But I just want to give him a chance to respond briefly to any public comments.
Thank you, Ms. Emerson.
Yeah, just briefly, thank you to all the witnesses that came forward and waited on the call.
Also, in my experience, and I wasn't personally present at these RCO meetings,
but in doing this for a number of years and appearing before different neighborhoods
with a project like this it is there is always um a challenge in in this is a dhs approved
home that's being proposed a lot of the logistics are handled through a process that comes later
i totally agree with mr jordan in that every neighbor wants to ask questions but it's even in
the um the attachments and the exhibits that mr pad provided to me that i've used today
There's a reference to the five bedrooms and maximum of 10 children, but Mr. Patton can say 10 children. DHS can say five children. So it's a lot of answers he may not have now, but in my conversations with him, in my review of the documents, he has referenced security measures.
I've mentioned any suggested provisos regarding cameras or security or lighting and trash and the full-time staff on site or going to, from nurses today too.
so all the logistics of operating this thing are more of a DHS protocol than a zoning protocol but
we do get obviously when we're talking about a house on a block in a neighborhood these things
all blend together so but I have run into those problems before where the neighborhood wants to
know a lot of answers to questions that maybe the applicant doesn't have yet or doesn't want
to commit to because things can change in a lot of ways and there's more to the process but
you're familiar with that. And thank you to the board and Mr. Chairman and Ms. Emerson with regard
to the refusal. That wasn't filed by my office. Mr. Patton says that he received that advice
from the L&I staff to list it as a single room housing, whatever it is. But with that,
I appreciate the time. Thank you very much. Thank you, everyone. We will be back in touch. Okay,
sir yes sir is there anyone in the virtual audience who who their case has not been called
today and this morning i do not see any hands mr chair okay see everybody 2 p.m
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the ZBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
President, Mr. Chairman.
President, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our board member, Thomas Holloman.
Also, here is our...
President, Mr. Chairman.
We also have an alternate board member with us this afternoon, Emily Persico from the Division of Development and Services.
President, Mr. Chairman.
We also have another alternate board member who will be with us for a part of the time, LeBaron Leonard Palmer from Division of Development Services.
Hey, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographers, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To win an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question-answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Some continuances that I'll call out shortly.
Number one, MI 2023-006-962-3214 West Montgomery Avenue.
That case is continued.
Number four, MI 2023-006-110-2202 North 29th Street. That case is continued.
Number six, MI 2023-007-017-5700 Germantown Avenue. That case is continued.
Number nine, MI 2023-006-921-2431 North 26th Street.
That case is continued.
Number 11, MI 2023-007-020-508-14 Moore Street.
Is Darwin Bovee in the audience?
Also Steve Masters.
They've both been about to speak, sir.
Mr. Bovee, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Gladly.
First name Darwin, D-A-R-W-I-N.
Last name Bovee, B-E-A-U-V, as in victory, A-I-S, as in Sam.
I represent the applicant.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Masters, could you identify yourself, please?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
My name is Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E, M-A-S-T-E-R-S.
I represent about 20 near neighbors of the property.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. And I'm requesting, Mr. Chair, if I could have panel visibility because I have some materials to share as part of my as part of my my my argument today.
Well, your argument. Well, here's let me say this much. Mr. Masters, Mr. Bovee, has requested a continuance in this matter.
Council Member Squilla has also agreed to this continuance.
And we spoke to Councilman Squilla, and we also joined in on this continuance.
So, Mr. Masters, we are just going to continue this.
Well, Mr. Chair, the issue is that while we do support the continuance, we asked for that.
We believe that this case should be remanded, and I wanted to show you some materials so you can understand why the zoning board doesn't have jurisdiction at the moment to hear this case at any point,
because it doesn't it hasn't listed all of the properties that are involved in the project
and i wanted to to just mr chairman mr chairman i just subject to all of this this is a continuance
request that is clearly it's joint it's a joint continuous request
That is clearly it's joint. It's a joint continuous request.
I do ask that the board brings, brings us back in a timely fashion.
I initially asked Hillary if we'd be brought back in two weeks.
So, so Mr. Masters, Mr. Bovee, I'm going to continue this today.
I will mention that we'd like to get it back as quick as possible,
but the case will be continued, Mr. Masters.
well yeah so mr chair can in my oh sorry mr masters let me jump in i i am aware i'm aware
of the the issues that were raised in this case i have looked into this and i think um you me and
mr bouvet um need to have further conversations offline about what is before the board and what
isn't um and what should be the before the board and what isn't so we will have we will have that
discussion before this case is scheduled for a new, well, it's heard again. Okay. I'm happy with
that. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. So MI 2023-007-020-508-14 Moore Street. The case
continued. And number 12. Number 12. MI 2023 007031 4714 Griscom Street. That case is continued.
at number 15.
MI 2022-003-750-2024-28
North 12th Street.
This is the case we spoke about.
Am I correct, Hillary?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
So let me bring Vern on
and I'll tell him.
Mr. Anastasio?
Mr. Anastasio?
And if we can see if there's a representative from the council district council member Young's office president, is there anyone in the audience from the council member Young's office?
I do not see any hands, but Mr. Anastasio has been allowed to speak, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
State your name for the record.
Yeah, Vern Anastasio, on behalf of TPP Capital Holdings, owner of the property in question.
So one of the things we spoke about during the break, I spoke with Hillary.
We're going to go on with this case.
We will hold the vote until we hear from Council Member Young's office, okay?
Better than a continuance, so thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Are there any other requests for continue?
Sorry, Mr. Chair, while Mr. Anastasio is still on,
And I believe he was withdrawing a matter that we were going to be considering on our add-on list this afternoon.
So I could just give him an opportunity to do that for the record.
Two o'clock list or later today?
An add-on.
I believe it was the last one, number six.
Oh, okay.
On the add-on list.
Thank you.
So MI 2023-005-594-702 North 18th Street.
thank you mr chair vernon astasio on behalf of the protestant uh i'm going to uh withdraw my
motion for reconsideration uh pursuant to 702 north 18 thank you should we don't have to bring
alan on do we uh no i don't think yeah i was gonna say i think he he is present i know he
has other cases this afternoon but that's great yes i know he's aware that there's been discussions
between the parties yes all right good are there any other requests for continuance
mr chair i do not see any further hands at this time okay and i also have number eight
mi 2023 005097 4329 in glendale this case has been withdrawn
i'm going to go to our add-on list
1. MI 2023-005-619-2908 Karnwath Street. The vote on this matter has been rescheduled to
Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m. 2. MI 2023-004-373-2442-50 North 9th Street. The vote on this
matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m. Number three, MI 2023-006-565-6435-44
006-565-6435-45 Media Street.
The vote on this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m.
And number four, MI 2023, 006-949-933 Lindley Street.
The vote on this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m.
And number five, MI 2023-003-123-2021 Wilder Street, this is a request for reconsideration.
I vote yes.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, yes to reconsideration and rehearing, is that correct?
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Ishmael Shkate.
I vote as yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
And that, Emily?
Yes, sir.
I vote yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thank you.
And we're going to start our cases, and I'm going to go to number 15 first, I believe.
Number 16.
MI-2023-005-133-7918
Ardley Street.
Dawn Tang Grady is the attorney.
We also have our Leonard.
Are you coming on too?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hand.
Once again, I'll be your co-host this afternoon.
Thank you.
Both have been with you, panelist.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
Sure. It's Dawn Tancredi. That's D-A-W-N. My last name is T-A-N-C-R-E-D-I.
Sir Reuter, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court sonographer?
Sure. Good afternoon. May it please the board. Leonard F. Reuter, Senior Attorney for the City of Philadelphia. That's R-E-U-T-E-R.
Counsel Tangrady, could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I represent Ironhead Properties, LLC, the owner of 7918-20 Ardley Street.
I have a letter of opposition from the Chesterton Hill Community Association, a letter of opposition from neighbors along with the petition, and the applicant has provided petition and support signed by approximately seven neighbors, including adjacent neighbors.
Our vice chair has a few questions before we start.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case?
Bob, there is an advantage of the hearing.
Yes, my office did that.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Sorry, if I might just interject momentarily.
The reason why I'm here and why the case was called first, I'm here because my understanding is that Ms. Tancredi is going to preserve an argument making what's called a facial challenge to the ordinance in question, or rather the code insofar as it makes a distinction between an owner-occupied property and a non-owner-occupied property with respect to temporary property.
or short-term rentals so I'm here to I mean assuming she's still gonna want to preserve
that argument I'm here just to acknowledge that she is making that argument and that it's being
preserved because as both Ms. Tancredi and I and I believe boards counsel Ms. Emerson all agree
that the board doesn't have jurisdiction to make a decision with respect to a facial challenge
to a facial constitutional challenge to an ordinance.
What that means is basically saying the ordinance itself is unconstitutional.
To the extent that the argument is a little bit more tailored
that it's unconstitutional as applied to a multi-unit property,
I think the only factual matter that would have to be decided
is whether or not it's a multifamily property,
and we do stipulate that it is a multifamily property
if the argument were going to be more specific in that sense.
So all I need to hear is if Ms. Tancrini agrees with my summation