and we're live
you and Tanya and
Tina we'll give you a few minutes you'll let us
know when you're ready
yes chair
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have about 49 attendees with us today, and we're ready to begin as you
One second, please.
Sorry about that.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I apologize for background noise.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary, Mr.
Professor Plaza and Board Member Mr. Thomas Holloman. Board Administrator Fatina L and Board
Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta along with our Zoning Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkit are also in
attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our hearings I'll go
through some of the basics of what you can expect. First we will be administering oaths to individual
participants prior to their testimony. Second we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is
being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to to be recorded
and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise. For anyone
participating by phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone participating by phone if you wish to
testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue. I will repeat. To enter an appearance statement,
call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue
and i'd like to remind everyone please do not attempt to testify in the chat any comments or
questions you have please direct them to fatina l or board administrator with that i will read off
If there is a case that was scheduled for 3.30 today, MI 2021-001-476-731 North Uber Street, that case will be held for one week.
There's an add-on case, MI 2020-002-483-1431 North 20th Street.
Excuse me, Chair.
This is Sharon.
If we could move that to the end of the session, I'd like to contact someone at Planning.
Yeah, okay.
All right.
We'll move that back.
Thank you.
On the 930 list, case number five, MI2021-001479, 1433 West Fisher Avenue is being continued.
Number 10 on our list, 930 list is MI2020-000282, 4625 Wayne Avenue.
And number 14 on our list, MI2020-003172599 Adams Avenue is requested to be withdrawn.
is requested to be withdrawn anyone has any comments or concerns or disagrees with the
Anyone has any comments or concerns?
three cases i read off as being continued or withdrawn please raise your hand at this time
only if you have concern about the cases i just read into the record
i see no handshare thank you i will now ask if anyone would like to request
a continuance or withdrawal to please raise their hand I see no hands at this time chair
you just want to make sure Sharon am I doing the north 20th street now
chair if you could announce ask if anyone is here for number three on the list this is the case that
has related cases scheduled for the 330 list and we'll move them all thank you mi 2021 that's
zero zero one four eight three one three four nine south linwood street is there anyone here
for this case. This is a related case to several cases that will be heard on a 330 list. I would
like to advise everyone that this case I just mentioned 1349 South Linwood Street will be
moved to the 330 list. Chair, we have one hand up. We have two hands up. The first hand is
He's been unmuted. Please wait for the chair.
Thank you, sir. Please identify yourself. Spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Morning, chair and board adjustments. I am Minister Enoch Amarayal.
That is spelled E-N-O-C-H-A-M-E-N-R-A-hyphen-E-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I affirm.
Thank you. Please.
Excuse me, Chair. Before you start, could we also check whether the attorney, Isaac Slepner, is in attendance?
Is Mr. Slepner available? Hold on, sir. I'll go right back to you.
Yeah, he's there. I see him.
Yeah, I'm here.
Yeah, Mr. Slepner, please identify yourself. I'll swear you in and have some questions for you.
Sure thing. Isaac Slepner with Mattione Limited. I am counsel to the owner of 1349 South Lindenwood. Mattione Limited is 100 North Independence Mall West, Suite 5A Northwest, Philadelphia PA, 19106.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. I don't know if you heard my statement and Mr. Amman, just hold off one second. I was going to, we were considering moving your three, the case for 1349 South Linwood to the 330 list because they're all connected to each other, related.
and rather than have people sit on the phone to hear testimony on this case and then have to come
back at 3 30 we thought we'd do it as a bundle and hear them all at the same time is there any
objection to that i don't have any objection no objection i think that's a brilliant idea thank
you okay so we'll see everybody back here at 3 30 as it relates to linwood avenue and the other
cases which i believe are wilton street cases correct correct correct all right thank you
thank you for your cooperation all right uh with that um excuse me chair we have one more
okay the hand just went down never mind all right i'm going to ask again any requests for
continuances or withdrawals for the 9 30 list um hi chair this is tanya sunkett um this is typical
um that uh i wanted to mention that the case that's being continued for
MI 2020 000282 has been scheduled multiple times since 2020, I believe February or May
of 2020. Can I make a request that this be a must be heard? I had suggested to the attorney
when he reached out to me to make sure he appeared for why he needed an additional continuance.
Which case is that? Excuse me, Chair. This is, I believe we discussed this last night.
it is 4625 wayne avenue yes it's number 10 the rco requested the continuance and the
applicant agreed to it but i agree it should be a must be heard okay so when i get to that
i'll make a note when i get to it must be heard okay i think that you've already announced it
Must be heard.
I think that you've already announced it as continued.
It has continued.
I'll read it into the record again.
MI 2020-000282-4625 Wayne Avenue is continued.
Must be heard.
Thank you.
Thank you, kindly Chair.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals for the 930 list?
I see no hands share. Thank you. With that, we can begin. I didn't leave anything off. Did I, Sharon?
So far? No, nothing so far.
1431-33 is an add-on, correct? North 20th?
Yes, you're going to call that at the end after I've spoken.
You want to wait. Right. Hold to the end. All right. MI 2021-001481, 1213 Crease, C-R-E-A-S-E Street.
mr dorizio has been promoted to panelists good morning sir please identify yourself
I'll spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Raymond Dorizio representing 1213 Cree Street.
My address is 2 Penn Center, Suite 520, Philadelphia PA 19102.
And the owner of the property is, he is on the call, Vincent Cianciotti.
I'll spell your last name, please, for the record.
d-o-r-i-z-i-o we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you please proceed sir you will agree to waive the reading of its refusal and
stipulate to attackers i do and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five
days prior to this area? Yes. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we have met with
the RCO. I sent the letter a couple days after that. I received it after I sent the packet,
but we did meet. Thank you. So this is 1213 Cree Street. This is our application to legalize a
duplex. We have a refusal. If I could share my screen. I'm going to pull up
packet here. And we have a refusal to RSA five district to dwelling units in an existing
structure. That was our refusal. We did sign a timely appeal. This property is located between
East Thompson Street and Girard Avenue. My client and his wife have basically owned this since the
late 90s. There was a deed between wife and husband in 2015, which is the current deed,
which i'm going through right now um these are the plans essentially it's a two-story
unit there it's set back off the street um he's proposing the first floor one bedroom with the
second floor a two-bedroom property there is parking this is a picture of the property
it's the one on the right next to this wooden fence here uh not the one with the white car
in the driveway there. Originally, my client purchased this property and his family lived
there. He had his mother and his sister in there. And essentially what he did was he had his mother
living in there kind of as an in-ball suite with his sister and her family there. They lived there
for the first few years in the property. Here's some photos of the interior.
there are tenants in there now sorry that was upside down these are some photos so essentially
after they left is when he rented it out there was a previous I believe the community indicated
this he previously went before the community on this I'm not sure if he actually pursued his
appeal before the ZBA I don't think that he did this is my client's tax clearance
um again he's had this property for over 20 years um he's looking to try to legalize it
we did meet with the community i believe they sent a letter in opposition um based on you know my
I believe they sent a letter in opposition based on, you know, my client doing this so long ago and I guess never really pursuing it.
client
But there are other multifamilies in the area.
There's some CMX one and two on the corners of the streets here.
My client is sort of in the middle of the block.
He's about two thirds up the street towards Girard Avenue.
um and that's essentially what he's looking to do to try to legalize the property
um and moving forward from there and my client is on the call i believe
you might see uh but that in this photo are there separate utilities i believe that there
i believe that there are do you have any photos showing the uh the utilities i don't think i have
any photos no attached showing the utilities my client could could basically give more of
that information mr chatti do you hear us i do okay so you heard my oh hold on hold on hold on
One moment, Mr. Cianciotti, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
It is Vincent, V-I-N-C-E-N-T, last name C-I-A-N-C-I-O-T-T-I.
You swear for him to tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed, Mr. D'Orazio.
Thank you.
So, Mr. Cianciotti, you heard my testimony so far.
Right. Based on your knowledge, is that a true and accurate representation? And would you adopt that as your own?
Okay. Now, the chairman did have a question as far as the utilities were concerned. Are they separate in there? Is that correct?
or they are yes um they are all separate and if you view the picture that is up on the screen that
i see now to the right of the front door on the first floor level there is two electric meters
right there yeah but i can see it better now the other one was the far shot i thought it was but
i wasn't this is this makes it easier to see thank you yes and to the left to the left underneath the
concrete steps there are two gas meters under there and just just for um just for purpose
this has been this is this picture is a little older so the the fascia has been fixed up there
that was a windstorm i didn't know i sent that picture okay to the right over the door
yes to the left over the left i'm sorry
all right so so correct me if i'm wrong your family you had family members living in one unit
and you were in the other unit actually it was my mother and my sister and my mother kind of
lived downstairs my sister was upstairs we you know had newborns and she was up there but it
was like one unit like kind of like an in-law suite slash home and then my um my sister decided
to move and took my mother with me with her and then um you know i had this i had this property
that was set up like this so i decided to rent it out as a duplex and i went for i i applied for
zoning in 2004 and you know life for me in 2004 2003 just got hectic and I believe I withdrew it
or I didn't was not able to make the ZBA hearing I can't remember back that far but um you know
it's been operating you know pretty good no violations anything the city does tell me to fix
or change i do taxes are up to date um i don't bring trouble i'm not a nuisance to the block
have you been paying your rental license well that's the one thing that um i haven't been able
to do because i can't apply for it i tried to apply for it but i can't apply for it because
of the zoning so this right okay do you manage the property mr chinchot are you the person that
the tenants would call to resolve issues yes i am i am the manager and i have managed it for
years okay all right uh any questions from the board no no anyone else would like to
testify in this case please raise your hand i see no handshare waiting commission good morning
Planning Commission. Good morning, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U with the City Planning Commission.
David Fecto, F.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
the Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for single-family use. L&I's Zoning Archive
shows that a refusal for two units was issued for this property in 2004 there is no evidence that
the refusal was appealed we have to assume the work proceeded without permits we recommend that
the board deny the requested variances 2004 huh okay um mi 2021 that's zero zero one four eight
1213 Cree Street, my vote is no.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
MI 2021-001494, 1318 Rittner Street.
Lower Moinesing Civic has sent a letter of support
and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Mark Squilla.
chair i've just promoted corinne wise to panelists thank you please identify yourself
spell spell your first and last name and i'll swear you in
good morning good morning mr wise please identify yourself and i'll swear
Yes, sir. Corenwise, C-O-R-E-N-W-I-S-E, Attorney for Applicant Dorinda O'Donnell, 1318 Rittner Street. I'm sorry, my address is 100 North 18th Street, Suite 300, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
Affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Sir, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, voters and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the panel.
On the call also today is my client, the applicant, Dorinda O'Donnell.
The address is 1318 Rittner Street, and the application is for a use variance.
Ms. O'Donnell is a licensed massage therapist, and in this space of 1318 on the first level, she's seeking a variance to operate a massage therapy and spa.
And if I can share my screen, I can pull up my exhibits.
Okay, so can you see my exhibit list?
yes yes so here's our refusal for 1318 rittner street um for the massage therapy with a medical
practitioner licensed by the state on the first floor um this was previously a doctor's office
at this location um doctor moved out here's the lease miss o'donnell has signed with the
landlord for the space on the first floor in the basement for 1318 Ritner Street. And
here's your tax clearance, or I should say the tax clearance for the property.
This is the zoning meeting notice,
which was supported by Lower Moyment Singh. And here's the plans. I'm sorry, it should have been,
Oh, that is the letter. I'm sorry. That's the letter of support. So support here.
Here's our plans. Let me shrink this down a little bit so we can see that.
So this is on the first floor here. That's the space in question. Above it, on the second and
third floor, are residences that are not part of this application and outside of the applicant's
the applicant's control, and the basement space is accessed in the rented space. So
control and the basement space.
I'll show you a picture of that. Right now, that's just sort of finished, but open.
But the front door, there's a, here's the stairs up to the apartments above, and here's the door
into the um office and we'll you'll see there's a reception area a desk a laboratory some practice
rooms behind and then uh there's stairs inside the space down to the basement which would be
over here and you come out in the basement there's some storage in a room and this is
open with a small bathroom there and if i go to the photos i can show you let me flip this
okay so uh our vestibule our reception area
this is this is the this is the door into the office this is a receptionist uh station
small bathroom up front in the waiting area uh not this pardon interruption um i think you can
summarize would be helpful. Thank you. Um, Mr. N is looking for a variant so she can use this
existing, uh, office for her massage therapy. The name of the practice will be muscle and flow.
Muscle what? Muscle and flow. And, uh, if, if, if you'd like to promote her, I can have her, um,
yeah, the reason I'm, I'm very familiar with that block. I know there were many doctor offices on
at 1300 block right right behind the hospital the parking garage yeah right of course there's the
basement she's available to be sworn in chair please identify yourself spell your spell your
full name and i'll swear you in uh my name my name is dorinda o'donnell d-o-r-i-n-d-a-o apostrophe
d-o-n-n-e-l-l you swear from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes sir hey miss o'donnell did you hear my testimony i did did you find everything to be
accurate yes muscle and slow massage is the name of the place but yes i don't get the end of muscle
and? Muscle and, A-N-D, flow, massage. L-O? F-L-O-W. Flow, flow, okay. And do you adopt my testimony
as your own for this hearing? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Questions from the board? No. No. Anyone
else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand i see no handshare thank you
planning commission good morning mr chairman members of the board david facto city planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends this property for single family use however
there appear to be at least two other home-based businesses on this side of ritner street the
application for personal services appears to match the character of the block. We recommend that the
board approve the requested variance. Thank you. MI 2021-001494, 1318 Rittner Street, my vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is yes. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes. Thank you. We go to number four on our list, MI 2021-001480.
1439 East Passiunk Avenue.
There's a letter of non-opposition from Passiunk Square Civic Association
and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Mark Squilla.
Mr. DiRizio is coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. DiRizio, just please identify yourself with a record, spell your full name,
and you're already still under oath.
Yes. Good morning again, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Raymond D'Orizio, D-O-R-I-Z-I-O, attorney for applicant, address to Penn Center, Philadelphia PA 19102.
Mr. D'Orizio, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attack?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We have. Please proceed. Thank you.
Thank you.
So if I can have one minute to pull up what I have.
If I can have one minute to pull up what I have. I'm sorry. I have to go through this, get it back up.
okay so this is a refusal basically it's a rsa 5 zoning district it's application for a takeout
restaurant on the first floor with single family housing on the second floor the property is
located at pass junk avenue and dickinson street um my client is proposing to do an ice cream
takeout business. No inside eating, just serving cones and pints. Takeout from that location and
a timely appeal was filed. If I can get over to, we did meet with the community. There's a lease
attached here. It's in my client's name. The business is Milk John. They do have other locations
in the city. It's a corner property at issue. I'm going to get to our photos. Here is the
plans. So it's right on the corner. Entry would be right in the caddy corner there
for the restaurant, or I'm sorry, the takeout. These are the posting zoning notices. That's
a picture of the front of the building from Pashunk Avenue looking east. And that's Dickinson
Street looking east again. Building is the white building there. There are other businesses in the
area. There's a bar across the street, Acme, and I believe a senior center on the other side,
coffee shop on the other corner. So essentially, these are some interior photos. This is the
basement in the utilities. This is the first floor where customers will come in. This is the
basement, I believe. It's the first floor. This is a menu. It's all going to be takeout, pints,
cones. Here is the tax clearance. Essentially, my client will handle the trash. She'll be having
someone on site cleaning up. Commercial trash is in the lease. We have met with the community.
there was no opposition and my client's looking forward to try to get started with another
location for the business and I believe that my client is on the call Amy Wilson Wilson please
put your hand raise your hand and when I acknowledge you just spell your full name
and I'll swear you in Miss Wilson please unmute yourself and wait for the
ms wilson hello hi good morning ms wilson please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
a-m-y-w-i-l-s-o-n where from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do, yes. Please proceed, Mr. Doratio. Thank you. Ms. Wilson, you hear my testimony. Is it
truthful and accurate? It is. Okay, and would you adopt it as your own? Yes. Okay, thank you.
Any questions from the board? No. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
i see no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission good morning david fecto
city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this
property for commercial and residential mixed use the proposed takeout restaurant matches the
recommendation of the comprehensive plan and is in keeping with the general character of the block
We recommend that the board approve the requested variances.
Thank you. MI 2021-001480, 1439 East, Passyonk Avenue, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Thank you. We go to number six on our list.
Thank you. Good luck. MI 2021-001492, 2015 Church Lane.
Vernon Anastasio was the attorney of record. Faith Community Development Corporation sent
a letter of support. Mr. Anastasio. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Vern Anastasio on behalf of the owner of 2015.
So Vern Anastasio, on behalf of the owner of 2015 Church Lane, that's A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, 1315 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, 19107.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Anastasio, you agree to waive the reason of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, folders and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
I met with the RCO, but I did not get a letter directly.
I don't know if one was sent to the zoning board.
they did indicate support at the meeting but i'm not sure if they produced the letter
and we did receive a letter in support this is sharon thank you
may i proceed mr chair yes please thank you i'm going to share my screen
okay 2015 church lane as you can see it's a corner property
uh two separate entrances since 1957 it's been uh two units uh the first floor however uh the
long history of this property uh was that this first floor was a business it was a produce store
It was a meat market, several other commercial businesses.
At some point over the past decade or so, this property was outfitted as another residential unit.
My client just recently purchased the property thinking that it was, in fact, a legal two family.
And what he did was relied on the fact that there are two separate electric meters, as you can see here.
But unfortunately, it has not been legalized as an existing two-family dwelling.
We'll pull back and show you the plans.
These are ample units.
The second floor is a two-bedroom unit.
The first floor is a one-bedroom unit.
It's directly on the corner, as I said.
The property on the opposite corner is also a multifamily dwelling that once had some CMX-2 treatment or CMX-1 treatment.
And then two doors down at 2019 is another two-family dwelling.
I've submitted photos for your review.
And there's some proof of posting.
Given the history of the property, the treatment historically, the fact that my client believed it was a two-family dwelling and purchased it just by looking at it with the two separate entrances and the two separate electric meters, and because we met with the RCO and they agree with this use, they do not want commercial on the first floor at all, and they realize that turning this into a single-family dwelling would be impracticable.
As a result, we respectfully request the granting of the variance, and I would like my client, Leron, to raise his hand so he could be recognized.
Mr. Leron, please unmute yourself.
Sir, please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Liran Ben-Shoshan, L-I-R-A-N-B-E-N-S-H-O-S-H-A-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you. Liran, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Yes, I did.
And is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony if need be?
Thank you. That's all I have, Mr. Chair. I'm open for questions.
Thank you. Again, I apologize for the background noise. Any questions from the board?
Anyone else like to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. Please unmute yourself and wait for the...
Morning, Mr. Richardson.
there we go okay now i'm unmuted good morning mr chair charles from the office of councilwoman
Charles Richardson from the office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312, City Hall.
cindy bass room 312 city hall
You swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The Councilwoman has no objections to granting this variance.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else to testify in this case?
I see no other hands, Chief.
Thank you, Planning Commission.
Good morning, David Vecto, City Planning Commission, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single-family use.
The former storefront appears to have been converted to a residential unit without benefit of permits.
However, the use appears to predate the current zoning for the neighborhood.
We recommend the board approve the requested variance.
Thank you. MI 2021-001-492-2015 Church Lane, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Could everyone hear me over this background noise I have?
Yes, Frank.
We hear you very well, Chief Chair.
Okay. MI 2021-001492. I'm sorry, excuse me. I already heard that. Go to number eight on our list.
How about number seven, Frank?
Number seven, MI 2020-003076, 2614 Rohn Street. This is a second listing. Have we received any exhibits, Sharon?
we have not is there anyone here for 2614 ron street
i see no hands chair thank you mi 2020 that's zero zero three zero seven six two six one four
ron street my vote is to dismiss professor plaza dismiss thomas holloman dismiss you go to number
eight now. Number eight is MI 2020-000336. 3128 West Montgomery Avenue. There's a letter of support
from the 32nd Ward RCO. This is a pro se case. Linwood Jones. And this was a must be heard.
Mr. Jones has been promoted to panel. Thank you. Please identify yourself with a record
spell your first name a full name and i'll swear you in uh lenwood jones l-e-n-w-o-o-d-j-o-n-e-s
we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yeah thank you please proceed mr jones have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing? Yes, sir. And have you met with the RCO and have
a letter? Yes, sir. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. Chairman. Yes, please proceed. Can you
uh share your documents on the screen please uh me yes oh we we don't have any documents to show
that i thought we sent them all in to the uh to the board believe the last time you was here we
have told you that whenever you're ready to present your case you
yes sir the last document that we sent in uh was the letter from the rco that's what we needed
that was required what about plans there was no everything was already it was we're just trying
to improve the existence of uh what it is now what it exists as yeah we need to see if you got
to put it up on your screen so that we could see what is it that you're trying to do well we're
just trying to legalize the the its existence right now so of course we understand but we
we have we need to see what it is you're asking us to legalize
and that was explained to you back in i believe april you when you had
you had an attorney miss pritzker representing you then no sir
no that was a different case oh i'm sorry i'm looking at the wrong one my apologies my
apologies that's the next case no problem so sharon do we have any exhibits
problem so Sharon do we have any exhibits we do chair perhaps you could move this to the end of
the list and I could email the exhibit packets to the board members okay we'll go to number nine
Thank you. MI 2020-001-741-441 East Washington Lane.
Logan Dry is coming back in as a panelist.
No, Logan is the architect, right?
is the applicant or owner or attorney here we don't have one listed this is an llc
must be have a have be represented by council is there anyone here for 441 east washington lane
there was a letter sent by rachel pritzker uh right withdrawing this uh application
No, she did not withdraw the application. She withdrew her. She is no longer the attorney, but the case is still active.
Right. Anyone here? One more time for 441 East Washington Lane.
I see no hands, Chair.
All right. MI 2020-001741, 441 East Washington Lane. My vote is to dismiss.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe we go to case number 11 and 12.
I think they were somewhat connected, right?
MI 2021-001485, 5212 Beaumont Street.
and uh mr slepner is representing mi20 excuse me this is sharon i'm not
i'm actually not certain if these should be called together could you ask mr slepner
thank you just i was just about to do that thank you uh good morning um mr slepner are these cases
related uh they uh nominally yeah they're owned it's the same uh developer same owner um
um and why don't we do this we'll hear him separately all right yeah that that's okay
thank you okay so let's hear mi 2021-001-485-5212 beaumont street we'll go okay um good morning
mr chair good morning mr slepner you agreed a way to read in of its refusal and stipulate to
its accuracy i do and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five
days prior to this hearing yes we have and have you met with the rco and have a letter yes we have
and yes we do thank you you've been sworn in already i was sworn okay you're still on the road
thank you thank you okay uh good morning mr chair members of the board isaac slepner with
Mattione Limited for the owner of 5212 Beaumont Street, Easy House Cash, LLC. My client, LeVar
Clark, who is the member of Easy House Cash, LLC, is on this call also. And our architect,
Logan Dry, is also here. Without further ado, I'm going to jump into our printed materials,
if I may, if I may share my screen. All right, here we go. Nope, 5212 Beaumont. Nope, sorry.
Let me start from the top. 5212 Beaumont Street. I'll start right off the top. Can everybody see
my screen yes all right and uh actually let me go full screen here nice bear with me here
i know there's a way to full screen it oh all right if everybody can see it i'm just going to
proceed uh this is their certificate of tax clearance um issued on july 21st valid through
820 for Easy House Cash, LLC owner of 5212 Beaumont. Item two is our notice of refusal,
which we already stipulated to. Item three is a RCO letter of support from the 51st Ward
Democratic Committee, which is the coordinating RCO for this property. The letter is dated July
30th. I believe the board has received this separately from the RCO chairs, but if not, it is
has received this separately from the RCO chairs, but if not, it is right here before you at this
moment. As you can see, we met with the RCO twice on this and they are offering us support. They
didn't note their vote totals, but they did note that they are supporting us on this project and
on our variances sought. There are a lot of RCOs in this neighborhood, by the way, as you can see
on all the CCs down here. But this coordinating RCO was the 51st Ward Democratic Committee.
Exhibit four is our site plan. And I am going to tilt this this way. And I'm actually going to,
As you can see, it's a three-story. It's planned as a two-unit property. It's on an RSA-5, so the variance we're seeking is for use.
This is the site plan. As you can see, there's Beaumont Street, front steps. This is the building footprint.
There's a rear yard, and there's also a roof deck proposed.
uh exhibit five are our floor plans so it's a two unit um and the units would be the first floor and
basement would be one unit second floor and third floor would be a second unit the first floor would
have um you know access from the front door egress well at the basement level at the rear and also
use of the rear yard second and third floor would have uh access to the roof deck so the roof deck
would not be for the whole building would only be for the unit to the second third floor unit.
This is an elevation front and rear. It's pretty much designed to, you know, match other design
and development in the neighborhood. This is a rendering. Exhibit six is a rendering of what it
would look like, you know, brick with the stairs going up to the side, some large double home
windows this bump out and um parapet there uh with the five foot setback um exhibit seven
are some photos and i'll just take you through these quickly um
this is the current view of 5212. 5212 uh these vacant are actually two right about where the
rear bumper of that car is over to the left. That's 5212 Beaumont. Here's just another view of it.
Again, as you can see from that stucco wall there to about the rear bumper of that car,
that's the footprint of 5212. And as you can see right now, it's vacant.
And these are photos of our orange poster that went up at least 21 days ago.
at 5212 Beaumont. I think we have three photos of that.
Just want to make sure everybody gets a chance to look at them. There's a second photo, third photo.
And Exhibit 8 is our application, our initial application.
As you can see, it was filed on 3-25-21, timely. Exhibit 9 is our project information form with
all the information that the city requests from us. Exhibit 10 is an affidavit of service
of our notice to the neighbors of the community meeting. This was signed and sworn on July 19th.
The notices were sent out on July 15th and this is a copy, Exhibit A, to this is a copy of the letter
that we wrote to the neighbors regarding 5212 Beaumont and as we cc the council member's office
all of the related RCOs and a lot of people got cc'd on this again as I mentioned there are a
number of RCOs attached was our original notice of refusal and exhibit b are all the addresses
that we mailed exactly as instructed by the planning commission so it's a pretty dense
neighborhood in that part of the city so there's i would say at least about 100 150 addresses that
were mail dropped uh and then exhibit 11 is the deed and you'll see that my client purchased this
uh and recorded the deed on uh 8 9 of 2018 um at sheriff sale and conveyed to easy house cash llc
um that is all i have at this time and um any questions from the board so if you uh you have
your client? Yes, I'd like to call my client, LeVar Clark. Mr. Clark, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair. Yes, I'm here. Mr.
yes i'm here uh mr clark um excuse me mr slepner mr clark please spell your full name
and i'll swear you in uh name is lavar clark l as in larry e as in edward v as in victor a as
an apple r as in robert clark without an e where from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth yes please proceed mr slatner okay uh mr clark are you the uh member of easy
house cash llc yes i am and did you hear all the testimony that i offered to the board today
yes i did and would you adopt that testimony uh as though you yourself had given it yes i would
thank you i have nothing further questions from the board no
Anyone else like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Here we have Carmen.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Ma'am, please spell your full name.
c-a-r-m-e-n my last name fermandois f-e-r-m-a-n-d-o-y-s you swear affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i swear yes and please proceed uh i live in 1338
Wilton Street. I participated in the meeting two nights ago. We received the letter from
the lawyers and the office of the developer like three days ago. So it hasn't been a long time for
us to... Let me ask you, ma'am, I need to interrupt. You said you live on Wilton Street?
yes you're here for the cases that'll be heard this afternoon i believe oh i'm really sorry
no problem those that case will be heard in the 330 list
okay thank you anyone else to testify yes chair we have andrew goodman please unmute yourself
mr goodman and wait for the chair thank you mr goodman you know the drill please
identify yourself and i'll swear you win good morning andrew goodman g-o-o-d-m-a-n
you're representing the office of third district council member jamie gaudier room 586 city hall
you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do
thank you first i just had uh wanted to ask a point of clarification um since our office hadn't
received any rco letter until i saw it pop up on the screen um so i was wondering if we could go
back to that to clarify i didn't see i saw the normal meeting summary with where the vote is
normally tabulated but didn't see any actual numbers of people in the vote so i was just
wondering if council could clarify what happened there mr slush did point that out there is a box
the box is checked in support but there's no uh count no number of yeah that um this is what the
rco had sent to us i can share it again if um yeah could you do that would you do that sure
thing bear bear bear with me like here we go all right 5212 beaumont and you're interested in
seeing the rco letter one more time sure uh here we go exhibit two nope that's our notice of refusal
Exhibit 3, meeting summary form. I mean, I'll just scroll through this slowly if you want.
As you can see, the RCO has adopted a position of support for the construction of the two family, noting that the two meetings were held, that the final position was one of support.
They didn't list a vote total. I'm not sure why. That might be something you would want to inquire.
This is, you know, late, late information. So I just wanted to see if there was any clarification.
I understand.
And so, yeah, and so there is, I think there's a certain amount of, I don't know if confusion
is the right word, but I'll use it just because there are probably between eight and 12 very
similar zoning variance applications, all by the same applicant, all within a couple
all by the same applicant all within a couple blocks of one another so that's why and there's
blocks of one another.
So that's why, and there's obviously a bulk of them.
obviously a bulk of them that are being that are going to be discussed later this afternoon so
i'll hold the bulk of it for that um but you know based on the relatively kind of based on how
recently this area was remapped and certainly based on concerns that we've heard from neighbors
on comparable blocks nearby um our office our office would oppose the granting of this variance
mr goodman um would it be helpful if uh mr slepner or your office reached out to the rco
to find out why they did not put a vote count in there it would be helpful yeah absolutely
you know i you know i take mr slepner at his word that the letter is accurate
it uh so i'm not sure if you're basing the opposition on the fact that there's no vote
count or based on what you know about other concerns in that community i think it's well
it's both and i think our question would be you know obviously every block is different right and
so we would want to be we would want to be making sure that there were near neighbors on that block
that were that were part of that that were part of that meeting and part of that vote
and because the next case that mr slepner has is for 5307 chester apparently from the same
developer yes and i haven't seen the case information yet but my guess is it's going
to be similar but we'll wait till we get to that one yeah i don't know if it's the same applicant
but it is in the same area what i would suggest is that we'll close the record uh and the board
will uh no actually not close the record um what i would suggest is we uh have a resumption
hearing strictly for the purpose of uh feedback from the rco
does that make sense that way rco and the councilwoman's office yes and the council
that that way you mr goodman your office will have clarification
well i would um i would just say you know we have a letter from the rco right here i again i'm not
sure why they didn't include the specific numbers um i can certainly ask them as well i'm sure mr
goodman will as well um we we can have that done by next week i mean if you reach out to rco and
they submit a letter to to the board and to the councilwoman's office uh that that would i think
be helpful i think i understand mr goodman's position uh based on some of the other opposition
uh for other applications in that in that area so i think for one week mr slepner i think will
make everybody put everybody in a more comfortable position chair would it be enough and mr goodman
if um the record were held open only for mr goodman to um again offer the councilwoman's
recommendation after he has had an opportunity to yeah that's where i was going yeah something
like that okay yes thank you and i appreciate the opportunity to get more so mr slepner you
can get this done in the next 24 hours i'm sure it's to us and and and to the councilwoman's
office yeah um i can do that uh will this be listed for next week um we can do it as an add-on
can't we uh sharing yes yeah we'll do it unless miss unless miss sunkett objects to that won't
be any testimony you'll just be reading the nope it's totally fine okay okay i i may have a well
i can get this done behind the scenes you know between today and tomorrow today and the end of
the week we won't need your appearance we will just vote it up or down at that time all right
Well, we will need Mr. Goodman's appearance only to testify as to whether the councilman's position has changed.
Understood, but Mr. Schleppner, we won't be.
Yeah, I understand. I guess the only other thing I would offer is that, you know, this this whole neighborhood here was rezoned at the end of 2019 with a rezoning bill that was introduced by Councilmember Blackwell as she was leaving office.
And for years and decades before the hand had been zoned RM1. So, you know, that's really the only real reason we're here in the first place. I would just leave that out there on the record as well.
Okay, understood.
Excuse me, this is Sharon. Two questions. First, Mr. Slepner, is the same issue going to be raised in the next case?
the next case is a very similar it's the same ownership um it's you know a different address
obviously we have a letter from the same rco from 51st world democratic
We have a letter from the same RCO, from 51st Ward Democratic Committee, and I'm looking through my materials right now.
This letter doesn't seem to have a vote count either.
So, Mr. Goodman, would you want to have that held until next week as well?
If possible, it would be very helpful, but I'm not understanding that.
We'll do it that way. We'll just hear this case and do the same.
Sharon? One more thing. Have we heard the Planning Commission's recommendation?
I didn't get to that yet. Oh, I'm sorry. Sure. That's okay. We were asking for comments and
Mr. Goodman raised his hand. Thank you. I appreciate the consideration. Not to interrupt.
All right. Anyone else to testify in this case?
i see no handshare thank you so mi 2021-001485 5212 beaumont street this hearing will be resumed
on wednesday uh august the 11th excuse me chair i'm sorry did we get the planning commission
we did not I apologize planning commission good morning Mr. Chairman sorry David oh that's
that's that's perfectly okay David Fecto city planning commission Mr. Chairman members of the
board the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single family use
this is a 1,000 square foot lot there are no unique circumstances of the lot that would prevent
it from being used in conformance with the zoning code we recommend to the board deny the requested
variances. Thank you. MI 2021-001485, 5212 Beaumont Street. This resumption hearing will take place
next Wednesday, August the 11th at 9 30 a.m., at which time the board will consider any feedback
from the RCO and Councilwoman Gauthier's office.
Next case, MI 2021-001484-5307 Chester Avenue.
Mr. Slepner, you're still on the roof.
I'm sorry, Chairman.
This is Tanya Sunkett.
If I could request that you announce
there is another alternate board member sitting with you.
Okay, there is an alternate board member.
If I could just add next week, next week will be difficult, if not impossible for me to join.
And so if you think this case is coming back next week, and you would need me, I would suggest that you don't involve me in this case, unless you need me today.
Unless, unless I wouldn't need to come back next week.
I don't think we're going to get another alternate, but I think.
because i could sit out for one more case just if you know this one's coming back
well it's going to be handled the same way as the previous case we just read we'll hold it
uh because the letter from the rco is the same it has the same issue of concern for mr goodman
as did the one with the beaumont street um chair could we check whether the three board members
You and the two board members in attendance, if everyone is going to be here next week.
Well, I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, if I may.
I'm actually, I was going to say, I have a scheduling conflict for next week, the 11th.
I would prefer to be present with my client.
And it seems that Mr. Mondiak might have a scheduling conflict as well.
I was just going to suggest Wednesday, the 18th, if these can be reheard at that time
or resumed at that time.
okay and then again is anyone going to be does anyone expect to be absent on the 18th
i will be out next week but i'll be here the following week perfect thank you the 18th will
work better all the way around yep the 18th is not going to work for me i will be available
not going to work for who i i will not be available on the 18th
mr goodman who's who's i know exactly where i'm gonna be thomas holloman will be available
sorry who will not be available is that you john john monlock will not be available i i know
exactly where i'll be that day okay i will not have internet hopefully it's in a better place
okay uh how about the 25th it's not necessary if the three board members who are here today are
going to be here on the 18th then you can do it on the 18th okay do it on the 18th
Thank you, Chair and Board Members.
thank you chair and board members i'm sorry for the confusion especially
I'm sorry for the confusion, especially to the court reporter.
So this case will be resumed on August the 18th at 930 a.m., as is the case for number MI 2021-001484-5307 Chester Avenue.
We will now take testimony on that case.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Isaac Slepner, again, with Mattione Limited, 100 North Independence Mall, West Suite, 5A Northwest, Philadelphia PA, 19106.
For the applicant, Junk Property, LLC.
And I will, if I may, just jump right into our presentation.
Mr. Slepner, you agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
We have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
All right. Let me jump in here and share the screen.
So we let me go to. OK, I'll start with my 5307 Chester materials.
We actually had some revised plans. And I think those were sent to the board, I want to say yesterday, with a revised plan form. But the only revision, no additional variances were sought. We changed the dimensions of the front porch.
And this was actually a thing that we had discussed with the RCO. But at this point, I imagine when I go back for clarification from the RCO, I'll ask them to chime in on that. But let me take you through my materials. I'll show you what we've got here.
So the property is 5307 Chester, it's zoned RSA 5 and we're seeking to construct a four unit at the property. This is a tax clearance certificate showing that junk property LLC, the owner of 5307 Chester is compliant. This was issued on 721 valid through 820.
Item two is our notice of refusal, which, as I mentioned, we had just stipulated to.
Item three is the aforementioned letter of support from the 51st Ward Democrat Committee RCO.
And I'll go slow through this one. Everybody can get a good look at it.
Again, this is a letter of support over here, position of support.
This is 5212.
I'm not sure why 5307.
And you know what?
This is actually, they are 53, they misspelled Chester, 5307 Chester Avenue.
So the position of support and the coordinating RCO is 51st Ward Democrats.
Again, they cc'd all of the affected RCOs, and I will go back, since the board is going to hold this open, I'm going to go back to the RCO and discuss with them.
As I said, we had some revised plans, so let me walk everybody through those plans.
This is the site plan, and as you can see, this is the footprint.
This is Chester Avenue.
There is a bit of a setback from the street, and we are proposing to put on a front porch here.
We're not changing any of the elements of lot coverage, open space, or really square footage.
It's just that there's going to be an open front porch here before you come up to the entry steps and the footprint of the building rear yard.
This is the front elevation, rear elevation.
Our plans are, let me, sorry, bear with me, let me, can I pause this share for a moment?
I'm going to pull up our plans.
Thanks.
I'll stop the share.
Uh-huh.
All right.
Thanks for your patience. Let me
let me just grab these plans here.
Let me just grab these plans here.
Sorry, thank you.
Logan, I think my architect is on the call, and I think he has the copy of the revised plans
that he might be able to share with us. Logan, are you on here?
he's coming back in as a panelist thank you
can you hear me isaac yeah hi so i i have him but i don't know sir please identify yourself
with the records spell your first and last name logan dry l-o-g-a-n-d-r-y architect of record kca
design associates 6525 tulip street philadelphia pa 19135 where from to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do
logan are you able to um share those no i'm emailing them to you again but i don't
at this point okay thank you uh the zoning plan the zoning plan that was on there did show the
originally proposed multifamily design with the only revision being the addition of the front
porch per the RCO request. But I'll send over those plans right now. You should have them.
Thank you. And I apologize for the confusion here. Um, yeah.
oh i'm sorry we've got our here let me let me resume uh sharing i i've located the plans here
I'm going to share the screen again and we're just yeah so Logan if you might take the board
through the floor plans of this real quickly if you can see my screen yep I don't know if you're
able to rotate or not but you want me to turn it around counterclockwise if you could all right
here we go perfect um so just to get your bearings uh left is uh chester avenue and the
right is the rear of the property so um as i mentioned uh starting out on the ground floor
you enter the building through an open porch um which you have again that the rco felt strongly
that you know that the building would seem a little bit more contextual with the front porch
whereas we didn't originally have a front porch so we went back to the drawing board out of the
front porch and redesign some of the windows on the front facade you know as you'll see in the
documentation that isa provided there's no additional coverage refusals or anything else
related to that and we had some additional square footage to work with so by adding the porch you
know we we were able to make the building a little bit more contextual without getting any more
zoning refusals but to the point of the floor plans you walk in off that front porch you've got
two units in the in the ground floor in the cellar that are bi-level um you know those are both one
bedroom units um with your living spaces on the main floor and then your um sleeping spaces um
in the cellar that have walkout um egress wells um you take that staircase back up to the second
floor uh you scroll up just a tiny bit isaac there yeah second floor yep so here you land on the
second floor and what you have here is a flat so this is a two-bedroom two-bath unit that comprises
the whole second floor um so again here you've got a bedroom bath in the front living spaces in the
middle of the property with its own private terrace off the back and then you've got your
second bedroom and bathroom towards the rear of the property take that same set of stairs up then
to the third floor here we go yep and the third floor is an identical layout to the second floor
So again, a two-bedroom, two-bath flat with bedrooms flanking the front and the rear of the property, and your living space is in the middle.
And then you've got your pilot house there on roof deck, which is just accessible for that third floor unit.
So all in all, it's a four-unit building, a mix between two-bedroom units and one-bedroom units laid out as I mentioned.
a mix between two-bedroom units and one-bedroom units laid out as I had just described.
Thank you, Logan. This is a copy of our front and rear elevation. You can see that
this amendment was just to add the porch there at the front. Exhibit 6 is a rendering. Well,
that's an old rendering, but we've edited this since to include, like I said, a front porch area.
Subit 7 are photos of the site. This is the site as it currently appears.
It's this one-third, I would say, from the wall of this adjoining house over here, that's 5309, to about this tree.
The other two are separately owned properties. That's our property, 5307.
here's another photo of it just so you kind of can see it in context um 7b are photos of our
orange poster that went up 21 days ago there's the orange poster there's another one of the orange
poster um and there's a third one of the orange poster exhibit eight is our um appeal application
that was filed timely um on 3-25-21 uh exhibit nine is our project information form exhibit 10
nine is our project information from exhibit 10 is our affidavit of service
of notice to the neighbors um it was signed on may 6th uh the notices were sent on april 29th
for the RCO meeting.
Exhibit A is a copy of the letter to the neighbors
dated April 27th.
And noticing everyone of the ZBA hearing on August 4th,
the meeting was originally scheduled for May 17th
and we met at that point.
And then again, later on when the plans were revised,
we cc'd all the RCOs,
the council member's office, et cetera.
along with our original refusal and the list of addresses provided to us by the planning
commission again it's pretty dense neighborhood there are about 100 150 or so uh i haven't counted
them um finally exhibit 11 is a deed in favor of junk property llc again a sheriff's deed
recorded in favor of my client on august 21st of 18 and at this point i would like to call my
client, LeVar Clark. Mr. Clark, just identify yourself. You're still under oath.
Yes, name is LeVar Clark. Mr. Clark, did you hear all the, I'm sorry, Mr. Clark,
you are a member of Junk Property LLC, correct? Yes. And did you hear all the testimony that I
offered to the board today yes and did you hear all the testimony that logan dry offered to the
board today yes and would you adopt all of that testimony as though you had given it yourself
yes thank you i have nothing further questions from the board no no anyone else like to testify
in this case please raise your hand
i see no hands here thank you planning commission good morning david fecto city planning commission
mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential
single family use the city changed the zoning map here in 2019 and this is a 1632 square foot
lot. However, L&I Zoning Archive indicates that two houses on this block have permission for two
unit buildings, two have permission for three unit buildings, and two have permission for rooming
houses. We recommend that the Board approve the requested variance. Thank you. As I stated earlier,
MI 2021-001484 5307 Chesner Avenue this hearing will be resumed on August the 25th at 9 30 a.m
at which time the board will consider any feedback related to the RCO and Councilwoman
Gaultier's position thank you excuse me chair I thought it was August 18th
Was it? I don't know. We went back and forth so many times.
Yes, I know.
Is it the 18th, Tanya?
All right. So I'm sorry. So correction, this case will be resumed on August the 18th at 9.30.
so correction this case will be resumed on august the 18th at 9 30 a.m thank you
thank you chair i i well i have nothing further on this list i'm i'm on the 330 list um thank you
again we'll see you then thank you okay thanks uh we gotta go let's go back to uh number eight i
believe we've finished that one correct montgomery avenue um no i emailed the exhibits he wasn't able
to share them uh the other board members confessor and tom have you seen those uh exhibits yes okay
proceed uh for some reason i can't bring it up uh mr chairman on this john on john monlech
I am on I'm looking for the exhibits right now John I apologize I did not
send them to you I will right now if I officially recognize John earlier so
John Monlock M-O-N-D-L-A-K the Planning Commission is also attending as a
board member if i could make a request mr monlock could you turn your video off
because your internet look like it might go at any moment
it's off thank you kylie
okay so while we're waiting uh maybe mr jones lenwood jones uh we're back up with you uh
please give us a description of what you're proposing
yes sir
mr jones describe what it is you're asking this board to approve
uh yes chairman yes we were just trying to legalize
its existence
how long have you owned it
it's 2005
mr chairman yes tom i have it now
Okay, thank you. That's Mr. Holloman. All right. Could you walk us through Mr. Jones briefly?
Yes, Chairman. We currently is, we have three apartments in the property. And of course, when I purchased the home, it was a multifamily home as well.
And we just want to, I guess, get it legalized that it is a three-apartment residence.
Sorry about this noise.
I'm going to ask, is there anyone else who has any questions?
I'm sorry, does the board have any questions?
No, it's pretty hard. Some of the drawings are hard to read.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good morning. David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single family use.
L&I's zoning archive shows a permit issued in 1987 to convert a two-unit building into a single-family home.
Existing multiple units appear to have been built without benefit of permit.
We recommend that the board deny the requested variance.
Thank you.
Mr. Jones.
Yes, sir.
When did you purchase this property? When was that?
five and it was presented to me as you know as the uh uh holy family home you know every every
every floor had bathrooms kitchen or one it was just we went forward with the same situation
which we purchased excuse me do you have separate meters yes
yes and it looks like it's been renovated into three units yes it was
and it looks like it's been
three units when we first when we bought the home it was in bad shape of course
so it had to be renovated thank you yes you're welcome okay
MI 2020-000336-3128 West Montgomery Avenue. My vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
i still don't have exhibits okay well we got three uh majority so thank you
mi 2021 that's 001487 540 west moreland avenue
attorney uh vernon astasios for the applicant and attorney darren steinberg for the neighborhood
who opposed his proposal.
Chestnut Hill Community Association
sent a letter of opposition.
Mr. Anastasio, you're still under oath.
Please identify yourself and proceed.
Chair, before you begin,
we also received a letter in opposition
from Councilwoman Best.
Thank you.
Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O,
1315 Walnut Street, Suite 1006 Philadelphia, 19107. May I share my screen? Mr. Anastasi,
you agree to waive the region of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. And have you
emailed an exhibit packet with the required document, proof of ownership, proof of tax
compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
i do please proceed thank i we actually met with the rco four separate occasions uh before they
rendered a decision but uh nevertheless i'm going to share my screen
mr chairman members of the board this is uh this is pretty straightforward uh and
uncontroversial as far as i can tell this is a 25 000 square foot lot right here as you can see
my cursor is encircling it. It's over 25,000 square feet. All we want to do is relocate some
lot lines. I mean, we're not proposing anything else but that. In order to relocate the lot lines,
we are proposing a subdivision, this lot here, and then this lot back here. In order to access
this lot, however, we need to have some frontage that takes the property back in this way.
This is why we've been refused. I'll show you the refusal. That 15-foot driveway
needs to be 75 feet. Now, that doesn't sound like a bad idea. It's 25,000 square feet.
We can easily just take the lot and cut it in half, right?
Just cut the whole property right in half.
We could do that as a matter of right.
We wouldn't need to be before the RCO.
We wouldn't need to be before the zoning board.
However, there's a unique condition on this lot that prevents us from doing this as a matter of right.
And that condition is this structure here has been designated by the Historic Commission for Historic Protection.
As a result, the unique condition exists.
It causes a hardship.
We cannot tear it down.
The only way to subdivide now is to present it as we have here on the right.
Now, the hardship, you're going to say, well, your client bought a property and it's historically protected, and, you know, that's on him.
But the fact of the matter is, this hardship was not created by my client.
The hardship was actually created by the RCO because they decided to play a few games.
My client went under contract on the 13th of February, 2019.
They closed on the property the 12th of March, 2019. Then the RCO submitted on the 21st for historic protection. So the hardship, the unique condition exists not by the hand of my.
The hardship, the unique condition exists not by the hand of my client, but by the RCO.
So the only way we can now subdivide is by preserving the property and having this flag
lot again, but for the RCO submitting after purchase to protect this property, we could
have cut this right down the middle as a matter of right, no questions asked, we would not
need a variance at all.
So that's where we are with this currently. We met with the RCO on four separate occasions, and it's relocation of lot lines. I mean, there's nothing fancy or sophisticated about it.
So I think their letter of opposition really leaned on the fact that they want to know what is going to go on this other lot.
Well, we don't have a plan for that yet.
And my client didn't want to invest in coming up with plans until he could actually get the subdivision.
Now, by the way, unless it's a single family home that meets all the requirements, the RCO is going to be involved in that process anyway.
So I'm not quite sure why they're relying on the fact that we haven't have don't have a development plan and they're using that to oppose what would otherwise be a pretty perfunctory sort of application.
And with that, I'm going to ask my client, David, to raise his hand to be recognized.
Mr. Jacobs, you can unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
David Jacobs, D-A-V-I-D, J-A-C-O-V-S.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Anastasio, please.
Thank you.
Mr. Jacobs, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
And would you, was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony if need be?
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, relocating these lot lines won't cause congestion in the neighborhood.
It won't impact light or air for neighbors.
It will not burden the infrastructure.
it won't um otherwise have any impact at all zero impact on this community um by relocating
lot lines and again the only reason why we're here is because 15 feet uh should be 75 feet
but we can't get to 75 feet because we are prohibited from taking down this property
and correct me if i'm wrong the historical certification happened after your client
purchased the property that's right the ink on the deed was hardly dry and they ran in to
they ran in to get it historically designated happened on the 21st of march full two weeks
after purchase and my clients were dumbfounded they were they wanted to they thought they had
a lot that they could subdivide as a matter of right the portion of the property that you're
showing on the right uh that the rco was concerned about what might get developed there is zone
what is the zoning classification there rsd1 so anything beyond that would require variance
that's right and by the way mr chairman this new lot here is almost 14 000 square feet
it's massive but so unless they he unless they build a single family they're going to have to
come back for of course and even if they do build a single family they'll have to do it
in accordance with historic commission understood thank you thank you uh questions from the board
no no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
um excuse me was mr steinberg um was he promoted to he's representing a party his hand up
mr steinberg yes can you hear me yes please spell your first and last name i'll swear you in
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Darren Steinberg, D-A-R-I-N-S-T-E-I-N-B-E-R-G, 16 North Franklin Street, Suite 300A, Doylestown, Pennsylvania, 1-8-9-0-1.
I'm here on behalf of three of the near neighbors in opposition to this application, Walt and Robin Summers, who live at 7709 Cherokee.
Walt and Robin Summers, who live at 7709 Cherokee Street, Don Ratchford and Nancy Dickinson, who live at 545 West Mermaid Lane.
Mr. Steinberg, do you, sorry to interrupt, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Please proceed. Didn't mean to interrupt you.
Before I do, Mr. Chair, I know there are two RCOs who wish to speak, and I'm curious if you'd rather hear from them first or from me.
it's fine with me either way. I just wanted to give them deference if you would like to hear
from them. Since you're wrong, we'll hear from you and then we'll go. Okay. Before I get into
my remarks, just a couple points of clarification from Mr. Anastasio's testimony. First and
foremost, based on the record before the Philadelphia Historical Commission, Mr. Anastasio
participated on behalf of his client during the historical commission process, had every
opportunity to oppose the designation, chose not to, and did not object to it. So the casting of
this as something that was done in the middle of the night with no one knowing about it is
completely false. And the Chestnut Hill Conservancy, as the protectors of historical
properties in chestnut hill has every right to do what they did here and everything was above board
and it was legal uh and again mr anastasio participated in that process that's not relevant
i object i object it's completely relevant because you said it was done in the dark of night
uh it was to you and but in any event please do not talk over each other my apologies
second i just want to point out that it's not just the structure here that was designated
historic it's the entire property that was designated historic along with my client's
properties this was all part of one estate and then the third thing i want to point out is
there's actually two letters of opposition from the two rcos the chestnut hill community association
and the Chestnut Hill Conservancy.
So hopefully you have both of those in your possession.
I only have two exhibits, which I submitted to the board.
I'll just share my screen quickly for those.
Varen, could you take your exhibit down?
Yes, sir.
Mr. Steinberg, we can get his exhibits up.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Just wanna...
So hopefully you can see my screen here.
The first is a petition of the near neighbors within 250 feet of the property.
It was audited by a certified public accounting company and it was unanimous 33 neighbors in opposition to this application.
It's a little difficult to read, which is why he had it, my client had it audited.
Second exhibit is a letter that was submitted to the RCOs as part of the RCO process by
Ellen Goodwin, who I believe is here to testify, so I won't talk too much about it, but this goes
to the point of a couple things. One, even though this is a Hertzberg case and a dimensional case,
There's absolutely no financial hardship here because despite what Mr. Anastasio and his client would like to do, there's actually no need for a subdivision at all for this property to have significant value and for this applicant to recoup its investment and then some as a single family home on a single family lot.
So I'm just going to stop sharing my screen there. And again, I believe that Ms. Goodwin is here to testify so she can testify on her own behalf.
A few points I want to point out. And the first is, as I just mentioned, there's no financial hardship here.
the applicant purchased this property for just over $400,000 and from what I understand again
from the letter we saw from the testimony we had at the RCO meetings if this property is rehabbed
as is and sold as is it could solve for over 1.5 million dollars so there's there's no economic
detriment to the applicant if the variance is denied because it has tremendous value as a
single-family home on one lot. There's also no financial burden to bring the building into strict
compliance with the zoning requirements because it already complies as it is. There's also no
because it already complies as it is. There's also no financial burden to meet the characteristics
financial
of the surrounding neighborhood because it fits perfectly as it is. This is just a situation
where the applicant is on a quest to maximize profitability, which is not a grounds for a
hardship. He could recoup his investment by rehabbing the existing home and reselling it
as a newly renovated historic property on one lot. So this case does not meet the Hertzberg
standard for dimensional variance. Furthermore, it doesn't meet the minimum variance required
because number one, there's no subdivision needed to make this property appropriate and fit for
purpose. So no subdivision, let alone a subdivision that requires a variance, is the minimum relief
needed. In fact, contrary to what the applicant believes, this property could be subdivided as
of right, even with the historic property in its place without being torn down. And there
was significant testimony to that effect at the RCO meetings? Again, I have to object to that.
The Planning Commission has gone on record as saying that it cannot be done.
Well, again, that's the Planning Commission, perhaps. I have not heard that. I had heard
testimony at the RCO meetings that it could, in fact, be subdivided as of right, but be that as
it may, there was no movement whatsoever on the 15 feet to extend that by any stretch at all.
So 15 feet doesn't necessarily meet the minimum variance requested. It could have been anywhere
between 15 feet and 75 feet, but the applicant chose not to do anything in response to those
concerns. You submitted alternative plans, Darren. They were denied. You never submitted. I never saw
any alternative plans the only thing i saw was before i got on i heard that there was a
a nine unit um like condo proposed or something like that no but but even if there was it would
still require another hearing in front of the board that's correct i'm trying to stick to the
application at hand i know there's a lot of concern about what could be i'm just testifying
that this application mr chairman do you know that i don't want to i don't want to belabor the
record on what could be there because it's all speculation exactly i'm just focusing on
why this application doesn't meet the the standards for a variance for a lot line change
the financial burden to rehabilitate this now historic structure in accordance with the historic
designation that was triggered by his client is enormous it's not my client or your your rco
um i'm just i'm just i don't own any rc okay i mean the so to say that the herzburg uh level
has hasn't been met is silly they've put this financial burden on him he's willing to fix it
up he needs to subdivide this lot we're talking literally about relocating lot lines here
doesn't hurt anybody unless there's another motive
mr steinberg please proceed thank you mr chair uh the third point i want to make on this is that
this is in fact a self-inflicted uh need for a variance because again there's no need for a
subdivision in the first instance let alone one that needs a variance there's no unique physical
characteristics of this property it's a complete square uh the the designation alone does not
create anything unique about this property that would require uh any type of variance again this
is a self-inflicted situation on a quest for are you suggesting that the change since the purchase
of the property and the designation as historical uh did not put a burden on on the on the owner
I mean, it all happened after he purchased it.
With the opportunity to oppose it, and he did appear at the meetings and did not oppose the designation.
Initially, we most certainly did.
But then we decided to negotiate with the community at the time.
They knew very well that our intention was to subdivide this lot.
And we thought out of good faith that we would be able to work together.
Little did we know that I think their motives are not necessarily as transparent as we think.
Sure, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, some of these comments and arguments really are for the RCO to speak to, which hopefully they will when I'm done. So I'll try and keep my comments to what I know. And as it relates to my neighbors, there was testimony that there'd be no undue burden on the community or anything like that.
But one point that would, and again, I know this is just a mere lot line change, but I think everyone can agree that nobody just subdivides a property for no reason.
Eventually, there'll be something on that property, and that something will have sewer issues and sewer needs.
And this property is connected to five other properties that share a private sewer line that is extremely old, is taxed right now at five properties.
Trying to add a sixth property to that sewer line would be completely, would create an undue burden and to try and extend to the public.
There's no evidence of that.
That is speculation.
Yeah, there's no evidence of that.
My client is available to testify to that effect because he is a part of that private sewer that
runs through the property. So I think there is, that's not just conjecture on my part for that.
So I think to me, the bottom line here, focusing merely on the fact that this is a lot line change,
there's there's no undue hardship there's no Hertzberg even though this is Hertzberg there's
no financial hardship that's been demonstrated this is not the minimum variance that is needed
and it's a self-inflicted variance so with that what I'd like to do is I don't see him on here
but I know that my client Walt Summers wanted to make a statement and I again I don't see him
on here mr summers available if so mr summers please raise your hand
chair um he has an older version of zoom so the only way i can let him speak is if i promote him
to panelists okay let's do that all right
you're on mute
Mr. Summers you need to
unmute yourself please
good morning
Mr. Summers
Mr. Summers
would you please spell your full name
and I'll swear you in
W-A-L-T-E-R-S-O-M-N-E-R-S.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Someone has a device on behind them?
Do you have a television or radio?
Not me.
Mr. Summers?
Sorry, Chair.
This is Tanya.
Mr. Summers, it appears that it was two devices for you.
do you have um two devices on at your home or your location oh we may have another device on
i don't know but can you hear me on this device yes i think the mute one because we're getting
feedback when there are two devices with volume i think mr chair um if one of my other clients
is here he might be able to offer the same testimony can you hear me now we can we're still
getting feedback mr steinberg do you want to go to your other client mr summers we'll get back to
you go to your other uh don ratchford are you on i can't see you anywhere
mr rashford please unmute yourself and wait for the chair please identify yourself spell your
full name and i'll swear you in don ratchford d-o-n-r-a-t-c-h-f-o-r-d i'm at 615 go ahead
finish i'm sorry i'm at 615 west mermaid lane in philadelphia 19118 you swear for him to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do sir thank you and don did you hear the testimony
that i gave to the board and if so do you adopt my statements as your own i do okay i don't know
if you were given uh waltz um statement that he wanted to make uh if so could you share that with
the board i sure will uh walt summers and i uh are both
Walt Summers and I are both owners of wings of the Kuwaitan estate, the third wing being the kitchen wing, which is the 540 West Mermaid lane in discussion.
Walt did pass me some information that he would like me to present.
so Walt is a representation representing the 540 Westmoreland Avenue near neighbors
I'm going to read this verbatim now we as a neighbor we as a group come before the board
you know I'm sorry I just have to respectfully object as it's hearsay well we're having technical
I understand Mr. Summers would be doing I understand your objection but thank you
Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Ratchford. Yes, sir. One of the things I always want to add, Walt and I have worked together on these words.
I fully agree with these words and support these words as well.
So we come forward as a group in a unanimous opposition and oppose any subdivision is not permitted as of right.
any subdivision would logically suggest the construction of a home that is now in the front
yard of an existing property the proximity of any new home so close to the street would be out of
character with the homes on westmoreland which are set back much further this would also block
burn excuse me you're mute you're muted i object there's no home being proposed yes i was just
going to say, Mr. Ratchford, all due respect, we don't know what will, if anything, get built.
My client could sell the property. My client could sell a subdivided lot to me and I could
decide to grow corn on it. And I would have to come before the board and the RCO if I wanted
to grow corn on that lot. Everything else is speculation. That's right. But continue. Correct.
I think what Walt is willing to say is being RSD1, this property is being separated into two lots,
continuing to be rsd1 uh for um the speculation as you said of uh the construction of another
property uh well my property has also been designated as historic and carries with the
same benefits and obligations i want to bring the board's attention to the properties which
constituted kuwaitan state were subdivided in 48 1948 the historic commission did not subdivide
these properties they were already subdivided when the designation occurred there are many
clear and compelling reasons why the historic commission designated the three parcels that
constitute the created state as a story the rcos have or will apply will aptly cover those issues
however there are a couple of points i'd like to specify specifically point out to the board
that will have material adverse impacts on me my wife and other immediate neighbors you know
Don Ratchard and Nancy Dixon. There are no waste disposed on Westmoreland Avenue other than
septic, which is not feasible for a subdivision. Those in Kuwait are adamantly opposed to any
attempt to tie to our private sewer line. Excuse me, this is the court reporter. Pardon the
interruption. Sir, could you slow down a little bit, please? Sure. These lines cannot handle
another home. In addition, a subdivision would negatively impact the neighbors across the street
and adjacent to 540 West Maryland because it would diminish the view shed and would be out of place
with the rest of the residents on the street. In fact, every single neighbor within 250 feet
of the proposed subdivision is opposed to granting a variance. In summary, the neighbor's request
that you deny the request for the subdivision
or the variance for the subdivision.
Thank you, Chairman.
I just have to object.
I just want to object to the testimony
with respect to a sewer system.
I'm going to have an expert come on
after Mr. Steinberg is done
and we're going to clear this up right away.
Mr. Steinberg, you have anything?
Any other witnesses?
No, but I do believe that the two RCOs
are available and wish to speak want to get to that right now thank you all right anyone else
who wishes to testify please raise your hand chair we have lori
salganikoff please uh spell your full name
um l-o-r-i s like sam a-l-g-a-n-i-c-o-f-f like frank frank i'm not sure why my camera's not
working no worries we can hear you uh you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth? I do. Thank you. I'm sorry, Chair, this is Tanya Sunkett. If I could make a request
Thank you. I'm sorry, Chair, this is Tanya Sunkit. If I could make a request that we get the individual testifying. Yes. Thank you, Kylie.
that we get...
Yep. Please state your address.
Chestnut Hill Conservancy is located at 8708 Germantown Avenue in Philadelphia in the Chestnut Hill section.
So you're representing the conservancy, not as a near neighbor. Is that correct?
Correct. I am the executive director of the Chestnut Hill Conservancy.
Okay. Okay. I just want to establish that you're not a near resident, but your testimony is welcome. Thank you.
Thank you. And good morning, Mr. Chairman. As I said, I'm the executive director of the Chestnut Hill Conservancy, a community nonprofit and RCO working to balance development with preservation and conservation in Northwest Philadelphia and throughout the Wissahickon watershed.
shed. Over the last two plus years, the Conservancy worked in partnership with two-thirds of the
owners of the former Keywayden property to add it to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places
and help manage its evolution. I'd like to share a brief description of what was protected,
that the applicant not only declined to object to the designation, but actually voiced support for
it, and some reasons that the Conservancy's Historic District Advisory Committee unanimously
voted to oppose this variance. I'm here to request that ZBA not approve the variance requested to
subdivide a larger developable front lot at 540 Westmoreland Avenue than allowed by zoning
and create a narrow flag lot for the historic building. The Kewaden property was built for
the Clark family in multiple phases between 1889 and about 1912 on a large plot of land in the
Chestnut Hill neighborhood of northwest Philadelphia. The U-shaped complex is set
deeply back from three streets and includes a main house, two flanking detached but connected
wing buildings, and dramatic public streetscape views to all. The main house stands approximately
200 feet from Cherokee Street behind a deep lawn. 540 Westmoreland and 545 Westmermaid
Avenue wings face their respective streets from 150 foot. This is the biggest, the best,
the most fun case of the day this hearing is about the excuse me excuse me ma'am someone is speaking
over you so please proceed thank you i appreciate the compliment this hearing is about the future
of the moreland avenue property the original keywayden property was subdivided into multiple
parcels in 1948 with these three properties converted to single family homes and zoned rsd
The three-pop property complex received local historic designation from the City of Philadelphia in February of 2020.
The buildings, some of the earliest colonial revival homes in Chestnut Hill, have always been physically and visually connected to each other and to the streets on which they sit.
The open space and viewshed from the three surrounding public streets of Moreland, Cherokee, and Mermaid Avenues are a fundamental part of the property's history and significance.
The protection of the open space and historic streetscape views was recently confirmed once
again by the Historical Commission's counsel, Leonard Reuter, who added any lot adjustment
or subdivision will not affect the designation. But this was certainly not news to the applicant.
In fact, on April 2019, all three K. Whaden property owners were notified that the Historical
Commission was considering designation based on a nomination prepared for two of the property
owners by the Chestnut Hill Conservancy. The notice letters stated, if adopted, the designation
of the property as historic would include the site, the exterior envelopes of all buildings
on the site and any permanent site appearances. During historical commission deliberations,
Mr. Anastasio suggested that the historical commission should designate only the building,
but declined to respond to the commission's invitation to demonstrate that the open spade
is not part of the site's significance or provide a site plan with proposed boundary adjustments.
In addition, he stated at the January designation committee meeting,
we want to put this on the record again. We do not challenge the designation. We do not object
to the designation. Mr. Anastasio later added that it was... I have to object, Mr. Chairman. None of
this is relevant uh but unfortunately uh open space isn't protected my statement i'd just like
to finish i don't have a lot more it's objectionable i'm sorry he does have enough he does
have the right to she's putting words in my mouth she speaks we are here for our hardship
they created this hardship we went along with it to be good if i may he's he's lobbed his
objection. It's noted. I think she should be able to speak. Nobody interrupted Mr. Anastasio when
he made his very short presentation. We are responding to it. We have the right to do so.
presentation we are responding to it we have the right to do so please proceed ma'am
thank you um i will mention that at no point during the designation process did mr anastasio
mention the hardship described in his letter to zba and these quotes that i'm mentioning and and
are based on recordings from the historical commission uh vote uh so the chestnut hill
Conservancy unanimously voted to oppose the variance request for 540 Westmoreland Avenue
for the relocation of lot lines for the use as a vacant lot. The variance sought by the applicant
does not represent the least modification possible of the code provision as required for the granting
of a variance. As the Planning Commission has described that 540 Westmoreland is likely
subdividable by right, it is puzzling to hear that the proposed subdivision represents the least
modification possible how could the applicant know that if by their own admission they only
proposed one by right scheme to planning that was not accepted and have not further investigated the
issue to our knowledge and to their testimony objection that's not true that's what you said
during the rco meetings we took your advice we resubmitted we were denied i'm sorry chair this
Mrs. Tanya Sunkett, if I could ask that all witnesses do not debate or discuss matters with the attorneys, they can make their statements, and the attorneys do have a right to make objections.
Thank you very kindly, Chair.
Thank you, and we'll try it again.
Ma'am, please continue and understand what Ms. Sunkett just said.
The attorney does have a right to make objections.
Thank you for that clarification, Ms. Sunkett.
I'm new to this process and I will continue that.
Having one possibility rejected does not mean that something is not at all possible.
It defies logic to state that a proposed 15 foot wide flag lot is the least modification possible
from the code if sufficient frontage is available.
The applicant states that the hardship for this variance request is the designation of
this property to our local historic register. We and the Philadelphia Historical Commission's
Executive Director understand that the designation of an historic building does not constitute a
hardship. The designation in and of itself adds to the value of this parcel, preserves the physical
and historic attributes of the property and the city, and assists in managing change in Chestnut
Hill, which is a national register historic district characterized by the Wissahickon style
of architecture open space and pedestrian scale residential streetscapes. The conservancy works
as an RCO through our member elected historic district advisory committee created to manage
change in one of the nation's largest national register districts. We seek to preserve the open
space within the community both to protect community character but also to preserve the
adjacent Wissahickon Creek and park. The construction of a larger building made possible by this
requested subdivision would disrupt the pedestrian rhythms of the streetscape and would likely
conceal a major portion of the existing historic building. Despite repeated attempts, the applicant
has been unwilling to provide any information as to how the newly created lot will be used
or how any new structure would be located on the lot. This makes it impossible to assess the impacts
of subsequent new development on the existing historic structure, viewshed, adjacent properties,
the neighborhood the community objection respectfully that all of that is irrelevant
none of none of it can be taken into consideration here i would ask also uh when the attorneys or
anyone uh objects to just state your name because the court reporter doesn't know our voices as well
as as we do very well does verne anastasio objecting on the relevance of the most recent
testimony as to what could have should have or may happen or something. Thank you.
Please proceed ma'am. Thank you. In fact over a year ago the developers of 540 Westmoreland
approached the neighbors with a plan to turn the existing house into apartments and build
a multi-family apartment building. Objection none of that is relevant. We're not proposing that
anymore we're relocating lot mine those those are conversations that could take could have taken
place and might continue to take place until somebody decides uh to on a plan that then
submits um an application for permits to begin that construction it may require that that applicant
to come in front of this board again so it's all kind of conjecture or or or uh hearsay uh
So hearsay, there's a lot of terms I can use. I don't mean that disrespectfully, but it's not germane to what we're talking about today. Thank you.
There's a lot of terms I can use.
I don't mean that disrespectfully, but.
understood um finally as stated by the historical commission chair bob thomas the commission has
approved many many additions built on designated lots the city's comprehensive plan recommends
this lot remain single family residential and a subdivision to create a second parcel could be
possible by right objection that's uh she's testifying to what somebody else said that's
please deny this variance request to create a large vacant lot for an undefined
development opportunity and we'll allow the historical commission
to provide the guidance they are here for thank you very much
is there anyone else who would like to testify in this case and please if it's something new
and different please do not talk about speculation of what may or may not get built in the future
because none of us has a crystal ball chair we have judy berkman miss berkman please unmute
yourself and please wait for the chair morning ms berkman please identify yourself spell your
full name and i'll swear you in hi my name is judy berkman i am a near neighbor at 516 west
Moreland. My name is spelled J-U-D-Y B-E-R-K-M-A-N. Thank you. Do you swear to affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. As I mentioned,
I'm a near neighbor at 516 West Moreland, and I oppose the variance for the subdivision for the
flag lot. It does not create any, there's no unnecessary hardship to the property.
My house at 516 Westmoreland was built in the 1880s as a carriage house to a property that's been demolished, that was a mansion between my house and 540 Westmoreland.
The Chestnut Hill Conservancy records indicate that my house is historically significant.
It is similarly set back to 540 Westmoreland, if you look at Atlas or Google Earth maps.
The subdivision of 540 Westmoreland would be a bad precedent for properties such as mine, for my house, and the sightline of my property from the street.
If this variance is granted, it will compel me to spend time and money to create a conservation easement to protect my house for the future from a similar subdivision in the future.
I believe that my house, unsubdivided, as is 540 Westmoreland, more valuable as an intact property and that a variance creating a flag lot would detract from the value. Thank you.
Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point that the sight line in view is not considered light and air under case law.
I have a case memo, a legal memo that I've already submitted to the board.
I'm moving that into evidence with all its exhibits.
And the application for historic designation, not that this is even relevant, it was for the actual building.
again submitted after purchase so noted
chair we have uh ron eisenberg please unmute yourself and please wait for the
mr eisenberg please spell your full name i'll swear you in first name ron r-o-n last name
eisenberg e-i-s-e-n-b-e-r-g where from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth
Yes. Please proceed.
I am also a near neighbor. In fact, I own a house that is part of the original estate from the original subdivision at 601 West Mermaid Lane.
I bought that house before the official historic designation was made.
But knowing that the property in the area was historic, that was part of the value for me.
I would like to address the concern that any thoughts of the neighbors about what's going to happen to this property are simply speculation.
In fact, there is an immediate effect because any future buyers will know that after the subdivision happens,
that something could happen to that property that will change the nature of the estate
and therefore affect the value of my property and all the other owners who live on the property.
So that effect is immediate. And in fact, the longer that the current owner at 540 declines to
current owner at 540 declines to share information about what is going to happen
on the subdivided property, the greater the fear will be, not just of the existing owners,
but of any future buyers into the area, that they will have a fight on their hands to challenge
something that will harm the nature of the area into which they're buying and which is part of
the value of the property. Thank you. Thank you. Just one counter to that, Mr. Chairman. Relocating
a lot line isn't going to impact anybody's value of the property. So there's no evidence of that
whatsoever. Thank you. Anyone else? And please, if it's something new and different, we would
appreciate you. We have other cases we still have to get to. Also, I want to object that his
testimony isn't an expert testimony because he's not a realtor, I don't think. So to testify to
value, he would not be equipped to do that. So I do have a witness, but I would like for all
other interested parties to be exhausted, and then I'll bring my witness on. Any other witnesses?
Chair, we have Eileen Javers. Please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
mrs javers please identify yourself spell your full name and i'll swear you in
yes my name is eileen javers e-i-l-e-e-n-j-a-v-e-r-s
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed let's be very brief uh i am board president of the chestnut
Conservancy. I live at 40 Hillcrest Avenue in Philadelphia 19118, and I just wanted to confirm
that Lori Salgonikoff was speaking for the Conservancy and for all the neighbors who are
members of the Conservancy. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else? Chair, we have John Landis.
Please unmute yourself. I'm sorry, Ms. L. Chair, we do have Mr. Richardson available from the
Council Office. Thank you. Thank you kindly. All right. Mr. Landis, just hang in there. We'll get
Mr. Richardson. Good morning again, Mr. Chair. Good morning again. You're still under oath. Just
identify yourself and proceed. Yes, sir. Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass,
room 312 City Hall. Please proceed. Sorry for the background noise. The Councilwoman
supports the objections of chestnut hill civic association the chestnut hill conservancy the
near neighbors and surround the community for the myriad reasons that have been raised previously
though it's been minimized the relocation of black lines will at some point have some huge
ramifications on the neighborhood in the future so she requests that you deny the variant request
thank you could i ask everyone's indulgent and take a five minute break i have something going
on in my house that is going to disturb this hearing. So five minutes please. Yes, Chair. Thank you.
It's, you know, working from home sometimes has its advantage, but today it's a disadvantage.
I have construction all over, all over the place going on, but thank you.
uh let's proceed i think uh we were miss javers i believe it was was up next is that correct
no i think no chair john landis oh mr landis thank you
mr landis please unmute yourself and please wait for the
can you hear me yes very good mr landis i'm not sure if i swore you in or not
no you did not please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
my name is john landis j-o-h-n-l-a-n-d-i-s do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes thank you please proceed thank you mr chair good morning my name is john
landis and i am the co-chair of the development review committee of the chestnut hill community
association the designated coordinating rco for the chestnut hill area from 2007 through 2020 i was
crossways professor of city and regional planning at the university of pennsylvania where i served
as department chair for nine years. I'm speaking today on behalf of the Chestnut Hill Community
Association and its multiple review committees in opposition to the proposed variance. Our
our opposition is based on three grounds. The first is that all three of our community
opposition is based on three grounds. The first is that all three of our communities
review committees, the Chestnut Hill Community Association's Land Use Planning and Zoning
Committee, the Conservancy's Historic District Advisory Committee, and the community's convening
RCO, the Development Review Committee, have listened in great detail to the case made by
the applicant. And by unanimous vote, we found it to be incomplete and unpersuasive. The LUPZ
voted unanimously to oppose the application. The HDAC voted seven to nothing to oppose the
application. The DRC also voted unanimously to oppose the application. The members of these
committees are not lay people. They are experts in the fields of architecture and landscape
architecture, site planning and urban design, and real estate and historic preservation.
If they say something is missing or wrong with the application, they do so.
They do so on the basis of professional knowledge and experience.
Respectfully, this is Vern Anastasio.
I have to object.
There's no evidence of any of these people's criteria or their competence.
Thank you.
I would just say that that was made clear at the RCO meetings who these people are.
We didn't see anybody's resume.
All right. Let's stipulate that Mr. Landis is giving us accurate and honest testimony this morning. Let's stipulate to it.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Finally, the Board of Directors of the CHCA, which is not primarily made up of design, planning, and development professionals, also voted unanimously to oppose the application for a variance.
So why did all these committees vote to oppose the variance application? The answer is simple. The applicant was unable or unwilling to respond with the information needed by our review committees or by any reasonable review group to come to an informed decision about whether or not a lot subdivision variance was appropriate.
Like the ZBA, we seek to determine whether any proposed development project will create an adverse and unmitigated physical or economic or aesthetic impact on the neighbors and the community.
Also like the ZBA, we seek to determine whether the applicant's variance proposal constitutes the minimum required relief from the city's zoning and subdivision requirements.
As to the minimum relief issue, we repeatedly asked the applicant why a narrow flag lot configuration was necessary and why they could not instead pursue a more traditionally shaped lot arrangement, possibly as of right and thus avoiding a variance.
We never received an answer to this question.
As to the question of adverse impacts, each committee repeatedly asked the applicant to indicate in either text or graphically how they plan to use the proposed lot, for a new single-family house or for an attached home.
Where would the new unit be located?
Objection. None of this is relevant.
Yeah, Mr. Landis, I think I've said this several times. We don't know why. It's all speculation.
as to what would happen to that other lot that we'd be creating.
So let's just speak to the issue in front of us
and not try to speculate on what may or may not be proposed.
And again, if anything beyond a single family is proposed,
they're going to need to come back to the board for a variance.
Well, I'll just summarize by saying,
to repeat, the applicant's request for a variance
is neither the least disruptive form of relief,
nor does it provide any assurances that the resulting development project will not create
adverse impacts on the community or neighborhood our final concern goes to the issue of potential
nuisance creation should the applicant's variance request be approved it is highly likely the
resulting development project will be placed in the middle of the newly created lot thus
objection we don't know that sustained okay fine fine okay well with these with these objections
noted i i i thank the the zba for its time and for its consideration thank you for your testimony
thank you all right anyone else uh it is 12 noon we're running up against a clock that we're
required to have a break for staff. So I would ask if anyone else wants to testify, please give us
something new and different. Chair, we have Michelle Connors. Please unmute yourself and
please wait for that. Michelle, Ms. Connors, please identify yourself. Spell your first and
last name. I'll swear you in. My name is Michelle Connors, M-I-C-H-E-L-L-E. Connors, C-O-N-N-E-R-S.
Yes, I'm at 541 Westmoreland Avenue, directly across from the lot in question.
I'm at 541 Westmoreland Avenue, directly across from.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Chairman, I just want to say I know you're not interested in speculation, therefore I just want to give you some background facts.
Thank you.
On January 19th, 2019, the existing property caught on fire, was a multi-unit fire, and the homeowner died.
The property was purchased by Mr. Jacobs in February of 2019 before any of the local real estate developers or real estate agents knew that the property was even available.
Objection. That's not relevant.
It may not be relevant, but it's true.
It's just, but you're wasting, we're wasting the court, the court, the court.
I just am going to give a few.
Ms. Connors, please do not engage with it in an argument with the attorney.
Please stick to your testimony that is relevant to this case.
Ms. Connors.
I'm not going to deal with speculation.
You can unmute yourself, Ms. Connors.
Thank you.
okay can you hear me now yes we can thank you okay for the following year um the property
was there was no action on the property um the property was often left unattended neighbors had
to call the city on multiple occasions even to get the lawn mowed on the property objection
mr chairman that none of that is relevant i i i as recently as yesterday's installed new
windows on the property actively working to rehab it i believe it is relevant mr chair as it goes
to the concerns of the neighborhood and it's again yes this might be a lot line change but it's not
just a mere lot line change there's been significant neglect since this applicant has
owned the objection that's that's a matter for lni but for the city windows in that building
as we speak uh the new windows went on that building yesterday that's right because we
they have to work with the historic commission to get this right it took months for them to
get historic commission approval now the historic commission from what i was told approved those in
january it's not true what's going on gentlemen gentlemen even if it was january given the
pandemic and all the problems we're having with people getting material and construction that's
right it's not that unusual at this time so please just let's get on it i'm i'm actually going to
end with this witness because we get keep getting the same testimony and no matter how many times i
say it's not relevant it's speculation we keep coming back to the same issue so please miss
Connors, try to direct your comments to the application in front of us and not speculate
on what may or may not happen going forward. I don't want to speculate on what may happen going
forward. I just want to tell you what has been proposed to us already. In March 2020, the week
before lockdown, the near neighbors were invited to a meeting at the Chesney Hill Conservancy with
mr jacobs and his architect at that time it was proposed to us that the existing structure would
be converted into four apartments and the separate objection none of that is relevant we're not even
talking about the all right i'm going to end this testimony we keep going back to the same thing
that's all speculation thank you mr chairman i just have one quick uh witness well before that
Vern, if I may, is if Ellen Goodman is available, I do believe she would have something new and
relevant along the lines of the letter. I would hope so, Mr. Steinberg. Yes, and I do apologize
for the... And I don't mean to be disrespectful for those folks, but we have to stick to the
issue and not speculate. So if Ms. Goodwin is in the audience, could raise her hand and please
just testify to the letter that we submitted.
There's no one listed underneath that name.
I do have a hand up by someone by the name of Charles Block.
He's a developer in the community.
That would be relevant, too, to the issue of the value of the property as a single-family home, Mr. Chair, if you're willing to hear it.
I'm sorry, Chair.
This is Tanya Sunkett.
I apologize for interrupting you all, but, Chair, I just want to be a reminder of the time that we're getting down to the wire.
Thank you, Chair.
thank you mr chairman i have to object to this developer sustain just i mean
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have to object to this developer.
Sustain.
Sustain.
Sustain.
Sustain.
your objection is noted we're going to i'm going to ask right now any questions from the board
i do have to put on one business no i'm sorry i'm sorry hold off tom yes i did i did acknowledge
that burn i apologize thank you let's get your witness on and we're going to move mr toner
please be identified. Ian Toner.
Mr. Toner, unmute yourself, please.
Please identify yourself, spell your first and last name.
Ian Toner, spelled I-A-N-T-O-N-E-R
from Tor Architects.
You're breaking up. You're breaking up, sir. Do you have another device on
near you? No.
Okay, try it again.
It's Ian Toner.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And your involvement with this case?
I am the architect who prepared the initial subdivision plan for our surveyor.
Thank you.
Mr. Anastasia.
Thank you.
Mr. Toner, I'll be very brief.
Did you try to expand the frontage to meet the code subsequent to meeting with the RCO?
Say it again?
Yes. Okay. And were you successful in doing that, or did the Planning Commission say a refusal would be issued?
They said that we would still need a refusal for what we proposed.
Okay. And is the proposed 15-foot more consistent with a better streetscape flow, in your expert opinion?
Yes. An L-shaped lot would be an odd lot for a site like this. So a flag lot makes more sense in this situation.
Okay. And you went to all of the RCO meetings, is that correct?
Okay. And after being told by the Planning Commission that that would not work, you went back to the 15-foot because of it being the least detrimental to the front lot. Is that right?
Would the lot created be size-compliant under the revised plan?
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I think I have nothing else. Do you have anything else to add, Mr. Toner?
I do not. No. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
A question from the board. No, no.
Chair, do we know if Mr. Steinberg had any questions from Mr.
Toner Steinberg? Thank you.
Thank you. Just a couple of questions. Mr.
Toner, Darren Steinberg, you and I know each other.
We work together on other applications. Did you,
were you asked to submit those types of things to the RCO at the at the LUPZ meeting?
We were asked to provide an alternative plan that would be code compliant. And I was told by
members of that committee that there was a solution. And I asked for their input so that I
could help because I didn't believe there was a solution that would be code compliant. And they
never sent me any information on their opinion on what that code compliance solution would be
so we never you never submitted anything you never submitted what was requested of the applicant at
the LUPZ correct I did not because we didn't have an approved plan from planning but you submitted
something to the planning commission after the RCO meetings correct we did so you could have
shared that with the rco but you chose not objection your honor there's no relevance to
to that there is relevance it goes to the already testified it goes to the credibility of the
applicant before the rcos it would have been everyone on this call is it not guys one at a
time guys don't speak amongst each other one at a time i have been only speaking when i've spoken
i have not interrupted anybody i'm done thank you please proceed mr stonberg i i'm done
Thank you. Did you get an answer to your last question? I don't know if I did. I didn't know.
My answer is just that I'm not the one running the case so I provide the information and it's
the attorney's decisions whether to who and what to share with the with the groups. So
and mr toner's alternative was awkward uh based on both of our uh uh review and it was still being
refused by the planning commission this saves the frontage is that correct mr toner yes okay
Yes. Okay, thank you. I have nothing further, Mr. Chairman, except, again, to wrap up my case, the potential development and its impact on the sewer system. Oh, Mr. Toner, about that. Can you speak to the sewer system issue that was raised?
thank you i have nothing further mr chairman except
Sure. The source objection to the question, if it's irrelevant to our case, why would it be relevant to Mr. Anastasia's case?
Well, I have to be able to rebut. That's called a rebuttal witness.
Yeah, but you're going down that road of speculation, correct?
Yeah. If he goes down speculation, why can't we, Mr. Chair?
Overworked.
If you'd rather not.
The objection is sustained. Yeah, we're not going to go down that road. Thank you.
Well, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, the historic designation is prima facie de facto hardship.
The cost to get this building back up is enormous, and my client is willing to do that.
He was always willing to work with the community.
He went through four exhausting meetings.
It was always their intention.
It was initially their intention to purchase, demolish, and split it right down the middle,
which we could have done as a matter of right, but for the RCO coming in and putting the
designation on there after the fact. Again, we're just trying to relocate lot lines.
Anything we do in the future that may or may not impact light, air, view, streetscape has to go
before these folks, and it has to be approved for us to move forward. And with that, again,
this is a lot line relocation i've never seen uh so many folks afraid of uh basically the
relocation of a lot line all right i'll ask again any questions from the board no no planning
commission good afternoon david fecto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board
The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for residential single-family zoning.
This is a 23,883-square-foot lot.
Between approximately 1950 and 1970, four new lots have been created at the periphery of this estate.
The current application is consistent with that pattern.
While we support preservation of historic properties, we note that zoning and historic preservation are two different sets of regulations,
and one should not be conflated with another we recommend that the board grant the requested
variance thank you uh mi 2021 does zero zero one four eight seven five four zero west
moreland avenue my vote is yes confess mr plaza my vote is yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
john munlock my vote is yes thank you uh let's uh i think we have sharon i need your help uh
we gotta do uh jen's uh send jen's uh case yes do you want me to read out the mi number and address
yeah please yes please it is mi 2020 002483 1431 to 33 north 20th street um the board heard this
on june 23rd it was held for um lni to produce a revised refusal and planning asks that it be able
to make its recommendation after the refusal so planning should make its recommendation we did
receive the refusal is mr jen available do we need him not necessarily but if he is um present
He should be called.
Good afternoon.
All right.
So please identify yourself.
I'll swear you in.
Zenjen, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
We're in front of the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Again, as Ms. Soleta has indicated, we were asked to get a revised refusal for this case.
Testimony was given previously at the hearing in June.
If the board would like me to go over the application again, I would certainly be happy
to do so, but I don't think it's necessary.
I don't think that's going to be necessary.
I just want to make sure that we're on the same page.
So with that, I think, Sharma, do we need to ask if there's questions from the board?
um no only you only need mr effecto to get the planning very good thank you planning commission
good afternoon david effecto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning for this
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning for this property.
property
The applicant's property is non-conforming with regard to use and yard, and it is one of the few parcels that was not cleared during urban renewal.
The structure predates the latest neighborhood zoning map changes, which occurred in 2017.
We recommend that the Board grant the requested variances.
Thank you.
MI 2020-002-483-1431-33 North 20th Street.
My vote is yes.
Do I need to say as per revised plans?
There are no revised plans.
You do not need to say that, Chair, but if you could add a proviso stating, I'm sorry,
if you could add a proviso stating as per refusal dated July or July 23rd.
July 22nd, 23rd.
July 22nd, that was held for an amended refusal that we have received.
My vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
With proviso as well.
With proviso.
Okay, thank you.
Sharon, do I participate in this case?
Sorry, I can't hear you.
No, John.
Oh, I'm sorry, John. No, you weren't there for the original hearing.
Thank you. Thanks, John. All right. Are we finished with the 930 list?
Yes. Chair, if you could just ask the question of our attendees.
Is there anyone who would like to be heard and has not yet been acknowledged? Please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Sam Cowell. I'm going to unmute him.
Good afternoon, sir. Please spell your full name.
Sam Cowell.
Spell your name.
S-A-M-C-A-O.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
What case are you referencing?
Mr. Cowell is here for my case, actually.
oh we don't need them okay your case is heard thank you anyone else
I see no more hands chair thank you if that concludes the 9 30 list see everyone back
here at two o'clock all right
we are chair thank you and I'll give Tanya and staff a few minutes to let us know
No, Chair, we're ready to go forward.
Okay, good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our Board Secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza,
and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. John Monlack.
Board Administrator, Tina L., and our Board Attorney, Ms. Sharon Sletta, are also in attendance, as well as our Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
second we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be made
available to the public on the web or otherwise third for anyone participating by phone if you
wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself
I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand
by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to make an appearance statement,
call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I will repeat that. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue. And I'd also like to remind everyone,
please do not attempt to testify in the chat. Any comments, questions, or information you need,
please contact our board administrator, Ms. Fatina L.
With that, is Sharon on now?
I am, Chair.
I am, Chair.
Those 14 cases that you...
Those 14 cases that you sent to us, I read them in now?
Yes, if you could.
And if you approve them, it's with the proviso approved uses group living.
Do I have to say that for each case or could I say that?
You can read them together and then vote.
Very good.
Thank you.
So these are the add-ons for the two o'clock list.
MI 2021-000530, 1545 Page Street.
MI 2021-000532, 1522 Fountain Street.
MI 2021-000529, 1713 West Montgomery Avenue.
MI 2021-000524, 1800 North 18th Street. MI 2021-00527, 1828 North 16th Street.
MI 2021-0005251812N16. MI 2021-0005141940N17. MI 2021-0005151934N17.
M.I. 2021-000517, 1928 North 17th Street, M.I. 2021-000517, 1928 North 17th Street,
MI 2021-000-516-1930-North 17th Street.
MI 2021-000-521-1924-North 17th Street.
MI 2021-000520, pardon me, 1922 North 17th Street, MI 2021-000522,
1926 North 17th Street
and MI 2021
that's 000513
205 North 17th Street
my vote is yes on the 14 cases I've read into the record
with the proviso that they be approved
approved use as group living
Professor Plaza
my vote is yes with proviso on all 14. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso on all 14.
Thank you. With that, we will go to the two o'clock list. And I don't see any
no continuance request on the two o'clock is that accurate sharon as of yet it is okay on the two
o'clock list um i would ask if anyone would like to request a continuance or withdrawal
for the cases listed for two o'clock if so please raise your hand
i see no hands chair okay thank you um case number one mi 2021-001-757-1847
spiviva street attorney of record is gussie o'neill fishtown neighbor association sent a
letter of opposition. Mr. O'Neill or Ms. O'Neill, please raise your hand. We have Michael Phillips
present. Phillips, you'll be representing this case? Yes, I will. Please identify yourself and
spell your full name and I'll swear you in. Michael Phillips, P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S, Claire Harrison,
in Harvey Brandsburg, 1835 Market Street, 14th floor, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
Here on behalf of Sepviva Properties, the owner of 1847 and 1849 Sepviva.
the owner of 1847 and 1849 Step 5th Street.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. Phillip, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I agree to waive the reading in terms of the accuracy.
I do take issue with, there was a rear yard refusal indicated on, a rear yard refusal
indicated that I do not believe it's accurate, and nonetheless, we have a revised plan.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof
of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
I have, Mr. Pava.
Thank you.
have you met with the rco and have a letter yes thank you please proceed okay um once again good
afternoon uh chairman de chico and members of the board uh i have with me here today harris schwartz
on behalf of step biver properties the owner of these two lots as well as matt imperato from
KJO Architecture. This application proposes to adjust the lot lines of two existing lots at 1847
and 1849 Subviva Street to create two lots. So we're just going two to two. We're just adjusting
the lot lines and to build two single-family homes fronting Subviva with two accessory parking
parking spaces located off of Houston Street, which is a very narrow 15-foot wide street.
The refusal notes the parking, which is prohibited in the RSA 5 District unless accessed from
a shared driveway alley or rear street, and that is the only refusal we should have received.
With respect to rear yards where it says nine foot required, one foot proposed, I'll go
through the plans, but show that we're actually now proposing a 14, almost a 15-foot rear yard
on 1849 and a 14-foot rear yard on 1847. So there's ample space there. And also, despite the
letter in the packet from FNA, there is considerable support from the neighborhood,
as well as the near neighbors and the adjacent neighbors to the property. So I'm a bit confused
does to FNA's decision but it was made without a formal vote taken and I believe there are
you'll see as we go through the exhibits the petition of support and letters of support that
we have from the neighborhood. I'll begin with some photos of the of the surrounding property
so this is Sep Viva Street and right here on the corner of Sep Viva and Houston is the existing
lot. So right now there is a, at 1849, a one-story industrial garage, and 1847 is currently just a
oddly shaped vacant lot. Here's a better picture as we go out. Again, these are the two properties,
here's Houston Street, the very narrow 15-foot wide street, and in nearly every picture that
I'm going to show you of Houston Street, you'll notice cars parked up on the sidewalk right near
where our property would be, and that's really the condition at Houston, and that's where our
parking would be accessed from. Here's an aerial view. Again, this is 1847, Sep Viva, currently
vacant lot. Once again, the photo, I don't know why it came out warped, but cars parked along the
sidewalk, and here is the one-story industrial garage. Now, what we'll be doing is we're proposing
a curb cut around here on Sep Viva for the two accessory parking spaces. We are giving an
on-street space back, excuse me, on Sep Viva. The parking will be off Houston. So taking one
parking space off the street on Houston, giving one back at Sep Viva, so you're at a net neutral
there, and then providing the two parking spaces for the two single-family homes. There are a number
of garages and uh accessory parking spaces uh throughout the neighborhood i'll just take you
through a few other pictures uh once again survivor see other homes that have either
the parking space or uh or the front loaded garage it's 1858 here's our posting
and here are the proviso plans that are being submitted so you'll notice that 1847
we're creating just a much more regularly shaped lot we're going from 822 square
um we're creating just a much more regularly shaped lot we're going from 822 square foot lot
to 1223 square feet and we're reducing the size of the uh the lot at 1849 to 1440 square feet
there is a rear yard right here of 1849 that is 14 feet 11 inches the open area we also increased
after meeting with the community to 24% on the interior, 24% on the corner lot and 29% on the
other lot. So we meet both of those. This is just the revised proviso plan form. Here's our original
application. We made some other changes that I'll go through in a moment. We had this sloped roof
that in the initial zoning screen, the community did not like or FNA didn't like. So we removed
that. We also added more brick, increased the open area. Here's the petitions of support
from numerous members of the neighborhood, noting both the end result of a creation of these two
off-street spaces, but also what we heard from a lot of the neighbors is that Houston Street is
not a great street for parking on because cars are on the sidewalk. It's only 15 feet, and it
doesn't create really a good condition due to the narrowness. So this, we believe, will be beneficial
in an improvement for the neighborhood as well. In addition to the petition of support, we have
a letter of support from the near neighbor who owns both 1851-Viva through to 1852-TULIP,
and they also see this as a beneficial project.
They're familiar with the developer.
He has a good reputation in the neighborhood
and they're looking forward to this
and support the parking.
This is the zoning map.
So you see this oddly shaped parcel
that we're adjusting.
You see the narrowness of Houston.
Here's Sepviva.
Here's Tulip.
And so these are the plans
that show what we're proposing to develop.
And I'll quickly show this is,
there are some elevations.
Now, originally, we were proposing something
that looked like this, which had this sloped roof
and not as much brick.
The community did not like that,
or the zoning committee didn't like it,
So we made the change to this more contemporary brick look.
Again, here's the parking.
We have these two accessory spaces, both accessed off of Hewson, the zoning plan.
So 1849 will jut out like this and have one parking space.
Still has an ample rear yard.
We're not cutting into that.
And in terms of 1847, again, it's on the corner. We still provide some outdoor space here before you get to the parking, and then the parking is right there.
And we feel that this is a common sense plan. It removes this unsafe condition of cars parked up on Houston Street. We're adding a parking space back on Tip Viva, so you're at a net neutral there, but creating these two accessory parking spaces.
um i would like to uh just quickly call uh matt imperato from kjo architecture
to just ask him a few brief questions and then i'll uh ask my client uh mr schwartz to
uh adopt my testimony when you get on please identify yourself spell your full name and i
you in. Could you have your client please raise their hand? Either Matt and or Harris,
can you please raise your hands?
if we can't it doesn't seem like we're getting that maybe you can just
can you hear me now okay yeah mr schwartz spell your full name uh harrod schwartz h-a-r-r-i-s
S-C-H-W-A-R-T-Z
I'm the owner of
1847-1849
Survivor Street
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Phillips
Harris, you heard
my testimony
a moment ago? Yes
And do you agree with everything that I stated earlier as being truthful and accurate?
Do you agree
with everything that I
And do you agree to adopt my testimony as your own?
And can you briefly just let the board know some of the changes that you made to the project in response to our meeting with FNA?
um so like michael said we uh changed the slope roof deck uh that we initially proposed after
meeting with the fna board they wanted more conformity in the neighborhood and and while
we thought the slope group was a good idea we we obviously uh made that change um also with
dealing with some of the neighbors and some of the light concerns with their backyard we pulled
in 1849 Survivor Street's building an extra couple of feet. I also have a deal with the
neighbors next door that I will use a certain material because it is going to be bordering
their outdoor space and other changes that we made. We obviously use more brick, which is what
everybody wants and what I typically try to do on all my projects. I've done a significant amount
of time uh working with different neighbors and making little changes here and there and and and
talking about what we can do in terms of putting some trees on the street um i actually built the
houses directly behind this and in talking with the uh neighbors that live there now they had put
um street trees on their sidewalk because they had so many people parking on their sidewalk
cracking the side uh the cement um and they asked if i would do the same thing and and
And I do plan on doing that.
I think it'll be a great look for the neighborhood.
And, you know, I look forward to working with everybody on this project.
Thank you very much.
Questions from the board?
Yes, I have a quick question.
I assume that this has gone into streets department for zoning.
and i'm wondering if they have approved the curve the location of the curb cut
that won't happen unless we approve it correct is that right mr phillips or no
that's correct but this did go in for zoning and streets department did give
their approval on the location great i just want to make sure that they're okay with the location
thank you thank you john and um is there anyone else who has any questions for this
in this case, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have John Scott.
Scott, please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Hi, John Scott, 456 Moyer Street.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
So I was at this F&A meeting.
i was also the board member that last year proposed the uh the virtual meeting guidelines
and uh so in this case the the fna zoning committee voted against this um and we don't
let the well we didn't set up set it up so that the neighbors would vote because we didn't have
a way to confirm their identities and also keep them anonymous um so my understanding is that the
The F&A voted against this, the neighbors were against this, and the F&A zoning committee basically represents their viewpoints as much as they can.
My specific concerns that I had were that the elderly neighbor on that street had difficulties with the off-street parking spots here.
So, Mr. Scott, were you aware of the revised plans?
uh i was not no i don't believe they were brought back to the to the neighbors
there is no parking on is it houston street mr phillips yes it's houston street no parking
other than people parking on sidewalks correct well no that i don't believe that's true there
is parking there it's a narrow street they do park on the sidewalk to leave more clearance but
there is legal parking there to my knowledge to the best of my knowledge thank you is that correct
mr phillips that is correct you'll you'll see here i pulled up the aerial where there are cars
parked along um this side of uh houston if there weren't cars parked there i wouldn't have actually
gotten a refusal because uh it would be classified as a rear street however you know they're all up
on the sidewalk and yeah okay thank you uh anyone else have any questions uh testify in this case
testify in this case yes chair we have Jacqueline excuse me Jacqueline McKnight
yes chair we have Jacqueline
Miss McKnight please identify yourself spell your full name and I will swear you in
hi can you hear me yes okay Jacqueline McKnight that's J-A-C-Q-U-E-L-I-N-E McKnight and that's
mc capital k n i g h t you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do okay please proceed okay um i have several points i want to make um i'm apparently the only
one that is directly affected by this what is your address ma'am i am at 1646 east houston street
um and it appears that this driveway will be directly in front of my house
um but first I want to point out that we park on the sidewalk yes but because that has been
a vacant lot I've been in my home 43 years and it's been a vacant lot the whole the whole time
so um when the homes are built I mean of course we don't want to ruin anybody's
uh pavement so we will park on the street there's enough room for cars to get by
All right. The other point I want to make is I can't see how only one driveway is going to be
wide enough. They're going to have to take up with the curb cut more than one spot because it's going
to be such a narrow turn. Then they're going to have to back onto my pavement. And it's just,
i don't see that this is uh any logic in this um the then if you're going to plant trees that's
going to affect our parking because now you have to watch where your passenger gets out of the car
because you can't open the door because you're in front of a tree so um and another issue i have is
they're making frankfurt ave metered or permit parking soon that's um up for discussion so now
when though the people you know this street is a half a block in from frankfurt ave yeah ma'am
not not to interrupt sorry to interrupt you but that's not a matter before this board
that is a matter that the community will will discuss with the parking authority and the
your district council person. Okay. But anyway, this is a small street. Our parking is limited
as it is. We can't afford to lose another spot. Okay, thank you. Anyone else to testify in this
case? Please raise your hand. Chair, we have Denise Whitaker. Good afternoon, ma'am. Please
identify yourself spell your name for the record good afternoon chairman and the members of the
board my name is venice whitaker that's spelled with v-e-n-i-s-e last name w-h-i
you muted yourself miss whitaker
miss whitaker
the council president yes hello hello miss whitaker miss whitaker hello you muted yourself
before you completed spelling your last name okay okay i'm sorry can you hear me now yes we can
okay so uh last name whitaker w-h-i-t-a-k-e-r thank you please proceed you swear or firm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth yes i do sorry please proceed okay thank
you i'm here on behalf of council president daryl clark city hall room 494 the council president
set a letter in opposition to this matter based on feedback from near neighbors and the coordinating
RCO FNA. Neighbors have been reminded of the importance of rear yard space during the pandemic.
They oppose this variant since there is already street parking adjacent to the property on Houston
Street. There is no hardship sacrificing yard space for parking. Therefore, he asked that the
board deny this variance and vote along with FNA. Thank you very much. Would you, Ms. Whitaker,
or happen to know whether you or does the councilman know of the revision that extends
the rear yard from the original proposal out to somewhere between 14 and 15 feet?
No, whatever was presented during that zoning meeting is the only thing our office is aware of.
Okay, I thank you for that.
Okay, I thank you for that.
Anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
I see no more hands, Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, city planning.
Last name Bednar, B-E-B-E-N-A-R.
Please swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Comprehensive, hold on a second.
Sorry, just give me one second, right?
Yeah, no worries.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family
zoning at this location given the narrow width of head Hewson Street.
We have no objection to the variance for parking access with regard to the refusal of the lot
size variance and variance is minimum and does not
conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning court accordingly the city plan commission
recommends that the board grant the variances thank you very much mi 2021-0015 excuse me let
me start again. MI 2021-001757. 1847-1849 Spiviva Street, my vote is yes with the revised plan
one page approved today. Professor Plaza, my vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holliman,
my vote is yes with proviso. John Monlock, my vote is yes with proviso. Excuse me, chair,
this is Sharon. Mr. Phillips, I emailed Gussie to ask for the plans and the proviso plans form
to be submitted as separate sheets so that we can stamp them and send them back to you. Could
you take care of that? I believe she's on vacation. I will take care of that as soon as we're off.
Thank you. Thank you, Sharon. MI 2021-001467. 222 Market Street. A letter of support from Old City District.
Justin Crick is coming back in as a panelist.
Good morning, members of the board.
Good afternoon, Mr. Crick.
Please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Yes, Justin, J-U-S-T-I-N, Crick, K-R-I-K.
Address is 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 630, Philadelphia PA 19102.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Professor?
Mr. Crick, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you.
members of the board we're here today seeking a approval of a referral for a sit-down restaurant
with accessory assembly and entertainment in the basement and first floor of the property
located at 222 market street the property is currently zoned cmx3 and because of that and
because of its location in the old city residential district this special exception is
required. What we're doing here is creating a restaurant atmosphere that is not intended to
not intended to be and will not be a nightclub. This is a restaurant for daytime and evening
be and will not be a nightclub. This is a restaurant for
gatherings. Just to give a geographic perspective, we are at 2nd and Market between 2nd and Bank
Street, located on the southern side of Market Street, to familiarize everybody. And a little
bit closer of that can show you where it's situated near steak sandwiches on both sides
for whatnot. And let me get to the frontage. So this is the building we're talking about,
we are only dealing with the first floor and basement. The above is used separately and is
not on this application. This is the view of across the street, and we have an east-facing
view from 222 Market and a west-facing view as well of the street. The intended proposal would
allow for these two spots in the building to be used for the restaurant purpose. The applicant
is the tenant of the property and has undergone significant renovations and obtained permits to
basically convert the basement into the kitchen space and use the entire 1,200 square feet first
floor for the restaurant dining area. This is a conceptual design of the first floor area. As
you'll see, one of the things to note here is that this is for conversational lounging and dining.
there is no dance floor here. There is no intention to have loud music that has been
discussed with the neighborhood. Here's another just general conceptual design obtained by the
client. And one of the concepts that we're talking about is to provide the crowd with
morning modern wellness by day with certain types of drinks, coffees, fruit juices, and so forth.
and later in the day, extending into a dinner and cocktail menu and late night dining with
bar service. There will be an occasional live DJ. And here I'm going to just go through some
of the exemplar menus that may be modified as the restaurant opens and so forth. But this is
the general concept for what the daytime and then an evening menu is coming up. But what we have is
a DJ who would be there approximately three nights a week and even potentially a live violinist
to accompany that. The discussions with the neighborhood resulted in my client
specifically contracting with an audio company to specifically design this so that it would be
conversational music. And that is built into this quote here, as you can say, as you can see,
that this is a background system only designed for low level listening purposes and is not
sufficient for any foreground high output nightclub variant. And in the neighborhood
meeting, we went through some of the actual components that will be part of that audio
system that make it very evident that this is not something with loud thumping music throughout the
evening. In addition, again, just as some evidence of the client's work in renovations, there was
substantial underpinning to convert the basement to the kitchen, and the permits obtained are there
for that purpose. In meeting with the old city district, they had unanimous support, one
abstention, but all of those that were entitled to vote at the May 19th meeting did support the
application. The tenant, the occupant is the tenant of the property and is in lockstep with
the landlord, Joe Greco, as to the design and the use of the property. And this is a two exemplar,
three exemplar pages from the lease showing that they are a five-year lease with a five-year option
to renew. We have a tax clearance certificate and posting of the zoning hearing. It is our belief
that the, and I will also state, I'm sorry, in addition, the client has, the applicant has
agreed that in his renovations, we'll be putting thicker glass windows in the property to further
help absorb any sound that may get through. At this time, we don't believe that objectively that
this project will not cause any congestion in the streets, overcrowding of the land,
impairment of any adjacent neighbor, burden any public facility, injure any other property,
endanger public health, or be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. And for that reason,
we are asking that the board approve the referral and the special exception application.
Rick, do you have a client to adopt your testimony?
I believe so.
I have not looked at the list, but if Mr. Wayne Shulick is on, please raise your hand.
Mr. Shulick, please unmute yourself and please wait for the show.
You can please spell your full name and I'll square you in.
Thank you.
Wayne Shulick, S-H-U-L-I-C-K.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed, Mr. Crick.
Thank you.
Mr. Shulick, have you had an opportunity to listen to my testimony to the board today?
I have.
And do you agree that the statements I made were true and correct?
based on that testimony would you adopt my statements as your own testimony yes thank you
uh mr shulik just want to give you an opportunity if you have anything else you wish to say to the
board about your application so i would just like to reiterate um that we've gone to extensive
costs to make sure that the sound system the soundproofing the thicker glass is in accordance
with what we discussed with the RCO.
My partner and landlord, Joe Greco, is hand in hand.
I've walked through everything with him, which he's approved.
So everything we think we've done as closely to keep Old City
with the RCO and what they were looking for.
As Justin said, it's not a nightclub.
It's a restaurant with cocktail service after.
there's no dance floor there's no security guards um and that's pretty much it it's just a restaurant
with live music after thank you any questions from the board no no and what else would like
to testify in this case if so please raise your hand i see no hands chair thank you planning
Commission. Thank you, Chairman DeTucco. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed, Ian. Thank you. Proposed special exception will not cause
detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what would normally be expected for this use,
and so the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the special exception.
Thank you very much. MI 2021-001-467-222 Market Street, my vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
John Monlock, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you. May I be excused?
Yes, you may. And again, I apologize for the background noise. I'm in my house and there's construction going on.
MI 2021-001-760-2316 North 10th Street.
Alan Notkinson is the attorney of record.
37th Ward RCO sent a letter of support.
Good afternoon, Mr. Notkinson.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you, sir.
Sir Nockmson, you agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we actually have a letter of support.
Thank you. Please feel seen.
May I share my screen?
All right. As I indicated, my name is Alan Occamson, and I'm representing the owner at 2316 North 10th Street.
I have a packet of materials, which include Exhibit 1, a deed to the property, showing that my client owns the property.
Second, Exhibit Certificate of Tax Clearance, showing that my client's a good standing with the city of Philadelphia with respect to their real estate taxes.
Exhibit 3 is the notice of refusal.
You'll see this is a CMX 2 property on the corner of 10th Street in Dakota.
All we're looking to do is swap out the commercial component and put a residential component.
There are other refusals, but that's the gist of this matter.
We have our application for appeal, maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area,
architectural plans and drawings, and most importantly,
the letter of support from the 37th Ward Executive Democratic Committee,
where we received unanimous support at a well-attended meeting.
where we receive unanimous support at a well-attended meeting.
First, deeds of property showing that NYG LLC is the owner of the property and just so the board
knows in the audience is Isaac Katz, the member of NYG LLC who will adopt my testimony.
Second exhibit is the certificate of tax clearance showing that we're in good standing.
uh third exhibits the newest refusal uh so we have a refusal uh first uh in terms of the amount
of units uh under the code we're allowed three dwelling units uh we're asking and one commercial
and we're asking for five dwelling units given that this is a corner property and the given the
way it's situated we think that this is a fair reasonable use of the property and the neighborhood
unanimously agreed with that. The second refusal has to do with the fact that we're swapping out
the commercial component with residential and actually the neighborhood isn't fully in support
of that. They don't believe that commercial is a good use of this set part of the neighborhood and
they would prefer residential use. Third refusal has to do with the configuration of the lot and
our requirement to have two staircases given that we're four stories. We're having our roof
deck access structure is not set back five feet but you'll see from a safety perspective we still
fall within the spirit of the code and then the fourth refusal just has to do with we're providing
some off-street parking and a curb cut where no parking is allowed anyway and the neighborhood's
glad about that as well our application appeal to the zba along with our notice of refusal
and our project information form.
Maps of the area.
Again, this is a very highly dense area of the city of Philadelphia.
You'll see we're surrounded by orange, which is RM1, as well as I2 and then CMX2.
Again, they prefer not to have full residential to support the commercial corridor on Germantown
avenue rather than bringing commercial component to a really just a residential neighborhood
photographs of the property this is a corner property again on the corner of 10th and dakota
views of the property from dakota street views from the right of the property on 10th street
to the left of the property on 10th street as you can see there's really no commercial component
here to see what by the playground it's a family oriented neighborhood uh to uh the right of the
property in west dakota to left of the property in west dakota and just examples exterior of like
what mr captain his company is have done this is a family-owned business that's been in business
for well over a generation so they're very good about you know finding properties uh and really
developing them responsibly and in a good and workmanlike manner. More examples of interiors.
This is the type of work product that he's going to do for this project as well. More example
interiors. And then our plans and drawings. I will reduce the size of this. Obviously,
I'm just trying to fit my screen. If we need to enlarge it, I will. But you can see from this
site plan. We're taking one parking spot, which is the one of the refusals, but there's no parking
allowed on that side on Dakota. Another refusal has to do with the roof deck access structure
not being set five feet. We'll see from the floor plans that this one pilot house, which is the
roof deck access structure, is not set back five feet, but everywhere else around it is set back
five feet. So no, there'll be no chance of injury where anyone's falling and we'll comply with the
code in all within the spirit of the code. So you can see that the reason why we need this roof deck
access structure because we have a four-story building, we need two forms of egress. One is
going to be on one side of the street and one's going to be on the other side of the street.
Units one and two are bi-levels, the first and second floor. Unit three is on the is which is
unit C is on the third floor by itself, excuse me, it's on the second floor by itself. And then
units four and five are by levels on the third and fourth floors. Everyone has access to the
roof deck, which was also important to the community in the sense that everyone had some
outdoor living. Here's just a side view of what we're planning to do with red brick to kind of
match the character of the neighborhood. There's just another elevation kind of showing where we
There's just another elevation kind of showing where we are in terms of a side view in the floor plans.
are in terms of a side.
And then again, most importantly, we met with the neighborhood through the 37th Ward Executive Democratic Committee.
And as you can see, 10 people were in support of this project and zero people were opposed for this project.
So with that being said, I would ask that Mr. Katz virtually raise his hand so he can adopt my testimony.
And then I would take any questions that the board may have.
Mr. Katz, please spell your full name and I swear you in.
Isaac Katz, I-S-A-A-C-K-A-T-Z.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Yeah, Mr. Katz, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right.
I have no further questions.
Questions from the board?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Counselor, what is the...
Mr. Holloman.
Mr. Holloman, go ahead.
Tom, you're muted.
You're muted again.
Tom, you're good now.
You were muted.
What is the hardship for the additional units?
Well, the additional one unit.
Again, it's just a way there is not a hardship, so to speak, but more of how it's situated.
This is a corner property.
It was important to the neighborhood in terms of affordability.
We're trying to make this affordable product.
By having that additional unit, we can make it more affordable.
And in terms of it being a corner property, from a safety perspective, we have access on two streets.
Also, did you fill out the affordability code requirements?
we well I'm not we're not seeking as a zoning bonus is that what you're asking yes no we did
not seek we did not seek a zoning bonus thank you and I think under the current
legislation we couldn't because we're under 10 units thank you any other questions from the board
no anyone else like to testify in this case please raise your hand
i see no hands chair thank you planning commission thank you chair to chico ian
hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the existing commercial mixed use zoning at this location we recognize the difficulty with
ground floor commercial use requirement at this location however no unique physical conditions
prevent the applicant from adhering to their requirements for dwelling unit count roof deck
location or parking access affordability is not a hardship in this case the city
planning commission recommends that the board deny these variances
am i 2021 that's 001 760 2316 north 10th street my vote is yes professor plaza my vote is yes
thomas halliman my vote is no
john munlock my vote is
on you you muted we didn't get your vote john
John Munlock my vote is no okay so it's a split and we'll have to get one of the other board
board members who are not in attendance to read the transcript and we'll have a vote
going forward thank you next case number four on our list mi 2021-001
Frank we lost you
can you guys hear me secretary plaza it seems like um the chairman might have bounced out if
You can continue, please.
Will do.
Calendar number MI 2020, I'm sorry, 2021-001755234-36 South 4th Street.
234-36 South 4th Street.
It looks like we have Attorney Messimer.
If you can promote her, please.
She's coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you, Kylie.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Can you please identify yourself for the breakfast?
Catherine Missimer. It's M-I-S-S-I-M-E-R, 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, 19103.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Okay. And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
We agree to waive the reading. However, I will note for the record,
a rear yard refusal was issued in this case. However, there are three street frontages
and the fourth side is connected. It's attached. So we're not required to provide a rear yard in
this case. Okay. And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of
ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days
prior to this hearing? Yes, sir. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we do.
Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. I'll share my screen now.
Thank you. Good afternoon. As mentioned, Catherine Missimer representing the Foreman Family Realty LP and 234 South 4th Street LP. Owners of the property located at 230 to 36 South 4th Street.
This is in the Society Hill neighborhood of Philadelphia. We're here today with an application
to restructure the lot lines to create one lot from these three existing lots, the partial
demolition of an existing structure, and the new construction of an addition to the existing
structure for use as a single family home. With me today is owner's representative Mr. Michael
Foreman and project architect Ming Wan. As you can see from your packages, we do have a letter
of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla, as well as a letter of support from the Society
Hill Civic Association. This lot has three street frontages. This is the zoning plan.
I'll shrink so you can see. We front on 4th, Locust, and Leithgow streets.
And our intent here is to preserve the bulk of the current historic structures located
along 4th Street to use the reconfigured structure along with a new addition as a single family home
with two off-street parking spaces. Those would be access from Leithgow Street. This project has
taken a long journey to get here. We completed the Philadelphia Historic Commission process
to authorize the partial demolition of one of those structures and the preservation of the
two remaining structures. And we've gone through a redesign as well as COVID. So this is a two-year
process in the making society hill civic association has been extremely responsive
and supportive throughout that process um i will just note as we walk through the plans
we did make some changes throughout that period that has allowed us to open up and provide a
little more green space you'll see here this is a locust street that you're looking at along the
front edge here and this is fourth this is the project site we'll be preserving these two historic
buildings and this is a current vacant parking lot and that's where the addition would go and
this is the view along locust street you'll note the fence in place as well as this curb cut here
this will go away parking will now be accessed via leaf gow and this is the current condition
on this portion of leaf gow street you'll note that there's already parking access from leaf gow
and this is a series of views of the project site from the neighborhood.
This project, as I mentioned, does generate two very technical refusals. The first for
the rear parking. In a typical situation, this would have not generated a refusal being that
this is an RM1 property. However, given that we're on three street frontages, each street is
considered a front. Therefore, although the parking is accessed from Leif Gow, it's technically
creating a refusal because that's a technical front rather than a rear. As you'll see, the rear
yard would be here on this fourth side where we connect to the existing buildings. And this view
allows you to see the existing parking along Leif Gow Street. It's essentially an alley in this
location, and there are no front doors fronting on Leif Gow here. So there wouldn't really be any
conflict with pedestrians or the like. There's also no on-street parking at this location.
There's also no on-street parking at this location. And then the last refusal cited would be the fence
height. This is an existing condition. We're proposing to put it back. It's exceeding in
height. It is a seven foot high fence. It's wrought iron. There will be landscaping. However, this is
the condition in the neighborhood. As you can see from some of the several surrounding photos,
um it's also the condition on site today um there are several locations here where this type of
ornate fencing is included in the properties specifically at brigham court directly across
locust street from the property um they have a red brick wall that does have the same height
and similar landscape so those are the two refusals that we believe should have been
In RAISE, we have discussed all three with Society Hill Civic Association.
You do have their letter of support.
This proposal will not impair the development of neighboring properties.
Again, it's more consistent.
The RM1 by right zoning would allow for multifamily up to about 19 units.
Both the Civic Association and the owner felt that that density is inappropriate here,
and all are in support of the single-family use.
We also feel that this will be less impactful to the neighbors and is in conformity with
the neighborhood context.
I would just ask Mr. Foreman, if he's available, to please raise his hand.
Mr. Foreman, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Foreman, would you please put your name and address on the record?
Michael Foreman. My address is 226 South Core Street, Philadelphia.
So you swear to tell the truth, to hold true for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Have you heard my testimony this afternoon?
I have.
Would you agree that it's true and correct?
Would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I would.
Thank you.
Unless the board has further questions, we have nothing further.
Does the board have any questions?
Is there anyone else that would like to speak in this matter?
yes we have paul bonnie or bonnie please unmute yourself
good afternoon members of the board mr bonnie can you please identify yourself
yes my name is paul bonnie and i'm the uh chair of the zoning and historic preservation committee
last name for the record yes it's p-a-u-l-b-o-n-i and my home address is three bells court
philadelphia you saw a friend to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed thank you i'm the chair of the zoning and historic preservation committee
of the society hill civic association and we're very pleased to participate today to indicate our
support for this project the property owner and their team have consulted with us and the near
neighbors extensively. There's been a number of designs and design changes made over the past
two years. The owner and their attorney have always been very transparent about the variances
that would be required. And everyone that we've heard from, and there's been extensive outreach
to all near neighbors, is on board and supportive. We're supportive of the setbacks, the parking
garage, the height of the fence. We all think that's appropriate. Mr. Chair and members of
the board, this is a unique opportunity for our neighborhood. It's an opportunity to have a
project designed by one of the country's preeminent architectural firms. It's an opportunity to
complete an important block in the neighborhood. I'd say in closing that we're fortunate to have
a variety of high quality architectural styles from different eras in our neighborhood. And
this project is going to be an important addition to that story. Thank you for your time.
thank you anyone else mr secretary i would just add in the event the board were inclined to
grant the variances today we do have revised plans containing those last couple tweaks
that mr bonnie mentioned um they consist of two pages two pages thank you anyone else
i see no more hands thank you board has any questions no excuse me this is sharon
Ms. Moore, did you submit these in advance?
Yes, you should have them via email.
I resent them to you this morning.
I can pull up the proviso plan form if that would be helpful.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Do you want to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Comments were to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thanks.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RM1 zoning at this location.
With regard to the dimensional refusals for rear yard and fence height, the proposed conditions are not in conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code or adjacent conditions.
and with regard to the use refusal for parking access the proposed use relocates previously
approved parking access to a more appropriate location on leithgow street so the city planning
commission recommends that the board grant the variances thank you and those changes can be done
by revised plans um kate how many pages did you say confessor this is frank i will not be voting
because i was not a party to this uh case for most of it i was disconnected right gotcha no
problem sharon that was two pages two pages thank you you're welcome uh anyone else
calendar number mi 2021-001755 234-36 south 4th street my vote is yes with proviso
So two pages approved today. Again, Confessor Plaza.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
John Munlock, my vote is yes with proviso on updated plans.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, we have five, six, and seven will be heard together.
MI 2021-001-722-3824 Haverford Avenue, MI 2021-001-724-3847 Haverford Avenue, and MI 2021-001-723-3818 Haverford Avenue.
And my question for Mr. Marioni, I believe you're representing. We had earlier decided to move the 1349 South Linwood Street case to this grouping. Should that be heard separately?
Excuse me, Chair, if they weren't being added, it wasn't being added to this grouping. It's a grouping at 3.30. My notes are wrong. I apologize. That'd be Mr. Slepper. Thank you.
You're right. So, Mr. Matteoni, the three cases on Haverford Avenue will be heard together. Thank you. Thank you, Sharon.
Mr. Matteoni is coming back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Sure. Michael Mattione, M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I, Federal Reserve Bank Building, 100 North Independence Mall, Suite 5A, Northwest Philadelphia.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And before you begin, Professor, just let me, there are, no problem.
There are the three cases, each have received a letter of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
Thank you. Mr. Confessor?
Yes. Mr. Marioni, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you.
And again, I represent Eugene Nidovich.
He is the owner and developer, hopefully, of these three properties, and we submitted
the exhibits, as we said, including tax clearance, the support letter from the Mantua Civic
Association, which showed a vote of 13 in support and two opposed with two abstentions,
site plan, floor plans, site photographs, posting of the orange posters, etc.
And I do want to say for 3847, the client also submitted a revised plans form,
reducing the number of units from seven to six,
and that was at his own volition without any request from the RCO.
Mr. Idovich is seeking variances to develop these properties.
They're all on the same block of Haverford Avenue.
they're all zoned RM1. This is a typical floor plan where he has bi-level units,
lower level and first floor, and then one-bedroom units on the second and third floors,
and then one-bedroom units on the second and third floors and a rooftop deck.
and a rooftop deck.
The variances are requested to permit additional units more than are permitted under the RM1 Zoning District.
For 3824, he's seeking six units where four are permitted.
He will have, again, bi-level units, about 750 square feet for the bi-level units,
and the upstairs units will be about 475 square feet and only one and only unit five will have
access to the roof deck for 3847 again he's reduced this to six units requested and similar
floor plan for 3818 Haverford he is requesting seven units it's a larger lives 2065 square
feet where five units are permitted um all three property and they'll all be developed with red
brick matching the community as mr knight of expose he owns several properties and has developed
several properties in the area all are in the rm1 zoning district the uses are permitted
he's seeking to develop in conformity with 3836 haberford avenue where this zoning board in
in January of this year, granted a variance for seven units
where only four were printed on a 1,750 square foot lot.
Mr. Nidovich is not seeking quite as much of a variance
as that was granted for that property.
He has a long proven track record
of responsible development in this community.
He builds multifamily structures.
He charges modest rents.
The extra units do allow him to conform
with the surrounding properties that have multiple units
and to deliver units that are lower rents than if the variants were denied and he were to build
the number of units that are permitted under the rm1 zoning district these are give him they allow
him to be inconsistent i'm sorry consistent with the surrounding uses mr neidovich also works
closely with the community he has at least six employees from the community who are employed by
his business he runs a construction company as well um and that's what he's done and that's why
he has supported the community works very closely with the community and um has their their support
as he has on almost every project he has developed there what i'd like to do is call on uh mr naivich
who will speak us today.
Eugene?
Hello?
Hello?
Mr. Naitovich, please spell your full name
and I'll swear you in.
Eugene Naitovich, it's E-U-G-E-N-E.
Last name, it's N as in Nancy,
A-Y-D-O-V-I-C-H.
You swear for him to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Mr. Marioni. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Eugene, did you did you hear my my comments?
I did. Are they true and correct? They are. And is there anything you'd like to add to my comments?
I would actually potentially say that you mentioned that we have six people that work for us in the community.
I would say that because we also try to use subs as much as possible that are as local as we can find.
Indirectly, it's probably a good amount more than six.
but everything else is accurate.
And with respect to the units,
you charge modest rents for your units?
So most of these units were about 20% to 30% lower
than market rates on those exact same blocks
that are built by other developers.
And you're consistent with the other properties
such as 3836,
which recently had a variance granted
for a similar type development?
Yes, I guess.
i'm not very familiar with 38 36. do you adopt my statements as your testimony as well i do
i've no further questions from this thank you questions from the board no no
is this project eligible for the mixed income housing bonus hold on before you answer that's
It's John Mondlake for the record.
Yeah, John, please.
Sorry, I should have identified with it.
No worries, no worries.
I'm sorry, Mr. Mondlake.
Is this project eligible
for the mixed income housing bonus to increase density?
I do not believe it is, but I'm not a hundred percent certain.
Mr. Nidovich did not seek it
because he has worked with the Mantua Civic Association
on numerous projects and always charges modest rents
and always charges modest rents and they're satisfied with how he runs his projects and
and they're satisfied with how he runs his projects
and have not asked him.
have not asked him to participate because they know that adds to the cost and would take away
from his development and lowering his development costs as much as possible. So they're very
satisfied with how he develops his properties. Thank you. Mr. Matteone, this is Sharon. For
3847 since the board doesn't generally stamp floor plans and since you are are not proposing
any exterior changes to the structure would it make more sense to simply add a proviso
saying maximum six units that would be fine thank you thank you any other questions from the board
anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
chair we have andrew goodman please unmute yourself and wait for the
good afternoon mr goodman identify yourself you're still under oath from earlier today
thank you good afternoon andrew goodman g-o-o-d-m-a-n representing third district
council member jamie gaudier room 586 city hall mr chair members of the board our office has no
opposition to the requested variances at these three addresses very much anyone else to testify
in this case i see no handshake thank you planning commission thank you chair chico ian hegarty for
the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board in 2017 the zoning map was amended to
rm1 uh in this location or kept as rm1 in this location in accord with the manchua remapping
which is a community proposal. The applicant's hardship claim is not supported with evidence of
unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property. This is a requirement. This is an
instance in which the appellant has neglected to pursue available by right density bonuses for
green roof and mixed income housing and is instead asking for the additional density without
providing the required benefits. We therefore argue no hardship exists. The variance is not
the minimum variance necessary for any of these cases and instead we would characterize this as
a request to circumvent the established process deprive the housing trust fund of contributions
and have no mechanism for enforcing long-term affordability of these units city planning
commission recommends that the board deny the variances in each of these cases
thank you um i'm going to take these one at a time because haverford avenue has a proviso right
so it'll be number five first mi 2021 that's zero zero one seven two two three eight two four
haverford avenue my vote is yes professor plaza my vote is yes thomas holloman my vote is no
john munlock my vote is no you mi 2021-001-724-3847 haverford avenue my vote is yes
with the proviso maximum six units
confessor plaza my vote is yes with proviso thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso
John Munlock, my vote is no.
I-2021, that's 001723, 3818 Haverford Avenue, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is no.
John Munlock, my vote is no.
Number eight on our list, MI 2021, that's 001-965-5323 Germantown Avenue.
Chair, this is Sharon.
Just to be clear, we now have no decision in number five or number seven.
We have to have another board member read the notes of transcript appearing to break the tie.
There is a decision on number six.
Thank you for pointing that out. Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2021-001965, 5323 Germantown Avenue.
There is a letter of support from the Faith Community Development Corporation with a proviso.
Eileen Quigley.
Yes. Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, members of the board.
Please spell your full name for the record, and I'll swear you in.
Eileen, E-I-L-E-E-N, Quigley, Q-U-I-G-L-E-Y.
Quigley, Q-U-I-G-L-E-Y.
We're from the television.
We're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Proceed.
Can we agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, or referral, photos, and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
we have met with the rco i the rco sent an email of support to miss sunkett and we were copied on
that email so i thank you i'm presuming that you have that in the records yes this is sharon can i
add that the only proviso was a request that the applicant makes it's not enforceable now
not enforceable right i understood but just just for um for the board's uh information and just so
i can put it on the record for the rco because it was discussed at the rco meeting uh they have
asked uh germantown friends i'm here on behalf of germantown friend school and they did ask at the
meeting if germantown friend school would meet with a few abutting property owners with regard to
repair of an existing retaining wall. And it is my understanding that meeting will be taking
place tomorrow. So we have met that request by the RCO. So again, my name is Eileen Quigley on
behalf of Germantown Friends School, addresses 1735 Market Street, Philadelphia 19103. We are
here today with regard to a variance request for 5317 to 23 Germantown Avenue. This property is
owned by Germantown Friends School. If I may share my screen. These are our exhibits. We have a deed.
We have the tax clearance certificate. I do have to say that the Office of Property Assessment
records were not updated and they still show the old owner, but we do have a tax claim certificate
for Germantown Friends as a tenant for this property. If you need anything further, please
let me know. We have photographs of the posting and the property at Exhibits 3 and 4. And as I
said, we're here for a variance because we are seeking to use the property for educational
facilities. The application was for administrative and professional offices, which is permitted by
right and these offices would be accessory to the educational facility use the property lies
in the cmx 2.5 zoning district so educational facilities are prohibited in this district
just quickly excuse the interruption i i have to step out for a few minutes confess your
please take over on my behalf thank you you've got it thank you chairman please proceed
so as i said we have our um preliminary exhibits i'd like to go to the zoning plan
and ask if um mr jamie unkafer can be can join in
so i have a few questions for him with regard to the use of the property and a few questions
about the project. Is that your client? So Jamie Onkelford is the design professional
from Diggsout. We also have three other representatives from Germantown Friends School,
Mr. Nick Dobrowowski and Dana Weeks and Mr. Keno Terrell. Okay. Can you raise their hands,
see if they're available? I'm available. Can you hear me? Sir, please identify yourself for
of records? Sure. My name is James Unkafer, that's J-A-M-E-S, Unkafer, U-N-K-E-F-E-R.
You swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you, Jamie. Can you please just state your position, how long you've been with DIGSAW?
My position is a partner. I've been with DIGSAW for 12 years since its founding.
and can you just describe briefly your educational background uh i'm a registered architect with a
master's in architecture okay i'm going to slowly but surely get to the zoning plan can you just
briefly describe for the board what's happening here as i said this is just a use variance
to use the property for a educational facility but i just have a couple questions for mr uncle
The work is pretty limited. The physical work is pretty limited. It includes modifications to an existing parking area in the rear of the building. There's currently 17 parking spaces.
The work is pretty limited. The physical work is pretty limited. It includes
We're proposing to slightly reconfigure things, clean things up a bit, and add three spaces.
There's an existing concrete slab in the rear of the building, an abandoned slab, which would be removed and replanted and additional plantings at the perimeter are proposed.
Okay, and there are no changes to the existing building, no change in height, area?
No changes to the building exterior at all are proposed.
minimal interior renovations, including finish improvements and select removal of
non-bearing partitions. Thank you. And the proposed improvements will not affect the
surrounding streets or neighbors? No, no effect at all. Mr. Unkafer, I do have your resume at
Exhibit 12, is that correct? Yes. And I'd like to ask the board to recognize Mr. Unkafer as an expert in design.
Okay. And then if I may just ask a few more questions. Mr. Unkafer, in your opinion,
will the grant of the variance represent the minimum variance and the least modification
that will afford relief to allow the proposed use of the property for an educational facility
and classrooms? Yes. And in your opinion, will the grant of the variance substantially or
permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent properties? No.
And in your opinion, will the grant of the variance alter the essential character of the
neighborhood? No. And finally, in your opinion, can the request for a variance to use this property
for classrooms and educational facility be cured by a dimensional variance? No, it can't.
Thank you, Mr. Ankerford. I'd like to call Mr. Nick Dvorowski, if I could, please.
Go right ahead.
Thank you. Nick, can you raise your hand so they can know?
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, sir. Can you please identify yourself for the record, spell your first and last name?
Yes, my name is Nick Dubrowalski. It's N-I-C-K-D-O-B-R-O-W-O-L-S-K-I.
You swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you, Nick. Can you tell the board what your position is at Germantown Friends School and how long you've been there?
I'm the director of buildings and grounds here. I've been here for 40 years.
thank you and can you just briefly describe some of your duties and responsibilities
my responsibilities is maintaining all the buildings and grounds here
including minor and major renovations thank you and um you heard uh jamie talk about the
the project and uh as we know we have the the plan up i just want to confirm with you that
the parking area is an existing parking area and it's accessed through the existing driveway off
of Germantown Avenue, correct? That is correct. And these parking spaces will be used by the
existing Germantown Friends employees, correct? Correct. And do you know how many employees will
be working at that building? Eight to ten. Okay, thank you. And can you explain briefly the trash
plan? The trash plan is basically we would be picking up recycling and trash and putting
it into the existing containers that we have on the opposite side of Germantown Avenue.
Okay and explain a security and lighting plan? We're in the process of upgrading the lighting
to LED. The security plan we contract with an outside security company and they are here
24-7. We also installed cameras around the primitive building and installed emergency call boxes.
Okay, and in your opinion, with your very long time with Germantown friends and your familiarity with the neighborhood, in your opinion, will the granted variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
No, it will not.
And in your opinion, will denial of the variance cause an unnecessary hardship?
Yes, it will.
And in your opinion, will the use of the property for classrooms be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare?
Thank you very much. I appreciate it. I'd like to call our next witness.
Thank you very much. I appreciate it. I'd like to call our next witness, and I think I will be able to call Mr. Kino Terrell. We have Ms. Dana Weeks, but I don't know if Ms. Weeks is on yet.
Mr. Terrell, you may unmute yourself. Please wait for the chat.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Good afternoon.
Can you please identify yourselves by your first and last name, please?
Yes, it's Keno, K-E-I-N-L, Terrell, T-E-R-R-E-L-L.
Thank you.
You swear to affirm that it's all the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Terrell.
Can you state your position and how long you've been with Germantown Friends?
My position is director of middle school, and this is my second year at Germantown Friends
School.
And can you describe briefly your educational background?
Yes, I hold a master's in education from the University of Pennsylvania, and I'm a current doctoral candidate at Temple University.
And can you describe briefly some of your duties and responsibilities at Germantown Friends?
Yes, I am. As director of middle school, I am responsible for the academic and social experiences of our sixth through eighth graders.
Okay, and we have submitted your resume, Mr. Terrell, and it is at tab 16. I would like to offer Mr. Terrell as an expert witness in education and educational management.
Okay, thank you.
You're welcome. Mr. Terrell, can you explain for the board what classroom, what class will be utilizing the property at 5317 and 23 Germantown Avenue?
Yes. Although middle school is 6th through 8th grade, only the 6th grade class will utilize this facility.
And will the students and faculty be self-contained in this building?
And why do you need this additional space for the classrooms and the students?
Well, the middle school is unique in that the 7th and 8th graders have an opportunity to be fully vaccinated, and our 6th graders have not yet reached the age of 12.
Thus, in order to keep them as safe as possible and to assure that we can have in-person education for the year, it's necessary for us to move the 6th grade to a different facility.
Thank you. Will there be any change in the student drop-off or pick-up?
Okay, so they'll all be dropped off where they usually are not at this new property?
That is correct.
Okay, in your opinion, will use of the property for classrooms and educational facility alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
In your opinion, will use of the property for the educational facility be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare?
And in your opinion, will denial the variants cause unnecessary hardship?
Thank you.
I'd like to call finally Ms. Dana Weeks.
Ms. Weeks, please unmute yourself and please wait for the...
chair plaza she's ready to be sworn in ma'am can you please identify yourself for the records by
your first and last name
Dana Weeks, are you there?
I believe we might have to move on.
She's unmuted and available.
Counsel, anyone else you have?
Then I would just like to bring back Mr. Terrell for one minute just so he can, just to ask a follow-up question then.
Okay, Mr. Terrell?
Yes, I'm here.
Mr. Terrell, you talked about the social distancing as far as needing this space for the class.
We've attached the City of Philadelphia guidelines with regard to restrictions for schools due to COVID.
Can you tell the board if those are the guidelines that Germantown Friends School follows?
Yes, those are the current guidelines that the school follows.
Yes, those are the current guidelines that the school follows.
And once again, we were not able to have all of the students in person for in-person education last year because we were limited based on those guidelines of social distancing.
The facility at 5317 would allow us to have in-person education for all of the students in 6th through 8th grade for the year under the current guidance.
And we have attached those guidelines at tab number 14 for the board's convenience.
Thank you.
Mr. Terrell, Ben, in your opinion, is use of the property at 5317 and 23 Germantown Avenue essential to the operation of Germantown Friends School?
Yes, it's absolutely essential to our ability to provide in-person education for all students, grades 6 through 8.
Thank you.
Thank you. Does the board have any questions?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. Do council have any interior pictures?
No, we have a floor plan. We haven't made any changes yet to accommodate the classrooms because we need the variance before we can get a building permit to make those changes.
but that's the proposed floor plan the property was used as a was used for administrative offices
for a private health care provider prior to germantown friend school taking over
and as mr uncle for said there are going to be some minor alterations inside to create the larger
spaces for the classrooms and i can have mr uncle for come back on and explain that
no that's okay that's okay i can see from the floor plan yeah there we go we can't change
anything through permitting until the variance comes through i understand thank you uh is there
anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter from the public i'm sorry if i may just
mr hollman if you could see it's only a two-story existing building so you have classrooms on the
Two classrooms on the first floor, two classrooms on the second floor.
I see.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
We have Charles Richardson.
Please unmute yourself.
Thank you.
Mr. Richardson, please identify yourself.
You still on the road?
Good afternoon again.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 312 City Hall.
the councilwoman is not opposed to granting the variance as long as they do uh follow through
with the proviso uh with with the agreement of meeting with the near neighbors to talk about
the repair of the uh retaining wall okay i don't think that's an enforceable issue is that correct
uh sharon i believe it's it's it's it's an agreement though that they made okay
right they do put that on the record that they have agreed to thank you yes and as i said we
there is a meeting already scheduled for tomorrow thank you with the neighbors thank you anyone else
i see no more here thank you planning commission thank you mr plaza ian hegarty for the philadelphia
city planning commission comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial
mixed use zoning at this location this proposed use is consistent with recommendation in the
comprehensive plan to encourage community serving uses along major commercial corridors educational
uses are also common in this area and so the proposed use does not conflict with existing
uses in the neighborhood city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
Thank you. Calendar number MI 2021-001-965-5323 Germantown Avenue. My vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes.
John Munlock. My vote is yes. Good luck. Thank you very much. May I please be excused?
Sure. Thank you. Have a wonderful day. Likewise. Thank you.
MI 2021-001-719-5708, Bridge Avenue.
Good afternoon.
My name is Al Fiscaldo, representing the applicant.
Can you identify yourself for the records for your first and last name, please?
Alfred Fiscaldo, F as in Frank, U, S as in Sam, C-A-L, D as in David O, 613 Patriot Lane, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, 19460.
Alfred Fiscaldo, F as in Frank, U, S as in Sam, C-A-L, D as in.
And you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate your attack, Harrison?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral folders and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We do. We have two letters.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you. I'm in the process of sharing my screen.
My name is Al Fiscaldo, as I mentioned, represent MHP Roxborough, LLC.
They are the applicant and tenant at this property, which is currently under construction at 5708 Ridge Avenue, which is at the northwest corner of Ridge Avenue and Shurer's Lane.
The building under construction is a multi-tenant building, and my client will occupy the corner at Shurer's Lane and Ridge.
Attached to the exhibit package at tab one is a copy of the lease, and I'm going to put to the site plan quickly so you can see Ridge Avenue is to the right.
Shurer's Lane is the bottom of the page, and that's the building under construction.
And my client will be locating, if the relief is granted, in the yellow outline portion of the building below.
So we're here before the board seeking a special exception for the use, which is a urgent care use, which under the zoning code is falls under the medical dental health practitioner group category.
Again, it's permitted by special exception in the CMX 2.5 zoning district.
We also need variance relief because the property is also located in the neighborhood commercial overlay district, which limits the signage at the property to 25 square feet per frontage.
And as you'll see from the photos, which I'll show later, this is a commercial corner with Sunoco gas stations and as such at the various corners.
And so we're just seeking signage in conformity with the rest of the neighborhood.
also the signs were proposed to be illuminated illuminated signs are not permitted in the
overlay district but as you'll see as we progress through the application after meeting with the
civic association we've significantly reduced the requested signage and i've also eliminated
the illumination uh in two of the three signs and replace that with uh with gooseneck lighting
uh tab three are copies of the uh applications of appeal for the special exception and for the
variances and the project information forms um just flipping to the pictures bear with me
uh copies of the zoning posters uh at the property under construction here we're looking
north on ridge avenue the property is is to the left behind the fencing uh this is across the
street looking at the property which is on the west side of Ridge Avenue under construction
you'll see the stone facade and as you'll note in the Central Roxborough Civic Association letter
that facade was an accommodation to the Civic Association by the developer of the property
as we went through the process with the civics to change that from a stucco facade to a stone
facade, more in keeping with the aesthetic that the civics were looking for. And that aesthetic
was also in mind as we reduced the signage and changed the lighting from internally illuminated
to gooseneck. Again, looking at the property from the west side, here's the corner of the property
where American Family Care, which is a national urgent care provider with 260 facilities
nationwide, and for which my client is the exclusive franchisee for Philadelphia and
Montgomery counties. That's the corner where they'll be located. Here again, we're looking
uh looking south on ridge avenue towards the corner um and again you'll see the uh this is
the commercial neighborhood and the type of signage that that um is present um at the corner
um tab five is uh again this is the zoning plan that was approved by l and i uh for the for the
property um and this is this is the sign package which we had originally gone to the board with
showing the AFC urgent care family care signage on the Ridge Avenue.
care family care signage on the um uh the ridge avenue side and also on the uh if you see item b
at the bottom on the surest lane side and also to the rear of the property where the parking is
located again that was the signage that was uh proposed after going through extensive uh discussions
with the civic association we reduced the signage extensively almost in half um to reduce the sign
on uh on ridge avenue from um 147 square feet to 80 square feet so almost in half uh and that
that sign will now be uh lit with gooseneck lighting um as you'll see uh in this photo
or in this rendering uh the signage on ridge avenue was changed um i'm sorry the signage
So Unsure's Lane was changed from the full design to just the AFC Band-Aid logo.
That's the only sign that's going to remain internally illuminated and for which we would need variance relief from the internal illumination prohibition.
And at the rear of the building is the AFC Urgent Care Family Care sign package.
That time was reduced from 35 square feet to 15 and a half square feet, so more than half.
So the total reduction in signage after meeting with the Civic Association was down to 131 square feet for the entire use.
And the number of illuminated signs, internally illuminated signs, was reduced from three to one.
Attached at tab eight to the application are letters of support from the Central Roxborough Civic Association and also from the Roxborough Development Corporation.
That was an email that's included at the packet and from which the board and Ms. Saleta and the council person were copied.
And then the tax clearance certificate is attached as Exhibit 9.
My only witness here this afternoon is Matt Mayorino.
He is the founder and sole member of MHP Roxborough LLC, the applicant and its parent company, Marion Health Partners.
um and so i would ask uh matt if he could raise his hand uh and uh be sworn okay
mr marino you can unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good afternoon sir please identify yourself for the records by your first and last name
yes uh matthew mayorino last name spelled m-a-i-o-r-i-n-o
thank you you saw affirm itself the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
yes okay you may proceed thank you uh mr mayorino were you present for the presentation that i
provided to the board this afternoon yes and was the presentation that i gave a true and accurate
yes it was and do you accept that presentation as your own testimony yes i do um and in and i
Do you also agree that the proposed use of special exception is as you propose it and as was approved in a similar application before this board in Toursdale satisfies the criteria for the grant of special exception under the zoning code?
Thank you. I have nothing further for the board other than just to say that in the proviso plans form and the attached exhibit at tab six, the sign package that was attached has a different revised date on it than was approved by the Civic Association.
that was an inadvertent error on my part the plan set is otherwise exactly the same but for the
revised date um and so uh with the board's permission and and mr letta's permission i'll
just email uh mr letta a an amended uh exhibit six with the correct uh sign package uh attached
which is the one that's referenced in the crca letter dated may 2020 may 20th 2021.
thank you does the board have any questions no excuse me mr fiscaldo did you say that you
submitted a revised plans form completed i i i will i have it teed up to send to you as soon
as as soon as you okayed it i just wanted to make sure that that was okay with the board
it's exactly the same exactly the same uh uh exhibit that was attached at tab six to the
exhibit package, which I sent last week. The only thing that's different is the last revised date
on the plans. I'm not sure why that was even generated. So I'm just going to, just for the
sake of accuracy and conformance with the CRC letter, I just wanted to send you exactly what
they approved. Okay, and just so that I understand, the plans that they approved are
they approved. Okay. And just so that I understand, they
different than those that were reviewed by ONI, is that correct? They are. We reduced the signage
significantly, and we eliminated some of the internal illumination, so the sign package that
attached to that form is what they agreed to support. Okay, and how many pages? It's seven.
seven pages that's an unusually large number um yeah there was there was there was there
were renderings of each of the of each of the proposed signs as well as um the schematics
of each one so i apologize for the size of it but that's what's what was submitted when i
initially no that's okay if it's necessary it is thank you what do we do shan we hold this or
Or is it okay?
I think that you can vote it with revised plans, seven pages.
Seven pages.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter?
I see no hands.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Secretary Plaza.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, this proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood.
beyond what would normally be expected for the use and the commission appreciates the reduction
in sign size and illumination to comply with the purpose of the code and the ridge avenue overlay
the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the special exception and sign
Thank you. Calendar number MI 2021-001-719-5708 Bridge Avenue. My vote is yes with proviso.
Seven pages approved today. Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes with proviso.
John Munlock. My vote is yes with proviso. Thank you. Good luck.
Calendar number MI2020-000835-621-25 Breed Street.
Mr. Phillip, you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Frank, you're back.
i am back to let you know that i will not probably be on this case as well
uh okay i've got some contractor issues going on so thank you you've got it uh can you please
identify yourself for the record sir um michael phillips uh philillips 1835 market street 14th
floor, Philadelphia PA 19103 here on behalf of 621 Partners, the owner of property at 621-25
Reed Street. Again, this is a resumption hearing at the request of Chairman DiCicco at the original
hearing that was held in November 17, 2020. Okay. So there's a resumption hearing you said?
Yes. So just briefly to refresh everybody's recollection, we had come before
the we had come before the board back in November with a proposal to convert the ground floor of
the property at 621 Reed Street from vacant commercial to four residential units. We had
prior approval for the second through fourth floors for 12 residential units and it secured
a buy right permit. We, to get to those 12 units, utilized the low income affordable housing bonus
and my client paid $120,000 into the affordable housing trust and a permit was issued.
During the pandemic, he encountered significant difficulty leasing the ground floor space to a commercial tenant.
So our proposal was to convert that ground floor commercials into four additional residential units for a total of 16 at the property.
At the hearing, there were concerns raised about parking and providing additional parking at the property, and Chairman DiCicco asked us to go back and see if we can add any parking.
us to go back and see if we can add any parking and incorporate that into the plan so we did that
went back and after you know a lot of back and forth with the architect came up with
a plan that provides four compact parking. Excuse me Mr. Phillips I'm sorry to interrupt you
but just came to my attention that Mr. Monblack was not here for the original hearing the two
board members who are present would not yeah right so we can go through with this and hold it a week
for Mr. Monblack to read the a week or it might take longer to get the transcript but he could
get the transcript and then vote, or I can check to see if Mr. DiCicco is going to be back on at
any point and we can push this case back a bit. Yeah, we could do that, especially since Chairman
DiCicco, you know, this was specifically, we looked into this at his urging. I think it would
be best if either we see if he can if he would be uh available um to uh to hear this either later
uh you know i can wait and let some of the 3 30 lists go on um or um you know or even i don't know
what the scheduling is like in terms of getting back uh quickly since it's just a resumption
hearing um why don't we hold this for now take a break as you generally we generally do between
the 2 and 3 30 cases I'll contact Mr. DiCicco and see if he's available to do this at the start of
the 3 30 session okay will that be okay that's okay with me okay okay so uh I believe this
conclude is there anyone else in the audience that felt that we missed their case or didn't
call their case for the two o'clock listening i see no hands okay then we could take uh
tanya's a 15 minute break okay sounds wonderful and we'll see you guys back in 15 minutes
all righty bye-bye thank you
Yes, we are ready to go.
Good afternoon, everyone, my name is Confessor Plaza and I'll be the acting chair for the
this zoning hearing. Along with me are board members Thomas Holloman and also in attendance
John Montlock. Before we begin, please be advised that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Second, for
the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify
themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, for anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to
unmute yourself. Again, to raise your hand, press star nine, then star six to unmute yourself.
Before calling the first case, you know what? I'm going to read a couple of the continuances for
3.30 hearing. I believe MI 2021-001-482-5155 North Hutchinson Street.
That case will be continued. I believe that's it. Is there anyone else here
that needs a continuance or withdrawal? Please come forward now.
We have Charles Richardson. You may unmute yourself, Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Richardson, please identify yourself. You're still on the road.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
Here, asking about the 3504 North 23rd Street, MI 2020-003082.
This case was assigned to Tioga United back in December of 2020, and I don't believe they have ever met with the RCO.
This case was assigned to Tayoga United back in December.
I know that they were scheduled one time and never sent any materials or anything, and I know the RCO has not met with them.
I'm wondering if anybody is here for that case. If not, I want to see if you guys would like to dismiss it.
Yep. Let me call it up. Calendar number MI 2020-003082, 3504 North 23rd Street.
This is Sharon. I'm sorry. Go ahead.
I apologize, confessor. I shouldn't have been.
No problem. Go ahead, Sharon.
I just wanted to say that we have no exhibits and this is the second listing.
That's correct. Yep. Anyone here for this matter?
I see no hands here. Thank you. MI 2020-003082-3504 North 23rd Street. My vote is to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
John Monlock, my vote is to dismiss. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
before we go I see another case here that has no exhibit calendar number MI 2021-001-486-2427
North 8th Street anybody else here for this uh for this matter please come forward now
i see no hands yet okay calendar number mi 2021-001-486-2427 north 8th street
will be continued must be heard
okay let's see
okay all right so we are ready anyone else here that need to continuance or withdraw
I see no handshake thank you let's continue let's bring up Mr.
uh mr phillip calendar number mi 2020-000835 621-25 reese street
thank you uh thank you phillip he's still on the road can you please identify yourself for the
record sure michael phillips phillips 1835 market street 14th floor philadelphia pa 19103 here on
behalf of 621 Partners, the owner of property at 621 Reed Street. Thank you. I believe Frank
won't be able to join in, so go ahead and continue your case, and we're going to have to hold the
vote pending. He's going to be able to read the transcript and see the video, okay?
Certainly. So, as I had mentioned earlier, we were initially looking to convert this vacant
ground floor commercial use to four residential units, but the community had concerns about the
additional density and the availability of parking, which is, I guess, tough to come by
in the patching square neighborhood so at the urging of chairman to chico we went back and
looked at whether or not we could add or incorporate any parking into the plan so
we went back to the zoning board and i went back to lni and presented a new plan initially it was
just a use, so we didn't have any plans, to provide four parking spaces at the ground
floor access from the existing curb cut and garage door on Reed Street and to reduce the
number of units that were proposing for the ground floor from four to two. So there would
be a total of 14 units for parking spaces. The addition of parking did result in additional
refusal insofar as parking is only permitted in the CMX2 zoning district if accessed by a rear
street shared driveway or alley, and that's not the condition here. And we also have some
additional refusals that were generated due to the size of the parking spaces rather than
Rather than eight and a half by 18, due to the physical constraints of the property, we were limited to eight and a half by 16 and a half.
eight and a half by 18 due to the physical construction.
So the spaces are a foot and a half shorter than the code requires.
Similarly, the driveway aisle, which is required to be 24 feet, we are 23 and a half feet.
So I think that is the minimum.
There were also some refusals that were generated for facade review.
And as much as I tried to explain to the examiner, this is not new construction, that we're utilizing an existing garage door, an existing curb cut, we received those referrals as well.
But, again, the plan now is to utilize the existing curb cut, have four compact parking spaces, and then I'll pull up a floor plan.
that will show, you know, we have the four parking spaces here, and then the two units
would still be in the back, which we proposed earlier. So, essentially, we're replacing two
of the units with four parking spaces. The total would then be 14 units for parking spaces.
Now, in response, Pastor Young Square did submit a letter where they said that they are continuing
to oppose because of our failure to utilize the affordable housing bonus but as i mentioned and
as submitted in the original exhibit packet we did utilize the affordable housing bonus to get
the 12 units from the second to fourth floor with a payment in lieu that was made to the city of 120
000. since then the zoning code has been revised to increase density slightly in cmx2 such that
the affordable, the same $120,000 payment would have resulted in 13 units. And again,
we're proposing 14. So we believe that we have complied with the spirit of the, not just the
spirit, we've complied in providing affordable housing. And essentially, we're just seeking
that one additional unit due to the fact that ground floor commercial really isn't feasible at
this location. We believe that the addition of the four parking spaces on the ground floor was
a good compromise that we made with the neighborhood. And essentially, we're going
from 12 units and a vacant ground floor commercial to 14 units and four accessory parking spaces.
So that is, you know, where things stand. We would hope that based on the revisions that
we were able to meet at the board's urging and due to the compromise that we've sought to make
with the community that the plan be approved. Thank you. Yep. And like I said, we apologize,
you know, but yeah, hopefully by next week when Frank, you know, reads the transcript,
watch the video, you should be able to vote on it. Is there anyone else here in this matter?
I would just ask, I believe my client is on, I'll just ask him to, if he is, Yoav Shiffman.
Yoav, if you can raise your hand.
I'm here.
Hello, sir.
Please identify yourself for the records by your first and last name.
Yoav Shiffman, Y-O-A-V-S-H-I-F-F-M-A-N.
Court reporter, was you able to get that?
It was kind of breaking out there.
Yes, sir.
I heard it.
Okay, thank you.
You swore a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Phillip, please proceed.
Good afternoon, Yoav.
Did you hear my testimony a moment ago about the conversion of the ground floor space to four parking spaces and two residential dwelling units?
I didn't mean it.
And do you agree that my testimony was true and accurate?
I think you were breaking up.
I'm sorry.
This is the reporter.
i did not get that response i said i i i do agree with your testimony okay and do you agree
to adopt my testimony as your own yes okay i have uh no further uh comment uh questions for
mr shiffman and with that i would conclude thank you does the board have any questions no
no okay is there anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter
okay is there anyone else here that would like to speak in the
chair we have eric heidel please unmute yourself and wait for the
mr heidel please identify yourself for the records by your first and last name please
eric e-r-i-c heidel h-e-i-d-e-l you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but
the truth? I do. Please proceed. I'm here representing the Pasadena Square Pacific
Association. I just wanted to clarify our opposition to the project. We have concerns
about density in the neighborhood. The owner added an additional floor to this building
so that they could construct the four extra units they were given with the affordable
housing bonus. So we're opposed to any increasing units on the first floor. And just to clarify
the issue with the housing bonus in our letter we would have looked more favorably upon this
if the owner was providing affordable units in the building that would benefit the neighborhood
directly but since they paid into the housing trust you know in fact good for the city as a
whole but not necessarily for the neighborhood so that was just what just clarify the wording
okay thank you anyone else
I see no handshake.
Thank you. Board, any questions?
Okay. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Ron, good afternoon. You swear to our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change from CMX2 to RM1 at this location.
we find that the applicant has not supported the claim of hardship with evidence of unique
physical condition or shown that the zoning prevents or prevents economic viable
development of this property. The previous approved plan benefited from the use of the
buy right bonuses while we have no objection to the proposed variances for the ground floor
residential use or the parking access from Reed Street, the City Planning Commission recommends
that the board deny the variances for the extra dwelling unit calendar. Thank you. Okay, calendar
number MI 2020-000835-621 through 25 Reed Street. This record is now closed. We'll
um leave it open uh like 30 days pending uh other board members to read the transcript and
vote this case okay thank you very much you're welcome maybe excuse yes you may thank you i
have a great evening everyone likewise okay uh sharon this uh 330 adam for uh uber street
I guess we got to wait for the other board member as well.
Is that correct?
No, that is actually going to be,
you announced this morning
that that would be voted next week.
That's right.
But you do have one case from the 930 list
that goes with the 330 list, Lindemann Street.
So you put that off so that they can do it together.
I don't have it.
You want to do it at the beginning?
It's all of the cases, remaining cases on the list, I believe, are heard together, and this one is also going to be heard.
Okay, with the number, okay, one, two, oh, these are all together, right?
Yes, one, two, three, four, and then the case that I will give you the MI number for now.
Thank you.
Okay, it's MI-2021-001483, 1349 South Lindenwood Street.
13 what? 1341, you said?
I'm sorry, 1349 South Lindenwood Street.
Thank you.
All right, let me call that up.
Thank you, Sharon.
And counting the number MI 2021-001483, 1349 South Wilton Street, and MI 2021-001491, 1321 South Wilton Street,
And MI 2021-001490, 1332 South Wilton Street, and MI 2021-001489, 1330 South Wilton Street, and MI 2021-001480.
And MI 2021-001-481353 South Wilton Street.
Mr. Slepner.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, sir.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Spell your first and last name.
Yes, my name is Isaac Slepner, I-S-A-A-C, last name Slepner, S-L-E-P-N-E-R.
I am with Mattione Limited, 100 North Independence Mall, West Suite 5A Northwest, Philadelphia PA, 19106.
And I represent the property owner of each of these properties.
Before we begin, I just wanted to clarify.
Real quick, sir, you, I believe you're still on the road from this morning.
You agreed to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes. And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes. Thank you. Please proceed.
So these are a series of five separate properties that all have the same plan development at each.
So I guess what I'll do now, I guess what I'll do is I'll take you through the development is is more or less identically the plans are identical for each development.
I do have my client, LeVar Clark, who is the member of the owner LLC of each of these, and also our architect, Logan Dry, is out there on this call as well.
But I'm going to just start by taking everyone through our presentation materials.
I guess before I start on that, what I would start out by noting, I'm going to share my screen here, and then we will get to the substance of everything.
I'm going to start out with our printed materials, and I'm going to show as well a bit of a history of the neighborhood and a history of the zoning classifications of the various properties.
We'll start at 1349 South Lindenwood.
The owner is Junk Property LLC.
My client, as I mentioned, LeVar Clark, is the single member of that LLC.
So I'm going to scroll through our materials, and if anybody has any questions, needs me to slow down, stop, go back to anything, I'll be happy to.
Exhibit 1 is our Certificate of Tax Clearance.
This one was issued on 721, showing that the owner of 1349 South Lindenwood is, in fact, compliant.
Okay. Exhibit 2 is our notice of refusal, which we just stipulated to. Exhibit 3, I believe that the coordinating RCO, King Sessing Area Civic, sent the letter to the board, I want to say late last night or early this morning.
um but we did meet with them uh we actually it took a bit of um back and forth to meet with
with this rco we had uh been getting in touch with them since early um since mid-may and they
finally got back to us uh and finally did host us for a meeting uh actually on monday the second
just two days ago. So there was a little bit of, I would say, miscommunication.
Logan, if you're out there, I would have you walk the board through the actual plans.
Okay, not hearing anything. I'll walk the board through the plans.
all right um so this is our site plan for 1349 uh i'm here isaac oh hey logan
i said uh i'm logan i'm sorry please identify yourself for the record
sure logan dry l-o-g-a-n-d-r-y architect of record kca design associates 6525 tulip street
philadelphia pa 19135 thank you you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do thank you please proceed
okay uh logan if you can um just walk the board through i guess the site plan and then the floor
plans of uh each of these and describe uh what's planned here sure um so this one that we're looking
Sure. So this one that we're looking at is the 1349 South Lindenwood Street address. As you can see here, we're proposing a duplex with the front porch, three stories. We're seeking some variances for the use primarily as a duplex and single family.
at is the 1349
South Lindenwood Street.
and then there's a slight dimensional variance that we're asking for here as well an additional
four percent of building coverage again you see the site plan there you see the elevations again
within the 38 feet of height permissible in the zoning district pilot house and roof decks meet
all the required zoning setbacks as well um you can scroll the next page isaac yeah okay
so these are the floor plans again you know two units here the first floor and cellar are bi-level
units comprised of three bedrooms and two and a half baths. Your second floor and third floor plan
is the second unit that's also bi-level and again another three bedroom three bath this time
and then you have the roof deck plan there that shows the pilot house roof deck is is for the
upper unit only and the rear yard of the property is for the lower unit only so we've got a total
of two three-bedroom two and two and a half bath uh units in this property okay um thank you logan
uh i'll actually i guess i'll have real quick are there uh are there uh bedrooms in the basement
we've we've got bedrooms in the basement and we've got walkout egress wells with the full door
I'll scroll back up to the plans here.
If you, well, let me rotate it so that the front of the property would be at the bottom of the page here.
So the front of the property is at the bottom here.
That's Lindenwood Street.
Then this is the rear of the property.
These are the egress wells right here from the basement level.
And you can see at the first floor level, the first floor again has.
Excuse me, counsel.
I don't see the walk upstairs from the basement.
Logan, did you want to address that?
Yeah, we don't have stairs designed on these because of the small lot size.
We wouldn't have enough run to get down to the basement, so we have the egress wells that have the actual, instead of windows, it's the swing-in door that's designed.
So sorry if I misspoke about that.
we didn't have enough if you look at the yard dimension we didn't have enough room to do a full
set of of walk downstairs to that cellar just because we have a pretty small rear yard which
is reduced even further by an alley um that's that's you know partially through the property
um so in this scenario we were we were a little bit constrained in terms of being able to do that
full staircase down the basement from the exterior what would you need a a bigger yard
yeah we we would need a yard probably about i'd say double the size here just because the
roughly the amount of stairs you see to get down to the basement level would be
the equivalency of the length of stairs you see in the main building so we need about
14 15 risers to get down there so we'd be looking at you know about 14 or 15 feet in length
plus the landings the top and bottom
okay thank you so that would cause that so that would cause a reduction in the size of your
building correct correct yep which means the reduced reduction in units
correct it may correct yeah depending on how the floor plans laid out it would either be a reduced
uh a reduced size unit on the ground floor with a pretty big cantilever up top or
you know a smaller uh a smaller reduction across the board yes thank you yeah um we'll go on to
uh exhibit six is the um this is a rendering you can see uh currently we have designed a front porch
um covered second and third floors have bay windows and the parapet has the required setback
so there's no view of the pilot house from street level. Exhibit 7 are photos of the site.
So Exhibit 7A, this is 1349 Lindenwood and this vacant here are actually two separate lots.
Our property 1349 is this right half that would border on this house to the right here.
The empty space over here is 1347 Lindenwood.
This is a wide shot of the current situation at the site again.
1349 is on this right half here that would border on this white stucco wall here.
This other vacant is 1347 Lindenwood not affiliated with us.
And again, just a kind of a third photograph, same scene.
And again, just a kind of a third photograph, same same scene.
Exhibit 7B are photos of our orange posters.
So this, as you can see in front of 1349 South Lindenwood, is our orange notice of today's hearing, which was posted 21 days ago.
This is a second shot.
As you can see, the house next door is 1351.
This is ours, 1349.
and one more wider shot of the orange poster. Exhibit 8 is our timely appeal application filed
timely on 3-25-21. Exhibit 9 is the project information form filled out on L&I's website
at the time of filing the appeal. And Exhibit 10 is our affidavit of service. And you'll notice
that it was signed by the person who did all the mailings on July 22nd but it certifies and swears
that it was sent out our mailings were sent out on July 20th of 21 to all of the affected neighbors.
Exhibit A is our letter to the neighbors dated July 19th regarding the 1349 Lindenwood project
And as you can see, it was sent to all of the below listed individuals and groups, signed by me, sent out, again, CC to all of the affected RCOs, which also included a notice of our refusal.
and Exhibit B, we included with the sort of service the list of addresses that the Planning Commission mandated that we mail to, and it's a pretty substantial list.
It's probably about 100 or so neighbors within the radius prescribed by the code.
And there's another copy of our notice of refusal, but okay. And Exhibit 11 is a deed in favor of my client that was recorded on August 9th of 2019. Again, in favor of my client transferring the property to his LLC, Junk Property LLC.
see. I would also like to, at this point, show you, show the board a little bit of an annotated
history of this property, and in fact, the group of properties that we're going to address.
These properties in this part of Southwest Philly had been for decades zoned RM1. They
were had been zoned as multi multi family and in 2019 on November 14th of 2019 as she was ending
her political career as a council member council member Janie Blackwell introduced a bill to
rezone a number of neighborhoods of west and southwest Philly changing the zoning in various
spots in our case from RM1 back into RSA 5. And I will call the board's attention to the text of
the bill simply calls for amending the zoning designations of certain places within
west and southwest Philly, as more particularly described in the maps. And I'm going to now,
Now, I'm going to call the board's attention and please forgive me for fast scrolling.
I'm going to get down because it's map A21, which was up until this bill was introduced in November 14th of 19.
I'm in December 4th of 19 and signed by the mayor on December 30th of 19.
And I'm going to give you the map of our particular area.
So bear with me here. A21. Okay.
Okay. So we are, our address is 1349 South Lindenwood, which is just about two in from the corner of Lindenwood and King Sessing.
The other properties that we're discussing today are all on the 1300 block of South Wilton, which is this block of South Wilton.
So that's as it was in 2019 prior to the rezoning.
Upon the mayor's signature on December 30th of 2019, the zoning changed. As you can see,
it had been RM1 and was RM1 for decades. I'm going to scroll down. Again, I'll show you
map B21, which ultimately became the new zoning. Now, map B21 changes all of that area that
Now, map B21 changes all of that area that you just saw there on the 1300 block of Lindenwood, 1300 block of Wilton, changes it all other than this corner here from RM1, which it had been previously for decades, to RSA5, which is as it is now.
My client purchased this property in 2019 and had purchased his other properties between, I would say, 2016 and 2019.
I'm not certain on the dates, but we have deeds attached to each of our hearing materials showing exactly when my client purchased these properties and recorded the deed.
The hardship was not one created by my client.
He purchased these properties, believing and understanding them to be RM1. He's a smaller-scale developer. He owns a few properties. He has been working on raising capital and has been working on getting his properties in order to get his zoning permits, get his building permits, and build in the neighborhood.
Um, in the meantime, while that was happening, uh, council went and enacted a bill and the mayor signed into law, a bill changing the zoning for these neighborhoods. So my client found himself suddenly midstream of these projects, having to seek variances from the code.
So had he done, had these projects, you know, been able to be started a year earlier, or perhaps not been interrupted by the pandemic, I think he would have found himself having gotten by right permits.
As you saw by our appeal application, we filed our appeal application in March of 21. So it's not as though he sat on these things.
I would also like to show the board a map, and this is a little bit of a comprehensive map, and I will actually expand the view of this map. I'll zoom this in a little bit.
This is a map of some existing properties in the neighborhood, as well as my client's properties. So these red colored properties here are nearby neighboring properties that are already zoned and used as multifamily.
So 52-33 Chester over here is a three-family. I was not able to find any zoning documents on it, but I've been out to the neighborhood. I took a look actually just yesterday and pictures.
There are at least three mailboxes, three meters of 5233 Chester. Next to that is 5231 Chester. That's been a three-family since at least 1942. And I can pull up zoning documents about that in a moment if the board cares to see them.
Next to 5231 is 5229 Chester. That obtained a zoning and use permit as a three-family by accelerated process in October of 2019, which at the time was an over-the-counter process.
Then we've got actually just a few houses away from my client's property on Lindenwood Street.
We've got a 1339 Lindenwood, which is a duplex, a two-family, which is just what my client proposes to build at 1349 Lindenwood.
That obtained an over-the-counter zoning permit in 2013 because, again, at the time, that block was zoned RM1.
Now, there's also 1309 South 52nd, which is over here just at the corner of basically at the corner of 52nd and Chester, one house in from the corner.
That's a brand new build. And that is a five unit. Now, that is still zoned RM1.
We also heard earlier testimony. Well, I'll strike that last part, but 1309 South 52nd is a five unit. So as you can see, there's significant number of multifamilies in the neighborhood with significant demand for, you know, for these things.
The green properties here that you see on this map are the properties on which we're hearing testimony today.
So right here, this is 1349 South Lindenwood that we're discussing right now.
This is 1353 South Wilton, which is actually the corner of Wilton and King Sessing.
Then you've got 1330 and 32 South Wilton, which are vacant.
And this is 1321 South Wilton.
All of these are vacant, and my client is seeking to construct duplexes at all of them.
I can go through the materials on the remainder of the properties if the board would like to hear them, see the plans.
I'm okay. I think they are pretty much the same, right?
They're basically the same design. Yes. Okay. I'm okay. Tom? John? No problem. I'm okay.
They're basically the same design, yes.
Okay. I'm okay. Tom?
I'm fine. Thank you.
Anything else, Mr. Slepner? I would call my client, LeVar Clark, at this time.
Okay. LeVar, are you out there?
Mr. Clark, you can unmute yourself.
Yes, I'm here. Mr. Clark, please identify yourselves by your first and last name, please.
Name is LeVar Clark, spelled L as in Larry, E as in Edward, V as in Victor, A as in Apple,
R as in Robert. Last name Clark, C-L-A-R-K. You swear to our firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth for nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you. Thanks for listening.
Okay. So, Mr. Clark, are you the member of Junk Property, LLC?
Yes, I am.
And Junk Property, LLC owns 1349 South Lindenwood?
Yes, it does.
And are you also a member of Easy House Cash, LLC?
Yes, I am.
And does that LLC own 1321 South Wilton?
Yes, it does.
And does it own 1330 South Wilton?
Yes, it does.
And does it own 1332 South Wilton?
Yes, it does.
And are you also a member of Urban Property Solutions, LLC?
Yes, I am.
And does that entity own 1353 South Wilton?
Yes, it does.
And you heard all the testimony that I offered to the board today, correct?
Yes, I have.
And you heard the testimony that Logan Dry offered as well?
Yes, I have.
And would you say that that testimony is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
And would you adopt that testimony as though you had given it yourself?
Yes, I do.
Do you have anything else to add to the board today, Mr. Clark?
Well, it's a couple of things that I would like to add to the board.
I have a number of projects in this particular area.
This was one of these situations to where in November of 2019, the 14th, it was enacted to change the actual zoning.
But it went into effect on the 5th of December 2019.
It was about a three-week change.
It was in the middle of us trying to get everything ready so we can get started with the actual zoning process.
I'm looking to do a lot of other projects in this actual area. I'm looking to work with the
community and making sure that we can have a good working relationship. I'm interested in being a
part of the community and doing the things that we need to do to actually foresight that actual
working relationship. So yes, that's what I have to say, Isaac. Thank you, Mr. Clark. A couple
other questions. So if you had known at the time that, and was there any way that you could have
known prior to November of 19 that this neighborhood would have been rezoned?
No, there was no way. We knew there were other areas in West Philadelphia at the time that was
getting rezoned. They gave about maybe eight to nine month notice. These particular, this
particular area was put in a bill was put in on like I said November the 14th 2019 which is pretty
much a week before Thanksgiving no one knew I just happened to someone gave me a call and I just
have to look at the bill and then we tried to do some things to try to get things in place but
during that time it's very difficult because of the holidays but by the 5th of December in 2019
it was in effect and it was it was on the books at that point it was nothing that you could do so
it was pretty much nothing but a three-week turnaround and taking the fact that in between
that time it was thanksgiving time and um just it wasn't really do anything right um were you
were you to build a single family on each of these around what well let me establish you've
bought and sold property in this neighborhood of West Philly in the past, correct? Yes, I've done
numerous projects in West Philadelphia. And you've built new construction in this
neighborhood of West Philly in the past? Yes, I have. And in other neighborhoods as well?
Yes, I have. Okay. So you're familiar with what it costs roughly to build, having done this.
what it costs roughly to build. Having done this in your own experience, you're familiar with
building costs, correct? Yes. Yes. If you were to build a single family house on any of these
parcels that we're discussing today, around what would that cost? Typically, right now,
we're paying anywhere from about $150 to $175 per square foot to actually build. You figure
the outsell price would probably have to be about $550. You're building like a four to five bedroom
home. It typically costs, like I said, like $175 looking at the square footage. So, you know,
$300,000, $400,000 to get it done. If you include everything from financing costs,
soft costs, actual construction costs, and everything in terms of getting everything
entitled. Okay. Yes. Okay. And would you, so what would, what would you have to sell that
house for? You would have to sell a house anywhere from five, anywhere from 500 on the low end to
about $5.50 to recuperate everything that you've done and actually make something that's financially
viable that a bank would finance. Right. And are you, well, okay.
In your, could you foresee your company if you were to build a single family, being able to sell
a single family in that neighborhood at that price point? At that price point, typically once
you get to the $500,000 price point, it's somewhat difficult for one buyer. What we've done in the
past, and I've done in other neighborhoods, is we'll do a duplex structure, but we'll sell them
as condominiums. So it's still home ownership, but we'll break them off in two. So you'll sell
something of the upstairs unit for around $275,000. The downstairs unit typically goes a
little lower you figure 250 so what happens is you're able to sell an affordable home ownership
product which doesn't cost the 550 cost and the person can't be in that actual neighborhood
and i've done that in west philly and i actually have a history of doing it i've just sold
eight condominium units the same type of way off of 51st and baltimore avenue okay um but were you
to let's say hypothetically you were to build a single uh right there um would you say that that
would cause you a hardship to be unable to sell it um at the uh price point that it would demand
in this market yeah it would be very difficult to do because the price point will be too high
um and we've we've figured that out through trial and error actually because of the fact that if you
sell it in parts you can actually sell it to a person give them the same quality product
a little cheaper, much cheaper, actually.
I would
I would also just
I have nothing further from my client at this moment.
Does the board have any questions?
We're okay. Board, you guys have any questions?
Okay. No questions.
All right. Is there anyone else here that would like to speak in this matter from the community or council person?
Chair, we have Thomas Bell. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, guys. My name is Thomas Ball. Last name's spelled B-A-L-L. I am a homeowner on Wilton.
I'm sorry, Thomas. T-H-O-M-A-S.
And you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
I'm sorry.
I want to thank you.
I apologize for interrupting, Chair, but could we get his address as well, please?
That's right. I apologize.
Sir, can you put your address on the record, please?
Yeah, certainly. It's 1339 South Wilton Street.
Okay. Thank you.
You're welcome.
I would like to thank the board and everybody that's on this call for allowing me to speak.
I am somebody who owns the home on Wilton Street and had some alarming concerns regarding the development that is being trying to be put onto Wilton Street.
I'd like to start first, but I hope that everybody got my email with the signatures with a lot of the people on both Wilton, Lindenwood.
with a lot of the people on both Wilton, Lindenwood, some of the 50, the 52nd, 100 block of Chester, as well as Avenue board.
I'm going to object to the introduction of any sort of petition. I did see that this morning earlier this morning by email.
It's a well, I think that Mr. Ball and I would agree. It's a list of names. It's a list of signatures.
There's no way of confirming that these people that signed this document are near neighbors or even far neighbors of any of these projects, if they are neighbors of this one at a time.
Mr. Thomas, please let us know your opposition recent for your opposition.
Excuse me. This is Sharon. As far as accepting the petition,
it will go to the weight of given to the petition, but it is accepted.
Thank you. Please continue, Mr. Thomas.
Thank you. And to just go with the objection of the of the petition,
um you can tell most people put their telephone numbers all those addresses are represented on
where it's building um i do apologize that it wasn't done in more advanced notice um but in
the giving and trying times that we are we try to do our best when we are for community um i would
like to just speak that nobody on our blocks are interested in duplex or even changing the um
Zoning required. I'm objecting on the basis of hearsay. Mr. Ball. I'm not interested.
Well, again, members of the board, Mr. Ball is certainly welcome to testify to his
opinion about the project. He's he's testifying to the thoughts, beliefs and understandings of
a laundry list of other people who we have no way of authenticating. So I'm objecting to his
testimony on the basis of hearsay. No problem. Anyone else? Chair, we have Minister Enoch Amon.
Okay. You may unmute yourself. Identify yourself for the record, spell your first and last name,
address. Yes, good afternoon, Acting Chair and Board of Adjustments. My name is Minister Enoch
Amariel. It is spelled E-N-O-C-H. Amon, A-M-E-N-R-A hyphen E-L.
Your address?
I'm representing the RCO Earth Keepers. We have the address, 1515 Market Street, Suite 1200, Philadelphia PA 19102.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Good. Thank you. As I just stated, I'm here on behalf of Earth Keepers Southwest Philadelphia Neighborhood Zoning Committee,
here and after Earth Keepers Zoning Committee, and affected RCO in the subject matter.
Based on the outcome of a recent RCO community meeting held this past Monday, the RCO organization in attendance and the affected residents opposing these applications, except for Jahid Ali, which representing the RCO, which is Southwest District Services.
and based on license inspections and notice of refusal prohibiting two-family household living
in a RSA 5 residential zoning district and the creation of a high density in the community
and the loss of privacy for surrounding neighbors based on the proposed project's decks.
The proposed two-family household dwelling all have three bedrooms and three bedrooms
total on six separate units in each address with common spaces.
The developer, Lamar, stated on the record at the Arsene meeting that the household dwelling was designed for group living to share in the rents.
Based on the developer's statement, this type of individual privacy, as well as each occupant, can have overnight guests creating a much higher density in the community.
With the height of these dwellings, with the rooftop deck patio, the surrounding neighbors will be forced to keep their blinds or their shades down, losing natural sunlight, as well as the loss of property inside their homes, not limited to overhead noise factors.
I would also like to state for the record, as we just mentioned, that a petition with over 50 signatures from affected residents was signed and emailed to the Board of Justice by a community resident.
Wherefore, to eliminate the detrimental impact to the community, we request that the Zoning Board of Adjustment deny the applicant request for the erection of a tax structure with roof deck access structure for use as a two-family household living in the RSA 5 residential zoning district.
I conclude and yield my mic.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
Yes, Chair.
We have Deanna Scott.
please unmute yourself and please wait man please identify yourself for the
Ma'am, please identify yourself for the records by your first and last name.
records by your first and last name sure
Sure. My name is Deanna Scott. First name Deanna, D-E-A-N-N-A. Last name Scott, S-C-O-T-T.
My address is 5210 King Sessing Avenue, second floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19143.
Okay. Please proceed.
You swear to affirm that's all the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
to you. So first, I have a question. Are these units being intended as rentals or as condos?
I'll turn this back over to my client in a moment. We're flexible on that.
You know, we had thought about rentals. We had also discussed possibly creating condos. But
again, that's, you know, that's something for more of a question for my client. And LeVar,
if you wanted to speak to that, you can. If you want to not address that, you're certainly welcome
to. But we're flexible. Mr. Clark, do you have to unmute yourself? Yes. Can everyone hear me?
Yes. Yes. We typically, what we typically do is every one of our multi-projects,
we get them set up as as condominiums because the whole plan is is is home ownership um it's just
at this point the particular area it would take maybe a year two years so we get it to a point
to where we can sell them off as as condominiums but the plan is always to sell to homeowners to
have home home ownership on the block and not just have a straight rental situation and everything
it comes with. So based on that, my understanding is that you would intend to rent them until you
can find a buyer, correct? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. This is Tanya Sunkit. This is not a question and
answer situation at the moment. It's only testimony. So I would allow, please ask if you
could give your testimony before. Okay, sure. So my background is I've worked in leasing for like
five years and I've placed runners all across the city. I'm also a neighbor directly across the
street from all of these wilson street properties what you're describing to me sounds like you're
adding in effect a 30 unit rental block on a very small one-way one-side parking street in an area
that is already at its limit for parking for parking and density and again i would like to
echo i mean if someone wants to qualify uh miss scott as as an expert um i'll take her through
the qualifications but uh i think that i'm going to object on the base out the risk reason for your
opposition the reason for my opposition is that the it the density of what you're asking to add
and then also the again echoing this minister's statements about the loss of privacy and sunlight
for adding a roof deck for all of these units thank you anyone else uh something new and
different. Chair, we have Carmen, please unmute yourself. Carmen, please identify yourself for
the record for your first and last name. All right, we also have Andrew Goodman from
council's office. Would you like to hear him? Okay, Mr. Goodman, please, you stand on the
please identify yourself. Good afternoon, Andrew Goodman, G-O-O-D-M-A-N, here representing the
Office of... Excuse me, pardon the interruption. Chair and Tanya, this is John Kelly, the court
reporter. I had a momentary power outage at my house, and I was knocked offline during the
presentation by Minister Amun-Ra El. Okay. This is Tanya Sunkit. No worries, John. We'll
ensure that you receive the video to use that for transcription.
Can everybody still hear me? Yes. Go ahead, Mr. Goodman. Awesome. All right. So I'll just start
start over andrew goodman g-o-o-d-m-a-n representing the office of third district
council member jamie gaudier room 586 city hall members of the board our office is here today to
oppose the variance applications being proposed as the at these addresses we see no evidence of
hardship nor of community benefit i'll stick to new and different so i'll jump jump ahead a little
bit and try to address some of the particular points that were brought up in the applicant's
presentation. So on the topic of the neighborhood remapping, I cannot speak to the timing of that
legislation as I wasn't working for the third district council office at that time. What I can
What I can say as a trained city planner and council staffer is that neighborhood-wide remapping legislation follows extensive technical analysis and community engagement and is a very common function of city government as neighborhood conditions and citywide goals change over time.
say is a trained city planner and council staffer is that neighborhood-wide remapping legislation
In fact, those who are familiar with Philadelphia zoning history know that RM1 is very often a legacy zoning category left behind in neighborhoods that haven't been remapped for a long time.
So many neighborhoods often show up as zoned RM1 on the zoning maps, not necessarily because it actually fits the land use that's there, but more as a signal that that neighborhood has not been remapped in far too long.
And that's, I would say, what fits the situation here, which is why it would make sense that the city and Councilmember Blackwell would have done that remapping when they did.
These two streets, Wilton and Lindenwood, are skinnier than your average Philadelphia street, one driving lane and one parking lane each.
These blocks are majority occupied with all existing structures being two stories tall.
And further, just to comment on the Google map that was presented, nearby multifamily is not grounds to grant a variance.
In fact, I would clarify on the map that it looked like from what I could see, the bulk of the properties that were listed on that counselor's map were located on Chester Avenue, as well as 52nd Street.
Both streets that have a very different scale and character as Wilton Street and Lindenwood Streets.
Those are probably double the width of Wilton and Lindenwood with a mix of uses, as well as accepted transit access.
So for all these reasons, we stand with neighbors in opposition to these applications and we thank you for your time today.
Thank you, Mr. Goodman.
Anyone else?
We have Diane Settles, chair.
OK, Mr.
Diane, something new and different.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Chairman and Board of Adjustments.
My name is Diane Settles.
I'm speaking on behalf of King Sesson Area Civic Association.
Your first and last name for the cenographer, please.
My first name is spelled D-I-A-N-N-E.
My last name is spelled S-E-T-T-L-E-S.
My address is 1313 South 49th Street, Philadelphia, 19143.
You saw our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed.
I'm speaking on behalf of the RCO, Kingston Area Civics Association, and we were also the RCO that convened this meeting.
I just want everyone to know that I did apologize to the lawyer and his staff for the delay in my setting up the community meeting due to COVID, recent job insecurity.
It came all at one time, so I did apologize, but I must say I do not believe that that the delay in the meeting affected the outcome of the community vote.
I would also like to say that the letter to the ZBA that I sent with the meeting summary along with the meeting summary was sent yesterday before three o'clock and
The lawyer is correct. I did say a letter after 5 p.m. Mr. Thomas Ball, I just want everyone to
know that he was at the community meeting. Also, the lawyer, in the early part of his testimony,
he had mentioned, or what I took it as, that Mr. LeVar Clark was an up-and-coming developer.
But then when Mr. Clark begins to talk, he talks about how many things he has going on, what he has done, the buildings he has sold.
So I'm like confused. Is he up and coming or is he really a full-fledged developer looking to as much as Southwest Philadelphia as he can?
He currently has an application for development at 52nd and Woodland Avenue.
Objection, relevance.
all right all right all right i'm just saying that this gentleman has a lot going on
but the lawyer also changed his mind because at the meeting when we were asking about doing
single family homes he never mentioned anything about doing a condo that was never he wasn't going
to do a single family home because there was much and he never mentioned anything about a condo
So we still stand in opposition of this development and for the development on Lindenwood Street and that is what I have to say.
and for the development on Lindenwood Street, and that is what I have to say. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I think that's up for testimony. Mr. Sleper, you're done?
Mr. Acting Chair, I'm actually glad Ms. Settles mentioned condoing. I wanted to, if I may,
recall my client for a moment. I wanted to ask him one or two more questions on redirect, if I may.
Thank you. Briefly.
LeVar, you still out there? Yes, I'm here. Mr. Clark, you heard Ms. Settle's testimony regarding single family and regarding condos. I wanted to ask you if you had anything else to add to your testimony before the board today regarding that specific issue.
In regards to that specific issue, I've done these developments in the past, typically the units, but we actually put all condo docks in. If you want specific addresses, I can give them to you.
It's probably, like I said previously, when we do the condos, it creates affordability for particular residents because it's basically half the price than it would be for selling regular single family homes.
and that's why we do it and we've seen that it works very well and typically
when we come in and do it that way we get favorable feedback from the
communities thank you I what is there a is there any so so just to clarify mr.
Clark you're open to creating these as condos rather than rentals correct
i'm sorry i had to unmute i guess you had to unmute it wow you're open to uh creating these
as condos rather than as rentals if that would um help move along relations with the community
yes definitely yes okay um all right and okay uh
i don't think i have anything further for mr clark at this time thank you planning commission
this is uh from bednar city planning this recommendation is for all five uh south wilton
properties these properties are all indicated for residential use on the city plan no changes
are currently proposed for the existing residential single-family zoning at these
locations. The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical
conditions or circumstances or conditions of these properties, and that would prevent
them from being used in conformance with the code. Therefore, we recommend that the
Equestria Variance for All not be granted. Thank you. All right. Calendar number MI 2021-001483,
1349 Wilton Street, and MI 001491-1321 South Wilton Street, and MI 001490-1332 South
wilton street um i'm sorry um mr chair uh before uh before the board votes we we may be open to um
some form of compromise uh with the community on um on some of these properties uh would i be able
to uh recall my client once more oh jesus fucking christ briefly thank you um mr clark
yes i'm here uh is there any any form i mean we've heard a lot of testimony from the community
members uh and from the planning commission would there be any form of of compromise you'd be
willing able to see your way to uh with with these groups yes um you know after after hearing
the testimony and the concerns of the neighbors, I am willing to compromise. Like I said in the
past, and even at the RCO meetings, my plan is to be a part of this community. My plan is to have
other projects that I'm looking to do, which I'm actually looking to put my office there. So
I'm not just a developer that just wants to come in and do things and walk away. So I do definitely
want to be a part of the community. And I don't want to have an adversarial relationship with
of any of the RCOs or anybody who's actually in the community.
The one thing I would like to do is offer
is that the address is at 1353 South Wilming Street
the the address is at 1353 south willow street because it's on the corner
because it's on the corner, if we possibly.
if we possibly can can do that as a duplex and 1349 south lindwood
as a duplex and then the ones that which are the infill lots
at 1330 and 32 and 1321 i can build them in single-family homes
um i i think you know maybe that may work this is a compromise because
at the end of the day i want to be a part of the community i'm here i'm
bringing my nonprofit there to the community i want to be a part of it but i don't want an
adversary relationship and i want to get off to a good foot if that's possible um mr chair would
the board be open to a proviso regarding um the uh the three on wilton street uh proviso single
family only um with uh given what my client has just asked if i did uh we don't make those
decision, Mr. Slepner, that was something that you guys will have to get with the community
and do what you guys got to do, you know, before coming to us, you know.
Okay. So where am I at? So am I, let's start all over. Am I 2021-001?
Hi, Chair. I'm sorry to interrupt. This is Tanya. I apologize for the interruption,
but i was thinking would it be um a good idea to maybe have a short resumption after they come back
to the table with um alternatives it's totally your call excuse me this is sharon can we if
there's a representative of the rco can we see if they are receptive to any further meetings or if
they would like the vote to happen today.
Mr. Goodman, can you please come forward?
Minister Enoch is here.
Yeah, I would want to defer to Ms. Diane
as the coordinating RCO representative as well.
Right, is she available as well?
Are you guys receptive of meeting one more time
and discussing this stuff?
Maybe we'll hold the vote.
pending a letter the community hi this is dying settles the community has spoken
okay to um they have really spoken about what they want and with everything that has been said
between the community, our council person, I think it's already done.
Okay. All right. Okay.
Thank you.
MI 2021-001483, 1349 Wilton Street, and MI 001491, 1321 South Wilton Street, and MI 001490, 1332 South Wilton Street, and MI 001489, 1330 South Wilton Street,
and MI-001-488-1353 South Wilton Street.
My vote is no to all.
Excuse me, Mr. Plowsett.
Did we include Lindemann Street in that?
Just to clarify, the addresses are 1349 South Lindenwood, 1329, 1349 South Lindenwood,
1-3-2-1 South Wilton, 1-3-3-0 South Wilton, 1-3-3-2 South Wilton, and 1-3-5-3 South Wilton.
Yep. All five, right?
Correct.
That's correct. My vote is no to all.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no to all.
John Munlock, my vote is no to all.
Thank you
Good luck
Thank you
I believe that concludes
Is there anyone else here that felt
That we did not call
Their case
I see no hands here
Thank you everyone
Have a nice evening
Take care, thank you
Thank you. Have a good night.
Likewise. Take care, everyone.
Thanks, confessing.
You got it.
Good night.
uh tanya yes i'm sorry this is john kelly the reporter yes um i i don't know if you saw my
Tanya?
Yes, I'm sorry.
my message to you or not yes yes i did okay uh is that something that can happen yes i had already
texted you i'll um get in touch with jennifer along with you okay i didn't i didn't see a
response in the chat i'm new to this i've never chatted on this thing before so i i just i got
my power went out here and then i tried to hook up with my it wouldn't let me back on without a
security code and i tried using my phone and it was unstable so no problem because it just knocked
me out too no problem all right so yeah but at least we finished for the day so i'll make sure
you get what you need okay now when you say get are what do they do they're going to send me a
link to the recording or the the actual file yes which is it a link or is it the actual um mp
whatever it's a link to the video okay okay excellent that's great thank you so i can just
i can just play the video and just recreate that section of the digital file correct okay thank you
so much and i don't believe there's any urgent need for that do you know when i should look for
it? I will send it as soon as I get the video from IT. Thank you very much. I much, much
appreciate it. We've, we've had pretty good luck with this so far. This is the first. Yeah, no
problem, John. We'll always make sure you get what you need. Thank you for all your services.
We appreciate you. Thank you so much. Have a great day. Everyone have a good night.