intersections and
streets, especially those served by frequent transit, as I showed on the map at Exhibit 8.
Page 59 of that district plan specifically states that new development can be incrementally
added on the several parcels of vacant and underutilized land that borders the north 52nd
street intersection intending to create an improved gateway to the 52nd street corridor
and the park west town center this project that's before you today as well as the other phases
will directly support that goal in conclusion the applicant submits that the proposal will
not increase congestion, endanger the public, or impair light and air. The property sits in
close proximity to a vast public transit network in the immediate area, including multiple bus
routes and the trolley line. The height here will not be out of character with other existing
buildings, nor can it negatively impact any surrounding uses, and will further blend with
any future development that occurs in the ICMX zones across the street. As always, a thorough
analysis is included at Exhibit 12, and I can expand on any particular point. So if you wouldn't
mind swearing in my client. Sir, could you please state and spell your name for this
stenographer? German Yakubov, G-E-R-M-A-N-Y-A-K-U-B-O-V. Do you swear or affirm and tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Counsel. Thank you. German, I talked a lot
about the vision for this commercial space and the necessity to provide large high ceilings modern
space can you just talk through briefly your vision for the space and in particular your
proof of concept if you will sure so the building next door that we moved our headquarters in on the
second floor um the first floor had about 18 foot tall ceilings and we were able to attract a boxing
gym there that or their second location the first one's in northeast philadelphia and the what we
found is that having taller ceilings for commercial spaces tends to cast the widest net for possible
tenants especially in an area like this that is currently underserved um we want to be able to
attract and um offer our space to as many people as we could so the other thing is as part of what
meredith mentioned the other two phases of the development the commercial space is intended to
in part be subdivided into smaller places to be able to give access to businesses that are kind
of quasi-established but don't have a brick and mortar operation for instance like a like a pizza
Like a pizza truck that, you know, doesn't have the space for an actual physical location, a mobile barbershop or other kind of businesses that need a, that have a following but don't have the capital to invest or the credit worthiness to invest in a commercial space.
truck that uh you know doesn't have the space for uh
So this first kind of foray into this neighborhood would be there to attract those kind of businesses.
There's a container village on Parkside Avenue right now that's there, and it's a great concept.
The issue is there's not a lot of density in that area to attract people to basically have those businesses thrive.
So here what we've proposed is having the density of the customers above the businesses that we're going to be proposing.
So we're hoping that these businesses are going to be successful.
There are other buildings that have opened up on Lancaster Avenue that currently do have vacancies.
They're not as dense, yet the commercial space that they've offered is also quite large.
So we're hoping that the synergies between the increase in density, as well as the accessibility
to the trolley lines, the CEPTA lines, and also the infrastructure of the 52nd Street
shopping center with the Lowe's, the ShopRite, Planet Fitness, all those places that are
there, they're going to create, they're going to attract both residents and businesses to
the area.
And then can you just briefly talk about property management?
property management in terms of trash disposal and how so how you sort of manage so just like
with all of our businesses we both build and manage our buildings we don't sell them so in
this specific instance we're going to have trash pick up four times a week there's a trash chute
that's designated off the street and a driveway for the trash to be picked up as Meredith's about
show on the site plan uh in between the two buildings right there uh that'll also act as
the loading zone area for the people to move in so it wouldn't block traffic it wouldn't um uh you
know have any negative impact on on traffic coming and going on that element but from a property
management perspective we manage all of our properties and in this instance our office is
literally on the same parcel and next door thank you questions from the board you know mr chairman
i didn't have him adopt my testimony um german in addition to what you stated uh did you hear
all the testimony and evidence that i offered in front of the board today i did and do you agree
that testimony is true and accurate and would you adopt it as if you had given it yourself
i do sorry about that thank you questions from the board can you speak to to some of the uh
questions and comments that were raised by the community
i don't think there were specific ones regarding this specific building but in general the biggest
pushback was parking.
One of them was just the height of the building.
Like you said, your office is, that was an existing building where your offices are now.
What's the difference?
It looks like that's a pretty tall building, one of the taller buildings on that block.
Do you know the difference in that current building to what you're proposing?
How many feet is different?
It's about 30 feet.
So you want to go 30 feet higher than that?
Than that building, correct.
Okay. And what is the, you know, I know that by right it's 45 plus with the elevator. Is there, what's the hardship of not doing 45? I know you would lose some units, but you can still have a higher, keep the commercial space higher, but you would lose a couple floors. Is that, if I'm not mistaken?
That's correct. Yeah.
Particular hardship about that.
Well, the particular hardship is we wouldn't be able to have a viable commercial space on the first floor if we do that.
You could if you had less residential units. I guess that's the question.
right but then the building wouldn't be profitable right so the the commercial space um we're not
relying on the commercial space to support the project just like we mentioned there have been
plenty new construction buildings on lancaster avenue that have vacancies on the first floor
like nobody's renting that space right so uh we're relying on the income from the
apartments above to basically pay for the commercial space that's below
Do you know how many units you would get if you are at the buy right limit?
The units is, there's no variance for the number of units.
I know, I'm asking, do you know how many units you would be able to have?
But you would, how many units, you're asking for how many with the height?
It's 45 units.
45, regardless, that's what you're saying.
So it'll still be 45 units.
You want to make sure that your commercial space has high ceilings, correct?
so if you don't have I mean what's the how small I guess would you be willing to like if you had to
reduce that height on the commercial space how far would you be willing to go with that or you
just want to you want high ceilings or no commercial well it's not that it's high ceilings 16 feet is
typically the average for you to attract anybody that has people coming into its location right
anybody that has people coming into its location, right? Like anything small, like here,
Like anything small like here
it's probably 14 foot ceilings in here, right? So believe it or not. Okay. So do you have an idea
of the commercial tenants that you're looking for? Because if that doesn't, you don't, every
commercial space doesn't need 16 feet. That's correct. So if it wasn't, it would be something
like an office space or something like a small insurance agency or something that doesn't see
clients it would just be somebody that would be in a private office effectively i guess my question
is this is only about six feet taller than a like typical ceiling regular ceiling is 10 feet so i
think you know you're asking for 21 feet of height relief for what you're arguing is for a six foot
need what's happening with the other 15 feet sure so in a typical so if ideally we could build this
by right right so if we were to stick this to 45 feet right away that's what i'm getting at so if
we were to stick with 45 feet we would have 30 foot uh 30 feet of commercial on the on lancaster
avenue and it would be capped at eight feet tall right so your choice you could also again have
less units right but again i think part of the issue here as you could see from a lot of the
photographs the aerials if if commercial is going to be viable here there has to be there has to be
density to support that so and that was something that i think the board recognized in other similar
cases like this one where similar height was granted and it and i i can tell you because i
was involved in several of those cases the the basis was exactly the same sure really to in
order to support the actual commercial itself, you need to have some level of density. And
unfortunately, this area just does not have that right now. So if you reduce the number of units
below what's allowed, number one, you're also reducing the number of affordable units, but
you're also then, you're essentially making it less viable that the commercial can be successful
here. So it's, I think, really a combination of factors here that really necessitates the
additional height to ensure that, you know, not only is there the appropriate density that can
support it, but that, you know, the spaces themselves are marketable for somebody that
might look at this area and say, you know, do I want to bring my business here? There's not a lot
lot of people here at least you know in this immediate area um you know is is this really
where i want to go and i think i think part of the point here is to ensure that you know these spaces
are are much more well designed than maybe some of the other offerings in the area is that well
right that and also there's the height here wouldn't impede anybody's sunlight right across
the street right now well ever right because you're sure 100 feet over a row house but there's
no row house the building there could be in the future though it wouldn't right so we own the we
own the big parcel across the street we own the building right behind it i mean there's row houses
directly across from you absolutely and they but they wouldn't be affected by that there's a hundred
foot street in between right you've done it you've done a lighting study we i mean we could attach
one that's easy enough to do okay that's easy enough for us to do i mean i just think like
yes I hear the argument I understand the logic around trying to have density for commercial
100% get that but I think the comparison that's been made has been made to a very different
intersection 42nd and Lancaster is a very different place than 51st and Lancaster there's a long
standing commercial corridor and a management at 42nd right that's where like previously was
hopeful now it's LA 21 like there's a robust long-term city funded commercial corridor program
at that other intersection and i think there's a much deeper rooted neighborhood at the other
intersection right so i think like to try to compare these two locations well i agree a little
bit of a stretch if anything i would say that that location that you just mentioned is way more
residential right correct right yet they were able to get the 66 foot in height and it doesn't
affect anybody they're on a much uh narrower street behind it and and what those also didn't
have was the competing zoning classifications across the street. So if the properties across
the street are ever to be developed, ICMX would allow for 60 feet. So, you know, I think that
just in terms of the vision for this area and trying to encourage, you know, some level of
redevelopment in this area, that I think that zoning is highly relevant because that would
allow for buildings to then essentially be entirely consistent with what is proposed today
i hear you you mentioned you mentioned oh go ahead mike but you mentioned affordability
what what what are there units that you uh are presenting that are affordable as far
Are there units that you are presenting that are affordable as part of this project?
Yes, this is part of the mixed income housing bonus program.
So five of the units will be deed restricted, affordable, enforced through the city's program.
And that's affordable to what, to 80% AMI or 60%?
This is low income, so it's 50% AMI.
and the bonus was for height or for density the uh both okay you said five units five of the 45
correct it's 10 and that gets rounded up that's that's essentially the code requirement so when
you take advantage of the mixed income housing bonus 10 of your units have to be reserved as
affordable okay good question i think i mean again not a question i think this is there's a lot of
density i think you're banking on a future of this neighborhood that while i can like try to see your
vision it's not the reality in most places in philadelphia have not densified like this in a
place that's 60 two-story buildings across the city i think to come in and this is the smallest
building you're proposing of the three right like there's this is going to be a lot of height that's
going to be immediately in a place where there's nothing that high until you get to st joe's
almost 30 blocks away that's not true we're proposing the same thing that was approved down
the street that's what i'm saying that's a different that's why i was saying that's a
different those conditions are way more uh um intrusive than ours they are literally adjacent
to two-story homes on a narrower street, right?
And those are still, that commercial space is still vacant.
And here, ultimately, I'm the one taking the risk, right?
So if I'm the one that's going to be making that gamble,
and I understand that you might not see my vision
the way I see it, right?
And it's mine to fail, right?
So if I get to invest into that community
and the only thing I'm asking for is height,
which was already given down the street albeit to an entity that received government funding
which seems to be the only difference here uh that i see the the other difference being like i said
is in a much more dense area um on a residential street here what we're proposing there's a there's
a uh an unsafe structure directly next to it there's an abandoned building across the street
from it right there's a junkyard literally across the street from here right um and we're doing is
transform the neighborhood we're not asking for any density we're asking for a little bit of height
so that people on the first floor that want to pay rent are able to afford it and be and have
an opportunity of being successful we have a different definition of a little bit i think
21 feet is more than a little bit i think seven feet is more than de minimis because more than
10 but um i mean i i can understand and just again but again your risk is also our risk so
like it's gonna come yes it is because if this doesn't work you're gonna come back in here and
we're gonna have to figure out what else is going there this has happened to all the buildings on