Our board has any questions?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No questions.
Planning Commissioner.
Good afternoon, members of the board.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends this property
for residential single-family zoning. This is a 1,628-square-foot lot. There is nothing unique
about the lot that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
However, we are aware of at least six other multifamily buildings currently on the block,
which predate the 2014 bill that rezoned this block. We recommend that the board approve the
requested use variants. Excuse me, this is Sharon. Ms. Amazon, do you have the
sheet with the requested provisos? Yes, it's right here. Okay. Okay, it doesn't
look like there's anything that the board could add as a proviso. Okay, thank you.
add as a proviso. Okay, thank you. All right, so where we at? Okay, am I, calendar number,
am I 002580-2223 North 22nd Street? My vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes. Thomas
holloman my vote is yes thank you uh next one up it's mi 2021 dash zero zero two five eight six
uh 2344 north 9th street that is awesome is that uh you okay
i see uh you agree to waive uh the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attackers
Yes, I do. And I'm sorry, can you miss your address for the record? I apologize.
No worries. 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600-19109.
Okay. And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, or referral photos and
plans five days prior to this hearing? Yes, I have. And we also have a letter
support for this project as well thank you please proceed thank you
let's go back to the cover page here can everyone see my screen
yes perfect so again i will be presenting 2344 north 9th street um this is a very straightforward
request and that we are requesting to eliminate the commercial use for residential. As you'll
see in the presentation, we did get overwhelming community support in large part because this is
a primarily residential block and they would like to maintain it as such. As we'll go through the
notice of refusal, our letter of support, maps of the area, photographs of the property, our proposed
plans and drawings, the application for appeal, the notice for the community meeting, as well as the
deed and certificate of tax clearance. First things first, we have the notice of refusal.
The property is currently zoned as CMX2, and we are just looking to have multifamily use here.
And we did receive a letter of support from APM, the RCO of its project. As you can see,
it was overwhelming support, 13 is in court, and one of no opinion. Again, this is a residential
block, and the community is very clear that they like to maintain that residential use.
As you can see from the zoning map here, we are pretty much a majority of the block is RM2, but for these three properties right here, which are vacant lots, and we are right in the middle, and they would like to maintain that residential use.
Here we have a global map view of the area, a view of the front of the property, a view to the right of the property, a view to the left of the property.
And we did mimic the design for the structure that was there previously, which was also a
three-story structure. And we just wanted to make sure that we wanted a design that matched what was
there previously, what the community requested as well, as you saw from our rendering. Again,
then making that berkside that was there prior. We don't have any height variances. We're just
looking to have multifamily use here. So as you can see here, we have floor plans. Unit one is
five level and unit two is the second and third floor
excuse me counselor can you blow up the basement yeah
so we do not have any living in the basement it is completely open floor plan because we have
egress on the front as well as the rear of the property thank you of course just zoom out here
and again these are very sizable units in that they are bi-level
here we have our application for appeal
the refusal again we're just looking to eliminate the commercial component it's a residential block
the community would like to maintain it as a residential block so we're just looking to have
a duplex with fully residential, although it was owned as CMX2. The notice that we sent out on
September 15th of the September 30th meeting, which was well attended, again, we did receive
a letter of support, 13 in support, and one of no opinion. Deeds showing that my client owns the
property, we'll just zoom out a bit here, and a certificate of tax clearance. So with that,
I believe either Bill Archer or Robert Dewey should be on the call if I could have them.
Is that my testimony?
Archer has been allowed to speak.
Archer has been allowed to speak.
Hi, Clementa.
Hi, Clementa.
To Bill.
It's Bill.
Hey, how you doing, sir?
Please identify yourself for the record.
Bill Archer, A-R-C-H-E-R.
Okay, you swear to affirm yourself the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Bill, did you hear my presentation today?
Yes, I did.
And was it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
Thank you, Bill.
so with that i'd be happy to answer any questions that the board may have
thank you does the board have any questions no mr chairman no thank you is there anyone else
here that would like to speak in this matter no answer this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon members of the board david fecto city planning commission this com the commercial
mixed use zoning on this site is legacy zoning dating to 1933 the council office has never
requested a bill to change it we believe that the applicant has demonstrated that no viable
commercial use can be found to fit this site we recommend that the board approve the requested
variance thank you calendar number mi-002-586-2344 north 9th street my vote is uh yes
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Next one up, MI-002614, 29-31 South 19th Street.
Mr. Secretary, Mr. Bob Kernlis has been promoted to panelist.
Okay. Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Robert Keralis, Vicozano-Connor, C-A-R-E-L-E-S-S, 1650 Market Street, Philadelphia.
Okay. You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
and uh do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of ownership proof of
tax compliance copies of the refusal order for photos and plans five days prior to this hearing
yes sir okay have you met with the rco and have a letter yes sir thank you please proceed thank
Thank you. I'm going to share my screen.
Mr. Chairman, can you see my screen?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Board.
Robert Careless and Cozen O'Connor, I will be brief.
I know the Board's had a long afternoon.
I'm here on behalf of the applicant, South 19th Street LP.
I'm here on two flat wall replacement signs,
which require dimensional relief from the code.
I'm showing you two existing building identification signs, which stayed POD at the POD Hotel on 19th Street.
Back in August of 2019, the applicant obtained relief for the placement of these two building identification signs, which are north and south facing.
Relief at that time was required because the code requires these building ID signs to be 150 feet high and our building is not that tall.
The property was recently rebranded from POD to Motto by Hilton, Philadelphia Rittenhouse Square, and in conjunction with that rebranding, it requires the signs to be replaced.
L&I takes the position that these are new signs and refused the two replacement signs, which I'll show you here, to replace the POD with Motto.
So L&I reviewed them as wall signs, which requires them to be lower than the roof line
of the second floor windowsill, and are obviously higher than the second floor windowsill.
Even if L&I reviewed them as building ID signs, as I mentioned, our building is still not
that tall because it reigns at its additional height.
The existing signs are 118 feet from the ground.
They're approximately 17 by 8 in terms of its dimensions.
We're proposing largely the same replacement, just the exception of from Pa D'Amato, 119 feet from the ground, approximately 18 by 4 in terms of dimensions.
And again, we're replacing the north and the south facing signs in kind with the exception of just the distinction between Pa D'Amato.
We've heard of complaints of people trying to find the hotel, so replacing the signs is necessary.
We've heard of complaints of people trying to find the hotel, so replacing the signage
was necessary and important to ensure that people can find the hotel without a distraction
or an intent in this if they're driving.
We also met with Senator Residence Association on September 28th.
We do have a letter of non-opposition from the RCO.
Again, this is a request for dimensional relief.
we think warranted given that we're replacing existing signage in conjunction with rebranding
that would help residents and people coming to find the hotel we don't believe we would assert
there's no alter to the character adversely this is the minimum variance no adverse impact to the
public streets or endanger the house safety and welfare in fact as I mentioned we think adequate
signage would provide a public safety benefit. Mr. Chairman, I don't have anything further.
Do you have any revised plans? No revised plans, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you. Are your client available to adopt your testimony?
Yeah, I would ask if Sharon Brand is still out there from Foreman Sign Company,
if she could raise her hand just to come off mute.
I see that Sharon's off mute. Mr. Chairman, would you like to swear at her?
Yes. Can you please identify yourself for the record?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Sharon Brandt, B-R-A-N-D-T, on behalf of Ormond Sign Company, 10447 Drummond Road, Philadelphia, 1915.
thank you uh you swore affirm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed thank you mr chairman sharon did you hear my testimony before
the board i did and would you adopt and affirm that testimony as if it were your own yes i would
thank you sharon mr chairman i have nothing further and would open this up for questions
from the board thank you does the board have any questions no mr chairman no okay is there
Is there anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter?
I see no other hands, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the existing commercial mixed use zoning for this site.
The applicant proposes to install building identification signs.
The ARC Commission has approved this application.
We therefore recommend that the board approve the requested variance.
Thank you.
Calendar number MI002614, 29-31 South 19th Street.
My vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
All right, next one up, it's MI-002609-400 Domino Lane.
Mr. Ruben Asia has his hand raised, I will allow him, I will promote him to panelists
at this time.
Mr. Secretary.
Thank you.
Hello, this is Ruben Asia.
Hey, how are you doing? Can you please identify yourself, please?
This is Ruben Asia. I'm an attorney at Fagre Drinker Biddle & Reef LLP, 1 Logan Square, Suite 2000, Philadelphia, PA, 19146.
You swear to our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
I did.
And you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate correct accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral of photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
And have you emailed an exhibit? I'm sorry, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Okay, please proceed.
Great, I've shared my plans. If you could just confirm you could see them, that'd be great.
Yes, yes, we can.
great so members of the board thank you for uh i know it's been a long day so um i'm representing
Well, members of the board, thank you for, I know it's been a long day. So I'm representing the property owner of 400 Domino Lane. This is zone RSD3. It's currently being used and has been used for a number of over 25 years as the transmission and broadcasting facility for a TV station.
and the applicant is looking to move some of its facility from Valley Kinwood
into this location so to expand this location for its reporters and transmission facility technicians
and for the photographers. So the proposal here is basically to erect a maintenance bay attached
to the current building to do some renovations to the existing building to provide for office space
renovate the parking and all kind of all as shown on the attached plans that i will show you shortly
the goal is to use it more as a field operations location in addition to the transmission facility
um and due to the current zoning we are seeking a use variance for the the closest fit would be
radio television recording use which is prohibited in this current located in this current zoning
district and seeking a height variance for an eight foot high fence security fence as opposed to
the six foot high fence which is required as you can see the current building is located on a
quite large plot um hidden back from the street shrouded by trees this is a closer look here is
gives you a flavor of the area and our zoning signs so it's um in while it's
zoned rsd3 it's located amongst other commercial areas
just a review of the insides
letter of support from the rco i'll go up to the plans
So with respect to the adjacent addition maintenance bay, the goal is to basically mimic the current building facade on the outside so that it looks about the same as the building and the currently existing building, and then to renovate the interior in order to provide more and usable office space for field reporters.
The expectation is that there will not be
many additional workers at this location