welfare. The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the coordinating
RCO support in addition to other expressions of support submitted, speaking to the granting of
relief being of benefit to the public and within the spirit of the code. The proposed variance
would represent the minimum variance to afford relief and represent the least modification
possible of the outmoded ICMX regulations as they relate to this site. The grant of variance relief
will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase danger of fire,
or otherwise endanger the public health safety or general welfare. Based on the present conditions,
which have been a source of great contention for those who have to live with the current property
that we do not own, the proposed development will be a tremendous improvement.
Cecil Baker and Partners, the architects, the visionaries behind this project,
represent the highest and best use for the site in line with the finest locations in the city.
Here's a sampling of some of their other recent work.
The proposed development appropriately respects a changing neighborhood with a mix of long
existing uses and new projects dotting the neighborhood this is reflected in the red
overlays which show the recent development projects and then you can see
classic philadelphia structures that have been in the community for a long time
the project will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burden water sewer
school park or other public facilities there are no environmental issues we are very proud of this
There are no environmental issues.
We are very proud of this project.
pride.
Mr. Zakroff is here at the appropriate time
to adopt and affirm testimony.
Mr. Layton of Cecil Baker and Partners is present
if the board has any specific questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Why don't we have the principal come on
and we'll adopt your testimony.
Mr. Zakroff, would you kindly raise your virtual hand so that you may be sworn in by Chairman Bergman?
Andrew Zakroff.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Andrew Zakroff.
Z-A-K-R-O-F-F.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Zakroff.
have you been present for the entire uh pendency of this presentation yes were you able to clearly
hear uh the testimony that i offered yes were you able to clearly see the exhibits that were
submitted yes and would you adopt and affirm the testimony that i've offered as your own sir
yes i do thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have a mr mark with his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time
hello could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Yes, the name is Mark, last name Prazak, P like Paul, R-A-Z like zebra, A-K.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you. Yes, I'm a near neighbor of this project.
I live three blocks north of this on Hancock Street.
I've lived there for almost 10 years.
This parcel should have obviously been IRMX or CMX3.
um i don't know why the history of that i don't know why it is what it is but i'm sure there's
some political reasoning behind that um so they should have never had to go through this process
um and second of all this is a one minute walk to burke station one minute walk not to mention
the bus lines um to me the fact that the setback was reduced and height reduced which reduces the
number of apartments is a big loss and unfortunately the rco thinks that somehow this is a victory which
is something I don't understand. I think the project is a beautiful project. It's going to
add lots of density to a severely depopulated area over the last 50 years, the legacy of
deindustrialization. I do have a couple of problems, though. It really should have been
three times as tall. This building should have been 200 feet. There shouldn't be any parking
included in this project. And I think that the city is going to end up regretting this regressive
attitude that it has towards height and density in places virtually adjacent to mass transit in
terms of affordability and in terms of climate change and the future needs of conglomerating
as a city should be. And unfortunately, our zoning process and code requires this consensus
model, which allows the loudest and most reductionist voices to curtail projects of
this scope and beauty. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for calling in. Any other
comments or questions from the virtual audience? Sir, I have Mr. Sloan Foulkes on the line.
I will now speak at this time. Sure. Hi, Mr. Foulkes, just state your name. You've already
been sworn. Yes. Good morning again, Chairman Bergman and ZBA. Sloan Foulkes, Councilman
sanchez uh office 508 city hall um just simply just uh just i would our officers simply like to
be made aware of the uh date for the um for the uh the vote uh so that we can submit a written uh
opinion prior to that uh after after our meeting with both the uh applicants and the rco thank you
thank you any other comments or from the virtual audience
Sir, I have Ms. Eileen DiVringhi with her hand raised. I have allowed her to speak.
Could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter?
Hi, can you hear me?
I can.
Great. So Eileen DiVringhi, E-I-L-E-E-N. Last name DiVringhi, D-I-V as in Victor, R-I-N-G as in George, I.
um and i'm here sorry okay do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
Okay, do you swear for him to tell the truth to hold?
the truth i do proceed uh so i'm here representing the south kinson community partners rco um and i
just wanted to provide a little bit of additional context on the community process around this
project and sort of highlight um sort of where we ended up um so um as adam highlighted in his
very comprehensive presentation um there were some things that neighbors um really liked
immediately um about the project um so again acknowledging that it is in the transit um it is
appropriate location for kind of this transit oriented development um we of course like seeing
the commercial on the first floor to add to kind of economic life in the neighborhood excuse me
mr chair i apologize for the interruption this is the court reporter yeah could i please ask the
witness to slow down just a bit sure sure sure sorry just go a little bit go eileen just go a
bit slower so the court reporter can get us down. Absolutely. So the two major concerns that
community members had raised were around sort of this height and density question. So this is
taller than a lot of these kinds of multifamily structures that we typically see proposed in
the neighborhood. A lot of them are around 60 feet. Eileen, give me a favor. You seem to be
like backing off the mic. So go slower and try to stay close to the mic when you speak, please.
okay sorry is this any better it is that is okay great um so the major concerns that neighbors had
raised were around kind of height and density um and in projects of the size we typically like to
see um on-site inclusion of a certain percentage of units to be set aside um for affordability
So, as you heard in Adam's presentation, the team made some modifications to the project
to address, particularly for Wilt Street neighbors, and Wilt Street is a street with, you know,
two-story host row homes that have been there for a very long time.
And they did try to address some of the height issues there.
I don't think it completely ameliorated the concerns of neighbors on that block, but they
did make some accommodations there. And then on the affordability side, I wanted to provide a
little bit more context on the community benefits agreement that we worked out with the project
team. So they indicated from the start that they were not interested in having on-site kind of set
asides for affordable units. So we tried to identify and be creative about other opportunities
to accomplish kind of the same goals as including affordable units on site, and we saw that
as, you know, identifying housing-related intervention that would help preserve sort
of the economic diversity of the neighborhood.
And one way to do that is to provide financial assistance to low-income homeowners who are
existing neighbors of this project and provide assistance for them to make, you know, critical
home repairs that they maybe would not be able to otherwise afford to address weatherization issues
to help keep their utility bills manageable to make adaptive modifications to their homes
so they can comfortably age in place and then other sorts of things like resolving tangled
title issues right which are really important to being able to access other kinds of
housing supports that are available through the city so the set aside fund is dedicated to those
purposes. It is not something that is going to add any organizational budget. All of the people
on the RCO are volunteers. None of us are going to see any of that money. So I just wanted to
clear up any sort of misconceptions about what the payment value might represent.
And this community benefits agreement was detailed at our last meeting, our last public
community meeting with the developer to the community so they could have a comprehensive
of sense of what sort of the the benefits and drawbacks of this particular proposal are
and our process is always that our stance is determined by a vote of neighbors who live within
a certain radius um so it was entirely within neighbors purview to say you know that's that's
nice but we still oppose the project but ultimately when neighbors sort of weighed the pros and cons
we had a vote that was in favor of supporting the project as presented today um and i will
add Mr. Folks from the councilwoman's office was in attendance at this meeting where we provided
sort of the broad strokes of the agreement so I regret that we weren't able to get the MOU to
the councilwoman sooner so that we could have allayed any sort of concern she might have but
hopefully it wasn't um it wasn't I mean you're starting to you're starting to go a little quicker
and fade away again so I mean put it you're you you support the program yes we supported the
yes we supported the project okay thank you thank you does anyone else have any comments about the
project. Okay, thank you. Thank you.
project i see no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chairman bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission uh members of the board uh start out i just have to
note that the comments of the cdr committee are not an expression of the city planning commission's
recommendation or opinion regarding this zoning variance. And I also just wanted to further note
that the proposed benefits arrangement is not enforceable by the city and is duplicative of
existing city-run programs and is therefore not a factor in the commission's recommendation.
That said, in 2016, the zoning map was amended on this site from I2 to ICMX. And this was done
in order to recognize what was then an operating business, which we've seen in this presentation
has since been vacated and cleared from the site.
The shallow groundwater conditions cited by the applicant support a hardship claim for
building height and for parking.
We do not believe that there are unique physical conditions of the lot supporting the hardship
claim for residential use variants.
However, given the surrounding context and given that the proposed uses are consistent
with general recommendations from the comprehensive plan to encourage transit supportive development
and active ground floor uses, the City Planning Commission ultimately recommends that the board
grant this variance. Thank you. So what we're going to do is we're going to hold the vote on this,
and Mr. Folks talked about a date. I'm looking for Tanya at least a month so that they can
see if they can't have their meetings and see where we stand with this. So we will vote on
this in a month and tanya to have an idea what a date that would be pardon pardon the interruption
if i may i would respectfully request that it be uh if at all possible no more than one month uh i
i know i i but just so you know i gave it a month because in your presentation you said time
was is not a problem with doing working this out i i i i mean okay so what we'll do is
you know be done by in one month and must be heard must be heard thank you
tanya are we okay with that um so are we stating we're going to do feedback or a letter
from the councilwoman's office that would depend on where we place it yeah i would think
a letter would be fine okay well how about may 4th that's fine with me yep
Thank you everyone. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Board. I appreciate your
indulgence this morning. Okay. MI 2021 004971 1925 North 19th. Is Mr. DeMarco back?
um yes sir he has been promoted to panelists okay thank you good
good morning mr chairman marco you've already been sworn
could you identify your client and the relationship to the property yes i can it's shalom
atias is the owner okay i represent and our vice chair has a few questions sure hi mr demarco do
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, it's a referral, and I agree to stipulate.
Thank you.
Okay, sorry about that.
No, that's all right.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the 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, I did.
And we have a letter that was received on Monday and sent directly to the Board of non-opposition.
Great.
you may proceed and share your screen thank you so much thank you and thank you for your indulgence
this morning everyone um so the uh this is a special exception matter for a single room
residence this board uh heard the case um back in 2018 and agreed to a temporary three-year
special exception uh we are back uh to ask that it be made uh permanent um you can see here and
And we agreed to the original provisors that the board had established, which is the key
were no basement no basement bedrooms and we had we do have trash disposals
the other one is not on here we had we do have trash disposals in the second and third floor
um i guess the other proviso was the was the temporary but we do ask that it be made permanent
anyway mr chairman uh we did meet with the rco there was no opposition the property is unusual
in that it was constructed as a duplex with four bedrooms each and that renders um it difficult uh
to do since no more than three unrelateds may live together.
There were struggles to get that situation resolved,
and that's why the applicant went forward back in 2018
for a special reception for a single-room residence.
By the way, these are seniors, 50 and over.
It's run by the owner himself.
I'll put him on in a minute.
The seniors loved living there.