from a design I'm sorry design standpoint as you can see there's already a residential
multifamily building right next to our lot built we are proposing a very similar duplex design
to be consistent in basically height and general outlook.
Also, the lot itself is a middle lot,
so putting a five-foot side yard is a physical impossibility
because it would actually make the lot too narrow to be used for a building.
We only have a 15-foot property line.
A five-foot side yard would make the lot 10-foot wide,
and it's therefore a physical hardship.
The design of the duplex itself is simply one unit on the first floor with the basement access, bedroom living space in the first floor only, storage and recreation in the basement.
storage and recreation in the basement. The second unit is above and has the bedrooms total in three
The second unit is above.
on the second and third floor. There is a roof deck available for outdoor space for the upper unit
and rear yard available for both trash storage and outdoor space for the first unit.
Based on the community support and based on the condition of the block, I would ask the favorable
review of this case by the board i'm happy to answer any additional questions or direct any
specific exhibits thank you is your client available to adopt your testimony uh yes i
believe my client should be here uh mr shimon uh i i don't want to mispronounce his last name
shimon can you raise your hand virtually uh so that you can be identified
In the interest of time, if I may, as an officer of the court, I would be able to stipulate that my client would have adopted my testimony.
So noted. Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Hello?
My client is here, Chairman.
Shimon?
Call jail?
Yes. Hi. Hello?
Hi. Please spell your full name.
Shimon, S-H-I-M-O-N, last name is K-O-E-G-E-L.
Do you swear from the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Mr. Jin?
Thank you. Shimon, did you hear my testimony and see the presentation to the board?
Yes, I did.
Okay, can you verify that it is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, it is.
Thank you.
Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify in this case?
i see no further hands mr chair thank you planning commission thank you mr chair ian hegarty for the
philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the comprehensive plan uh recommends
no change from the rsa 5 zoning at this location uh we don't have any objection to the dimensional
variances given the size of the lot however the applicant's hardship claim isn't supported with
evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property to justify the
multi-family use so the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the variance
thank you very much mi 2021-002164 2249 north franklin street my vote is yes
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thomas Harrowman, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number nine on our list, MI 2021-002-096.
2922 West Glenwood Avenue.
Jared Klein is the attorney of record.
All I see is a note, if yes, with revised plan, one page.
but uh ms tenary will ask mr klein as soon as i swear him in questions
good afternoon mr klein please identify yourself for the record and i'll swear you in good afternoon
mr chair members of the board jared klein k-l-e-i-n from blank rome 130 north 18th street
19103 you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do thank you
ms tenary and mr klein do you do you also agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy yes i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance
of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all the above
thank you you may proceed before you proceed mr klein madam vice chair i need to step away for a
minutes i'll be back shortly so okay great okay and this is sharon uh mr klein i don't believe
i have a copy of the rco letter yes i will uh share it on the screen miss so what i didn't
receive it until tuesday morning but it is included in the packet that i have to share
i can email you a copy separately thank you sure um so again uh we're here for 2922 west glenwood
avenue i understand the board's had a long morning so i will endeavor to be as brief as i can
our application is for a single family home on this lot and it is as you'll see a uniquely small
and oddly shaped lot that we think justifies the dimensional variances that we're asking for
one note about the refusal that's before you we have revised plans as the chair mentioned that
We have revised plans, as the chair mentioned, that remove the balcony that is on the second floor.
remove
So the first of the two refusals has gone away with our revised plans.
And so we're only seeking the variance for the rear yard depth.
To orient the board, this is our property here.
As you can see, it is located on this.
It is one of three parcels that make up this vacant triangle of open land that is right here.
and you can get a sense of it also on the zoning map these are three properties that front on
Glenwood ours is this one in the middle so it's a shallow lot with a uneven rear that doesn't form
a square or rectangle which as the board has seen before creates a challenge for getting
the required rear yard depth these are photos of the notices that are posted at the property
and this is what the property looks like currently it is as as we showed a vacant lot it does have a
tree that will obviously have to be removed uh these are some photos to give context on what
the surrounding area of west glenwood looks like at this moment uh as you can see there's vacant
properties on this side there's a parking lot immediately across the street from us there
uh these are the revised plans uh that remove that uh second floor rear deck otherwise it's
a traditional uh single family style row home as we're seeing all throughout philadelphia
there's a pilot house for a roof deck and some elevations and floor plans will follow
and here's the layout of the interior of the building again as i said it's a very much a
traditional single-family style home, but with the odd rear yard, it creates an angle that we
have to deal with from a zoning perspective. As I mentioned, we did meet with the RCO. There's a
letter from the 32nd Democratic Ward that is up on your screen now. They submitted a note of
non-opposition, provided that we had no balcony, which we revised plans to remove that balcony,
And we did share with the community that we do have a sanitation plan and we'll do our utmost to put a street tree if the streets department allows us to do so.
But their vote was in non-opposition and there were over 10 attendees in our virtual meeting.
I will email a copy of this to Ms. Saleta so she has it for her file.
and I'd like to ask Aaron Jones
to raise his virtual hand
to adopt my testimony
if he's still online.
Jones has been allowed to speak.
Yes, this is Aaron Jones,
A-A-R-O-N-J-O-N-E-S.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth,
all truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
thank you mr klein mr jones did you have a chance to uh hear my presentation this morning and see
the exhibits i shared yes i did and do you adopt my testimony as true correct and your own if you
had had the opportunity to testify yourself yes i do thank you very much i don't have anything
further mr chair questions from the board no mr chairman no no sir anyone else would like to
testify in this case please raise your hand i see no further hands mr chair planning commission
thank you mr chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
uh comprehensive plan recommends no change to the single family zoning at this location
uh the proposed dimensional variances are minimal and do not conflict with the purpose and spirit
of the zoning code city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
thank you MI 2021-002-096 2922 West Glenwood Avenue uh Mr. Klein I stepped away for a minute
you have a revised plan and this is it one page yes that's that's correct Mr. Chair my vote is yes
with the proviso revised plan one page approved today Carol Tenere my vote is yes with proviso
Professor Plaza, yes, Reproviso. James Snell, yes, Reproviso. Thomas Holloman, yes, Reproviso.
Thank you. Before I call the next case, Tanya, as you know, after the next case, we will have
the case that we moved from earlier this morning to be at the end of this list.
what are we how are we on time um we're at 12 22 chair so we can have a hard stop at
We're at 1222, Chair, so we can have a hard stop at 1 p.m.
All right, thank you.
Mr. Chair, we also have a request for reconsideration that I believe should be voted.
You were not here for that.
Okay, well, why don't we do that after this case before we go into the 1451 North Broad,
which I was asked to recuse myself on.
All right, so we will now go to case number 10, MI 2021-002163, 2900-02 North 5th Street.
Mr. Jinn is the attorney of record.
There's a letter of support from the association.
You'll have to help me confessor with this one.
something and mark i'm not sure about 8 p.m and rco a h-a-c-e rco letter of support
mr jen you're still on the oath just identify yourself and ms tenera will have some questions
for you yes good afternoon zen jen z-h-e-n-j-i-n 1617 john f candy boulevard suite 1838
Philadelphia PA 19103 here on behalf of the applicant. Good afternoon do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos and or plans five days
in advance of this hearing and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to all
questions. Thank you you may proceed. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information
relating to this case. We have submitted the refusal, RCO letters and support for those plans
and other related documents. I'm going to jump ahead to the refusal, which this one is a property
that is in a what is essentially mixed because mixed districts because it is really three lots
that are being consolidated. Part of the lots are CMX 2.5 and the back side of the lot there's
a portion that is in a RSA 5 zoning. However, this is a corner lot that has actually been used
as a commercial business for a long time. This is a essentially an expansion of the commercial
business and also to consolidate the above units which are residential into a multi-residential
unit above one vacant and one pizzeria business on the first floor. When we met with the community,
we met with overwhelming support. My client has actually been in the community a long time.
Their pizzeria is well known, and the community has worked with them as a business and never had
an issue with anything they've done. So if you can see that all the refusals are really focused
on the RSA 5 portion of the business building, which is better shown by looking at the plans,
what is going on here. If you look at a site plan, what happens is that we have a corner property
that is essentially at 1.3 lots. This is the RSA 5 lot that is being added to the rest of the
building but this will all be one combined building once completed with the residential
above and the commercials utilizing the extra space here. While this is a RSA 5 building in
essence that is facing Cambria Street it's really not being used in such manner nor is it really
impacting the neighbors on the backside Rees Street. We had no objections from the neighbors
there, they actually don't mind the idea that this business be expanded into a total combination of
what is being proposed here. So the L shape is going to be part of the restaurant business.
It just becomes additional part of the business on the first floor. And the upper portion of it
would be part of the residential units that are being proposed above. Again, the residential unit
count is not a refusal issue under CMX 2.5, but it is because of the RSA 5 for that one portion
of the proposal. Overall, the proposal allows my client to consolidate their holdings into one
manageable unit, and we believe that it does not cause additional hardship, nor does it really
impact the RSA 5 houses that are otherwise facing Reese Street. We had no objections from those
neighbors. And there is an alleyway in between at the rear of the property, even with the
at the rear of the property even with the consolidated design so based on that in the
consolidated design.
community support the only request the community made was that we would not sell alcohol which is
not in my client's business plans and certainly agree to but other than that request the community
was in full support of their request so as a result of the support and based on the l-shape
being part of the overall
law, we would ask the board for a favorable
ruling in this matter. I'm putting
the letter back up from
APM, which
indicates their support
and also HACI
indicating their support as well.
I'll be happy to answer any questions
or redirect to any exhibits.
I have a client to adopt your testimony.
Yes, I believe
Perla should be here.
Perla, can you
raise your hand virtually?
so you can be identified.
There's been another speak.
Sir, please
spell your full name.
Perla Angulo
P-E-R-L-A
Last name A-N-G-U-L-O
I apologize.
I thought I was a male.
I apologize. So do you swear for him to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?