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