Vice Chair, I see no one by the name of Chris Vitelli, but I do see someone by the name of Simon Zafrani.
Yes, he's my second witness. I'll go ahead and call Mr. Zafrani. He is the adjacent neighbor.
He literally owns the property right next door that has been the loan-occupied structure on this block for a very long time.
So if you could please call him to the stand, I would greatly appreciate it.
He's been abuted and allowed to speak, Vice Chair.
Hi, good afternoon, all. Thank you so much for letting me speak here.
So I've been approached by the developer.
I think we have to put him under oath, please.
Can you get your name and spell it for the record, please?
Oh, I'm sorry.
My name is Simon Zafrani.
Can you spell it for the record?
S-I-M-O-N, last name Zafrani, Z-A-F-R-A-N-I.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair.
Mr. Zafrani, did you hear my presentation?
I did, yes.
Okay, and you are an adjacent neighbor to the project, yes?
Okay, and please explain to the board your position and your perspective about what we've come up with today.
Yeah, so I'm the only building standing in this street, actually.
And when I came to the meeting a couple months ago, I don't remember, I believe it was back in November or December, something like this, or even earlier than that.
we all spoke about it all the neighbors and we really wanted that development to happen
because there was a lot of dumping trash shootings at night so if we can have
more traffic and more neighbors and bring more people that would be great right and you've
reviewed these plans with my client and my team is that correct yes and it's your testimony that
you support the appeal yes thank you thank you uh do you have your client um i do i do he's my last
uh person to call sir all right mr isaac badush if you could please raise your virtual hand
isaac badush has been unmuted and allowed to speak
uh my name is isaac badush i-s-a-a-c-b-a-d-u-s-h you swear to tell the whole truth
do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please to see you counsel thank you mr vice chair mr badush did you hear my
presentation to the board this afternoon yes i did is it true and accurate to the best of your
knowledge. It is, yes. Is it true that you work tirelessly, not only with your own team,
but with CDR and the local community organization to get the best possible
development for this long-neglected block? Is it true? Yes, yes. Thank you. Thank you. I know
that was a curveball. And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do. Absolutely.
Thank you. I have nothing further.
Sure. Counselor, I have a question. So I see you show one of the tax clearance. Can you
provide us with all the tax clearances for all the different parcels? Because we have not
received them as of yet. All the what, sir?
Mr. Vice Chair, those were all provided. Sorry. After the update was sent, all have been received. Thank you.
All right. No problem. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Vice Chair.
No, Mr. Vice Chair.
Any questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
I only wanted to verify with Mr. Anastasio that there are two pages of revised plans. Is that correct?
yes z001 z002 thank you thank you
okay any questions from the virtual audience
i see no answer this time vice chair thank you planning commission thank you vice chair and good
afternoon david effecto with the city planning commission vice chair and members of the board
this property completed its civic design review in december 2023 the civic design reviews committee
the civic design reviews committee the civic design review committee's advisory recommendations
the civic design review committee's advisory recommendation
are not an expression of the city planning commission's recommendation or opinion
regarding zoning variances special exceptions or other discretionary approvals associated
with this proposal the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location
from i2 general industrial to rsa5 residential single family this neighborhood still carries
its original 1933 zoning well we would argue that residential use per se is in keeping with
the recommendation of the comprehensive plan under the proposed rsa 5 zoning 13 dwelling units would
be allowed by right and off street loading and off street accessory parking would not be required in
the recommended residential single-family zoning district so those variances are supportable the
city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variance with a maximum of
13 dwell units and the associated parking dimensional variances.
Thank you. If I could just briefly, I obviously respect Mr.
effect those, uh, um, aspirational, uh, recommendation. Uh,
but the reality on the street is across the street is an old factory. Uh,
and, but for Mr. Zafrani who testified today,
there is absolutely zero residential activity on this block. Uh,
These units, as proposed, which have been reviewed and approved by the neighbors, are exactly what this block needs.
Not only is it residential, but they're going to be affordable and approachable at different levels with the diversity of one, two, and three-bedroom homes.
So with that, I rest. Thank you.
Okay. So we're going to hold this vote because we're still waiting for the RCO letter to come in.
I understand you had the meeting on the 19th of September.
Mr. Right Chair, the letter did come in.
I believe Mr. Anastasio showed that as part of his presentation.
Page 46.
Page 46 of support.
All right.
Yeah, still going to hold it because we're going to executive session
and have a little bit further conversation on the units.
So if we should be able to vote on this next week at 2 o'clock.
thank you mr chair no problem moving on to number four mi-2023-006-565-6435-45 media street
Meredith
Ferlinger
I won't mess it up
Ferlinger
Vice Chair Meredith
Ferlinger has been
promoted to panelists
Good afternoon Council
Good afternoon Mr. Vice Chairman
you did fantastic
Please state your name
and spell it for the record
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I sure do.
Can you please identify your client?
Certainly. My client is Media Flats, LLC, which is the owner of the property at 6435-45 Media Street.
Okay. Mr. Holloman has a few questions to ask.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his
accuracy? I do. Did you email all of the exhibits and documents required five days in advance to
this hearing? I did. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Thank you. You should
now see my exhibit packet up on the screen. As I mentioned, my client today is Media Flats LLC,
which is represented by Robert Sherman and Eugene Nadevich, and they should be both on the call
today. Just to summarize before I get into the bulk of the presentation, the request before the
board today is for a new 24-unit, 100% affordable multifamily proposal for which an application is
currently pending before the Pennsylvania Housing Affordability and Rehabilitation Enhancement Fund,
otherwise known as FAIR. The principal developer of this project is Stonewater Development Group,
which focuses on constructing environmentally conscious affordable developments throughout
Philadelphia. Stonewater not only develops affordable housing, but further manages all
of its properties following completion. For context, as I walk you through the proposal today,
For context, as I walk you through the proposal today, the only request for relief before the board is to eliminate the required non-residential, non-parking use along the ground floor, which is required under the property's CMX2 zoning classification.
the only request...
All other aspects of this proposal are by right and, in fact, significantly under what would be by right.
As mentioned, the property before the board today is located at 6435 Media Street in the
city's Overbrook neighborhood. The deed is included at Exhibit 3, and tax clearance is
provided at Exhibit 2. The exhibit packet includes 18 total exhibits. At Exhibit 16,
you will find a letter of support from the RCO, NOAA, for today's request.
By way of overview, you can see on the zoning map up on the screen at Exhibit 7 that this property is zoned CMX 2 and sits at the corner of Media Street, which is to the south, and North 65th Street to the west.
You will note that most of the properties surrounding 6435 Media Street are zoned RM1 multifamily.
The property itself is just under 17,000 square feet.
Turning to the aerials, which I've included at Exhibit 8, you will note the odd but decrepit condition of the existing property, which is largely vacant land surrounded by a one-story masonry wall.
If I flip back and you look through some of these historical images, you will see that the property was previously used in some form of a vehicle storage capacity dating back fairly far, at least to 1996.
If I turn to the next photographs, which you'll see at Exhibit 9, you'll get a better sense of the existing conditions of the lot and the surrounding area.
In the first few photographs, the board will note the existing masonry wall that surrounds this property.
And if I flip through the next set of photographs, you'll note that this property is quite out of character with the surrounding residential neighborhood.
You'll note that almost everything surrounding this property is of a residential nature.
And this is just directly across the street on North 65th Street, and again, directly across from Media.
Exhibit 10 shows the zoning posters, which were posted timely on February 6th.
At Exhibit 5, you will see the zoning site plan, which shows the irregularly shaped lot
at issue today.
This proposal is designed to balance the project massing with 12 units in each of two separate
buildings.
The buildings themselves are only three stories and 32 feet high, which is less than the code
would allow at 38 feet.
Additionally, while 80% of the lot is permitted to be occupied in CMX 2, only 44.5% of this lot is occupied by this development.
From a unit count perspective, this lot would permit a total of 42 units, where only 24 units are proposed.
Each building has a roof deck.
Although no parking is required in CMX 2, the proposal does include 11 parking spaces for residents, which is designed with porous paving and landscaping.
Parking is accessed from one curb cut on North 65th Street.
Street. Historically, the property was served by a curb cut from Media Street, but given the
proximity to the corner and the much lesser street frontage, it was much more efficient to
add the parking entrance from North 65th Street. I've included some renderings as well in the
packet that you should see up on your screen now, and some general floor plans. Each of these units,
which does not include a basement, is either a two- or a three-bedroom unit. So they're really
quite large units. And as I mentioned earlier, the property will be managed by the owner
and will be serviced with commercial trash pickup in conjunction with this particular
developer's other affordable housing developments in the area.
Now, with respect to the refusal, only one refusal was issued for this proposal
because the zoning code requires any building in CMX 2 to contain a non-residential use
to contain a non-residential use along the ground floor frontage and for the first 30 feet in depth
along the ground floor frontage.
which would only have applied to the media street frontage which was designated as the
primary frontage for this property. This application does not comply nor can it comply
for a multitude of reasons. As noted, no other variances are necessary for this project
and it is significantly under-built from a dimensional end-use perspective.
The applicant submits to a hardship in complying with the code requirement for three main reasons.
First, as the board has seen through the presentation of earlier evidence,
the property is surrounded by exclusively residential uses,
with no other commercial uses in a reasonable proximity to this property,
which would make locating a viable commercial space extremely difficult.
Shown at Exhibit 18 is a map of the city's commercial corridors
where the board can see that this property sits several blocks away
from the beginning of any of the nearest commercial corridors
where, of course, the commercial activity is focused and encouraged.
And you can see the notation of the commercial corridors
in that sort of light orange color on this map here.
In addition, records of nearby business licenses show that the only commercial uses in this
area are largely in-home daycares.
They're not traditional commercial uses that you might find with a CMX2 property.
The previous commercial use of the property, if you can even classify it as commercial
versus industrial, was not permitted by the CMX2 Zoning District, which prohibits any
automotive uses.
Furthermore, this property was previously approved in 2021 for the construction of a mixed-use building with 42 units and a commercial space.
However, despite even securing a building permit, that proposal was never built.
It's not unreasonable to surmise that the commercial space requirement may have been one component that fatally impaired the viability of the much more dense former proposal.
Second, the Board may be aware that financing programs that fund affordable developments,
such as this one, do not also grant financing consideration to non-residential uses.
Accordingly, this development was designed quite specifically in response to the requirements
set forth by PHFA, and including a non-residential use would render this particular proposal
unviable. Exhibit 17 includes a market study that was performed, which establishes the considerable
need for this type of affordable housing in this area, where there is a complete lack of affordability
or other multifamily projects that include income-based housing.
Finally, given the irregular shape of this lot and the character of this neighborhood,
that those features of the lot and the character of the neighborhood support the split design of
the proposed buildings with two low buildings instead of one larger structure. Given that
the property comes to a sharp point along Media Street, which I'm pointing to here on the zoning
plan, the L-shaped building design is the only feasible design that accommodates two efficient
rectangular buildings. And you can see how the building along media is even set back a bit off
of media to try and mitigate the impact of that sharp point. Because of this design, the rear
building is nearly 75 feet from Media Street. Designing a building that would follow the
property line would create extreme irregularities in the interior design. The floor plans show that
the residential units comprise the entirety of the floor plate. Furthermore, providing parking
for almost half of the residential units is a significant benefit to both residents as well as