ZBA Hearing - April 6, 2022

follows the same structure that the city has in place as if this project had been granted a bonus.

Now before I turn to the current refusal, the board can reference the prior refusal that I

included at Exhibit 5 just to show you just how much this project has transformed. Previously the

project included eight total refusals including for 18 dwelling units, open area that was deficient

by 30 percent, insufficient rear yard, exceeding maximum height, and insufficient bike spaces.

The refusal that you will see today has been greatly reduced, having eliminated the refusals

for rear yard depth, height, bike spaces, and reducing the refusals for the number of units

and open area.

I will go through these quickly, and if the board needs clarification on any point, I'd

be happy to elaborate.

We do submit to a hardship on each of these refusals, given the lot orientation, physical limitations, and the context of this neighborhood, particularly this specific block.

Starting first with the dimensional refusals.

You will note that we received a refusal for insufficient front yard depth.

However, if you notice in the photographs, and probably more easily in the rendering, the only immediately adjacent structure at 4818 Chester Avenue does not have a front setback.

Accordingly, the structure that's proposed before the board today was designed to align with that structure to ensure there's not an unattractive inconsistency in the frontages.

Furthermore, although the property is Zone 2 family attached, attached structures are

actually prohibited in the RTA 1 district. This project is considered attached since the structure

extends to the lot line. Now regarding occupied area, RTA 1 has one of the most limiting opening

open area limitations, requiring that 50% of the lot be left open.

requiring that 50% of the lot be left open. This proposal exceeds that by roughly 18%.

In fact, if this lot were zoned RM1, only 20% would be required to be left as open space,

whereas this proposal is over 30% open. As you saw in the aerial that I will bring back up for

reference. Most of the multifamily structures on this block cover nearly 100% of their lots,

and you can see that immediately next door. You can see that in the multifamily slightly down

the block as well as across the street. The dimensional relief requested here was tailored

specifically to balance the variety of structure types and layouts on this block and to ensure

minimum impact on surrounding structures. Now regarding the multi-family use and parking,

the RTA1 district would permit two units whereas this proposal includes 12.

This lot is double the size normally contemplated for RTA1 development.

Furthermore, this property has never contained a two-family use and the RTA1 zoning is not

consistent with the predominantly higher density multifamily and commercial uses on this block.

You can see the permits that I have included here at exhibit at exhibit 13,

which I did also summarize on the exhibit list for quick reference.

Densities of the existing developments on this block range from three units all the way up to

39 units. Just a block away, also in the RTA1 district, is a recently approved 76 unit development

on Kincessing Avenue. Directly next door at 4818 Chester Avenue has 12 units, which is consistent

with the density proposed today. Constructing a two-family dwelling on this lot would result in

units that were significantly out of character with this neighborhood. Regarding finally the

insufficient parking parking on this property could only be provided from 49th street which

would be extremely dangerous in light of several conflicts that i pointed out earlier including the

existing trolley route the existing utility pole and the entrance to the adjacent single family home

there is also permit parking along 49th street along this property that would be impaired by

the addition of a curb cut. We do submit that these variances are the least minimum that will

not increase congestion, harm neighbors' properties, or impair light and air. This proposal has

transformed over the course of three years and reflects considerable community input in addition

to addressing unique hardships facing this property while balancing the lack of uniformity

on this block of Chester Avenue. A full analysis is provided in the memo of law that I've submitted

to the board at Exhibit 14, and I'd be happy to touch on any particular point in more detail

if necessary. With respect to the community, as referenced, Cedar Park's letter of support

is included. And at this point, I would bring up my client to adopt my testimony,

if the administrator could find Braheem Engladen.

Can I get Dr. Oil on this door?

Mr. Gladen, may you please raise your virtual hand so that you may be sworn in.

Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?

Hi, can you hear me?

I can.

Okay, my name is Brahim, B-R-A-H-I-M, I-G-L-A-D-E-N.

Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

yes sir i do proceed brahim uh have you heard all of the testimony that i have given before

the board today yes ma'am and would you agree that that testimony was true and accurate and

would you adopt that testimony as if it were your own yes ma'am thank you questions from the board

no mr chairman and mr chair no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience

mr chair we have a taylor kessinger with the hand raised i will allow them to speak

um hi can you hear me hi yeah could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter please

yes my name is taylor kessinger that's t-a-y-l-o-r-k-e-s-s-i-n-g-e-r right do you swear

or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed um i speak to

I speak to you as a neighbor. I live very close to this proposed development. My comments today

you as a neighbor. I look very close to this.

are solely my own. What would be good for me would be personally for this thing not to get

built because that means potentially more competition for parking, seats on a 13th

trolley, congestion, but what's good for me in this case isn't what's good for the neighborhood,

what's good for the city of Philadelphia, or what's good for the 12 households who could

potentially live in this building if it goes up. I think this is exactly the kind of reasonable

size infill development that's badly needed in this neighborhood we've seen very little

development here i think the median age of buildings here is prior to 1935 or something

um it's crazy um in addition the absence of parking makes this a an environmentally friendly

responsible development especially so close to major transit lines um it's very likely the

families who move into this place will not bring cars with them at all so for these reasons i uh

would urge the zoning board to grant

the requested variances. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your phone call.

Any other comments?

I have a handout from Mr. Benjamin

Shea.

Hi. Could you state your name

and spell it for the court reporter?

Yes. Benjamin Shea.

B-E-N-J-A-M-I-N

S-H-E

Do you swear

Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes, I do.

Rashid.

Thank you.

Members of the board, I'm coming as also a neighbor in Cedar Park, and I also testify in support of this project at 4820 Chester.

This lot has long been a blighted presence along 49th Street, and the proposed use, I definitely agree with the testimony

that is a totally contextual and conforming use multifamily consistent with many, many other uses and characters along the block.

I would also like to also express that RTA1 zoning is totally inappropriate here,

given the existing preponderance of the multifamily including the one right next to it,

as such an RTA1 lot would not be able to on this very narrow lot probably would not be viable at

all. I would also like to express the fact that this is located right on Chester Avenue right on

the 13th trolley and that I would be passing by this place every single day. I would be grateful

for the fact that there will be more units available for just the growing you know the

demand and popularity of Cedar Park, both for students and for workers and for, you

know, people of all ages to come into this neighborhood.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for your call.

Any other questions or comments different than what we've already heard?

Mr. Chair, we have Gabriel Gottlieb with his hand raised, I have allowed him to speak.

Okay.

State your name and spell for the court reporter, please.

Gabriel Gottlieb, G-A-B-R-I-E-L-G-O-T-T-L-I-E-B.

Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do, Chair.

Proceed.

Hi, my name is Gabriel Gottlieb. I live at 4804 Chester Avenue, a few doors down from this site.

I just want to say a couple of brief things. I concur with my neighbors.

this is the multifamily building there I think is the only thing that would be appropriate for this

site. This intersection at 49th and Chester probably has the most public transit of any

intersection west of the Schuylkill except at 30th Street itself. You have the regional rail,

you have the 13th trolley, and most importantly you have the 64 bus which goes from Fairmont Park

all the way down to the Columbus Boulevard shopping centers and I use it very frequently myself.

So with the level of public transit here, it's appropriate, only appropriate to have a multifamily building.

I only have a couple of complaints about this particular development.

I think it should actually be a little taller.

The original proposal called for four stories and maybe a few more units, which I think would have been more appropriate considering the public transit at this site.

And many buildings, including my own, I mean, there are probably about a dozen four-story buildings on Chester Avenue, including my own and three others.

around 48th and Chester.

One other little complaint that I have

is I just think it's a real missed opportunity

not to have a retail space

at this important transit-oriented intersection.

It's right across the street from the train station.

When people come out,

they'll come up the stairs,

they'll see this building.

And I just think it's, like I said,

just a missed opportunity

to at least have a small retail space.

You don't have that much retail

between Baltimore Avenue and Woodland Avenue.

So to have like a little coffee house

across from the train station

crossing the train station, which is a great thing I've had for the neighborhood and for

which is a great thing I've had for the neighborhood and for all the travelers

all the travelers and stuff. But other than that, I definitely am in favor of building

this multifamily building. I think that's the only appropriate zoning and only appropriate

construction that should be at this site. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other comments?

Sir, Mr. Alex Schieffer-Decker with us, Andres. I'd love him to speak this time.

hi could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter my name is alex

schieferdecker that's s-c-h-i-e-f-e-r-d-e-c-k-e-r do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole

truth and nothing but the truth yes i do do you have something different or than what we've heard

in the past sir uh just a little um i i support the proposal and i agree with my neighbors i just

want to reiterate a point made by the lawyer for the applicant. This project is very similar

to the situation confronted by the ZBA about a year ago at 48th and Chester, one block away.

And the ZBA concluded in that case, and should also include here, that the zoning for this area

is completely incongruent with the past and present condition of this neighborhood. The

zoning is also incongruent with the future of this neighborhood as envisioned by the Thrive

vision of the philadelphia 2035 comprehensive plan this project will add affordable housing

it will add a mix of housing different income levels it will provide housing adjacent to high

frequency transit it will reuse a vacant lot and it will add to the property tax base those are all

specific goals enumerated in the plan so there's ample reason to grant the uh grant the appeals

in this case so for all those reasons i urge you to grant it thank you thank you very much

any other comments there are no hands at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman

ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board i just want to

have to note at the beginning the agreement for affordable dwelling units is not enforceable by

the city it's not a factor in the city planning commission's recommendation in this case

the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rta1 zoning with regard to the

dimensional variances, we find the proposed dimensions to be consistent with the adjoining

structure. With regard to the proposed use variance, we find no strict hardship stemming

from unique conditions of the lot. However, the proposed use is consistent with the adjacent

nonconformity cited by council and with the comprehensive plan recommendation to encourage

transit-oriented development. So the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant these

variances. Thank you. Meredith, your revised plans, how many pages is in that? One. Okay, thank you.

MI 2021-004-899-4820 Chester Avenue, I vote yes with revised plans, one page.

Harold Tenneri, my vote is yes with Proviso.

Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with Proviso. James Snell, yes with Proviso.

Ishmael Shaheed, yes, we're provisor.

Tanya, you had something to say?

Yes, Chair, I didn't know if the plans were reviewed, the proviso was reviewed already.

I did address it, yeah, the only addition-

No, I'm talking about by an attorney.

Oh, okay.

On the ZBA, typically proviso plans forms have to be reviewed and approved before granting.

i did send it with our packet last week yes we're currently not with an attorney

so we wouldn't need to hold this vote chair all right so all right we're going to hold this vote

till till next week okay thank you can you resend the vote please

MI 2021-004-899-4820 Chester Avenue.

We will hold the vote until next week.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

MI 2021-003-790-5019 Beaumont Avenue.

We're here for 5090, 19 Beaumont Avenue.

Ishmael Henrich.

Hi, this is Tanya Chair.

I believe this might be one of the cases where we did not receive any exhibits.

okay okay okay so this case is continued must be tried thank you

Okay, so this case is continued, must be tried.