such that they could remain on the site under this version of the plan they are both in uh positions
that would be problematic um and not possible to create this okay scott i'm gonna now go to the
floor plans, which I think are most helpful for my next questions for you, which have to do with
the requirement for the van accessible parking space. Can you explain to the board why a van
accessible parking space was not provided in the plan? So van accessible parking spaces are
primarily for multifamily projects to provide ADA accessibility to those multifamily buildings.
They're not required in single-family homes per the zoning code.
We do not have, we would need to provide an eight-foot parking stall with an eight-foot clear space for that van accessible space to be properly used.
it also needs an eight foot clear height which is a large amount of space which would increase
our garage height and add to one of the height refusals or just the height in general to the
project which was a primary concern going through this process okay so am i understanding correctly
that if we were proposing 10 single family homes with two park two car parking each which is what's
being proposed here on one lot but if we were on 10 individual lots that were attached like a typical
philadelphia row home street would would this code provision requiring ban accessible parking
apply to them it would not apply okay so again why does it apply here it applies for the technical
nature of the refusal uh being multi-family 10 units on one lot which will eventually be um
Subdivided in a plane unit development, turning this into single families.
Okay, thanks Scott. That's all I have for Scott.
May I, I think it'd be your pleasure to get rid of those witness. Can we put up the.
Yeah, the plan has the.
building shown on Pichin?
The actual building?
Like the zoning plan?
Scott,
the proposed eight units
that you were discussing,
were they
separate entrance from Pichin
and separate entrance from Larsen, correct?
Correct.
so there'd be two two curb cuts as opposed to one as proposed in your development now correct
each single family home would need its own curb cuts provide parking so there would be
eight total curb cuts if parking were to be brought could you have not developed a plan
where you'd have eight units that are parallel to loriston or parallel to peachen and have access to
a parking area or a driveway behind those is that correct
you're asking if we develop two less units uh and provide a shared parking
i just want to clarify the question provided access to the garages from the rear
there would be challenges with how the slope works for those buildings uh because the
grading would have to be raised up there'd be a large driveway slope to get to the rear
of the site which would have to be either we have a large surface parking lot in the rear
of those homes or we would have to be parking on the second or third level of those homes
based on the grade changes that would occur and the proposal here is for
And the proposal here is for 10 units that will run perpendicular to Lauriston and Pichin, correct?
That is correct.
And that is, are the homes on Lauriston and Pichin, do they front on those streets?
They do.
They have access from both of those streets frontages.
And so this proposal is inconsistent with the uses and the characteristics of the community, both on Pitchin and on Larson, correct?
We've provided facades that blend in with some of the surrounding contexts, providing porches to this and front entryways.
So I would argue that they blend into some of the surrounding contexts.
well the the porches face the the house on loriston that has that was adjacent to your twin
correct both porches face the street frontage peachen and larson those porches face there
don't they face the yard of the other house on peachen
alex maybe go there rendering it might be more clear council
what the rendering or do you want elevations whatever he can point to that would show that
those houses face loriston impeachin consistent with the other homes that are already on there
so the top image which is the southwest perspective that's larson street to the left
you can see there's a porch that fronts the entire street frontage of that
I want to go to that other perspective
to show the Peachen Street side.
Again, it's a little bit clearer in the actual renderings.
But yeah, you're kind of getting to it.
Yeah, so you can see there's a large porch
that fronts Peachen Street.
But all the homes behind that,
if you go back to the other one,
all the homes behind that,
the front of those homes face the backyard
of the other house on Peachen Street.
That is correct.
And how far out does the front of this unit with the porch that you have described there, how much further out toward Peachin Street does that go compared to the adjacent house?
I'm going to zoom in.
So our front building face is set back.
As you can see, they're 17 feet, one and one quarter of an inch.
um roughly five feet in front of the adjoining the old twin at 4114 peach and street um and then
the porch comes out another i don't know there's a mention somewhere on there i'm just missing it
right now another five feet now the intent in providing the house to be a little bit further
is that the house to the southern plan side is directly on the street.
So this is set somewhat into the middle of both sides.
As you can see, 4104 Pichin is directly against the street frontage.
So we felt we're setting back a good amount,
but also somewhat in line with some of the existing character on Pichin Street.
But inconsistent with the direct next-door neighbor.
Correct.
Okay, I have nothing further next person, please.
John Featherman, if you could raise your virtual hand.
I do have I'm sorry. May I ask God?
How many square feet are proposed for each of these units?
Alex, you have that number.
THE OCCUPIED AREA OF THE ENTIRE SITE OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING STRUCTURE IS 7700 SO HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
I THOUGHT I SAW IN YOUR PLANS THAT IT HAD A 960 SQUARE FOOT FOR EACH OF THE UNITS.
THAT WOULD BE THE FOOTPRINT.
okay and doesn't the rsa 5 uh in council district 4 require 1440 square feet
uh that's specifically to the lot area for a subdivided lot
i'm i'm sorry what do you mean by that the 1440 square feet uh is required to
You subdivide a single RSA lot of land area, not necessarily building square footage.
So each of these will be less than the required RSA-5 because they are a planned unit development?
So each of these will be less than the required RSA 5.
We're not proposing a sub-bill.
So the lot is staying 15,518 square feet.
If you were to divide that number by the 1,440, you would get 10 lots.
Okay. All right. Fine. Thank you. I have nothing else, sir.
next witness please John Featherman and while John is I guess being promoted
John is a licensed real estate professional he's drafted and we've
submitted a report regarding the market of the marketability of an 8 a 9 and a
10 unit version of the planning and development that we proposed so he's
going to speak briefly about his report and then i'm going to ask him some questions and then
obviously shan has questions john featherman you're allowed to speak great john a-o-h-n
f-e-a-t-h-e-r-m-a-n do you swear or affirm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
yes i do counsel john um i think i would say now is your opportunity to to sort of
uh give you a brief statement about your report and then i'll ask you some questions
great okay so i am a licensed pennsylvania associate broker and i'm also a pennsylvania
licensed real estate instructor at temple university my role here is very narrow
it's to address the market consequences of reducing the number of residences at 4112
petchin street my conclusion is that 10 units are the minimum market supportable configuration
based on the information i've reviewed we have a developer and contractor model comparing all
three scenarios 10 homes nine homes and eight homes with 10 homes the model assumes about 2 000
square feet per home and an average sales price of 775 000 gross revenue would be seven million
$7.75 million. Projected cost would be about $6.64 million, leaving a projected profit of about
$1.11 million. With nine homes, the homes become larger, about 2,500 square feet, and the assumed
sales price jumps to $950,000 each. That produces $8.55 million in gross revenue, which is actually
$800,000 more revenue than the 10-home plan. But the projected profit falls to about $289,000,
which is about 3.4% of the gross revenue. The developer's concern here is straightforward.
A cost overrun, delay, concession, weaker sale price, or other project problem could erase that
relatively small cushion. And with eight homes, the model assumes 3,200 square foot homes selling
for about a million each. And despite 8 million in gross revenue, the model projects a loss
of approximately 1.13 million. So progression is important. Roughly 1.11 million of projected
profit at 10 homes, only $289,000 at 9 homes, and a $1.13 million projected loss at 10 homes.
The issue is about depth of demand here. The project doesn't need one premium buyer.
It needs enough buyers to absorb all the homes at the prices required to make the project work.
All three pieces point in the same direction. The contractor says fewer homes spread difficult site costs among fewer units. The financial model shows the margin collapsing at nine homes and becoming a loss at eight. And the MLS evidence shows greater market resistance at the higher prices those alternates require.
Based on my experience in the Philadelphia residential market, my familiarity with Roxborough and Maniunk, and my review of the plans, MLS evidence, contractor feasibility statement, and revised developer model, it's my professional opinion that 10 units are the minimum market-supportable configuration for this project.
Thank you, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Are you done?
I'm going to ask him a few questions.
um john the the mls reports and the data that you reviewed are these the same review
reports and data that is available to the general public no so they're not bright
available to the general public no so they're not bright mls is our professional most multiple
listing database that we use as real estate agents it contains detailed listing and transformation
information transaction information including list listing histories that generally are not
available on consumer websites including sites like zillow redfin realtor.com okay um
Um, so where, where does the home have to sell for just for the developer to break even
here for the developer to break even, it's got to sell at about, probably about 775,000,
800,000, somewhere in that range.
And where does the 664,000 break even point for 10 homes sit relative to the market?
So that would, that would give it considerably more room.
For example, one of the items I put in the report, 151 levering, solved for $799,990 after 40 days.
So the 10-home breakeven is more than $130,000 below that actual closing.
Is there evidence that the market has supported an 8-home breakeven of approximately $1.141 million?
Can you say that again? I couldn't hear.
Is there evidence that the market has supported the eight-home break-even point of approximately $1.14 million?
Not in the properties that I reviewed on the MLS.
The most relevant one, let me look here, is $268 DuPont.
It started at $1.15 million and did not sell at that price.
What happened there?
So that's new construction.
Let me just check.
It's 3212 square feet, four bedrooms, three-car parking.
It was originally listed at $1.15 million, was reduced by $301,000 to $849,000, and was still unsold when I reviewed it yesterday.
Okay. A couple more questions here for you, John.
You spoke about sort of the razor-thin margin on the nine-home plan.
How common is a $32,000 concession on a home sold for what he'd need to sell it for, about $950K?
so i want to be careful here because 32 000 is about 3.4 percent of 950 000 mathematically
a concession of that amount on each home would wipe away the projected profit but i haven't done
a separate study showing how frequently buyers receive concessions of that size
so i don't want to characterize it as routine without data but what kind of concessions do
buyers typically ask for so in my experience they ask for things such as closing cost assistance
rate buy-downs, finished credits or repairs. I can speak from my brokerage experience,
but I don't have statistical studies showing how frequently each one occurs.
Okay, last question for you. What happens when absorption, the sale of these properties takes
longer than expected? So generally, the property remains exposed to carrying costs like financing,
taxes, insurance, marketing. Longer exposure can also result in price reductions. So I would
keep, I would say that, you know, it's going to hurt. Okay. And those things you described
could also very easily wipe away the razor thin margin of the nine home plan, correct?
it could it could and realistically it often does that's a theoretical profit but the reality is
you know these concessions happen supply and demand changes etc okay and last question is
there anything in the record that's inconsistent with your conclusion well yeah i mean there's
evidence i mean a home theoretically can sell over a million and i think it's over i think
it's really important to acknowledge that one wind guard for example which i have here sold for
900,000 after 62 days and i consider that rather than ignoring it but when i look at all the
evidence together including the longer market times the substantial reductions at 268 dupont
which i just spoke about i still reach the same conclusion okay all right thank you john hey i'm
yes sir mr featherman where is your office located yeah so my office is located in center city
philadelphia on 19th street between uh sansom and uh chesson street and when was the last time you
sold a property in the rocksboro area i don't remember i sold over i sold over 2 000 pro i've
sold or rented over 2 000 properties in my career so i don't remember and in this this matter you
were engaged as an expert witness correct yes and you've been paid by the developer
and you've been paid by the developer or someone on his behalf i haven't been paid by anybody yeah
or someone on his behalf i haven't been paid by anybody yet
you will invoice them for your services yes yes um and when did you meet with anyone from the
community from central roxborough community association i did not meet with anybody that
was not within my scope okay did you think it was important to possibly meet with the neighbors who
might be impacted by this development that was not within my scope and but the financial aspects were
within your scope, correct? Yes. And you've outlined the potential dangers to the developer
of a project of less than 10 units, correct? I've made them aware of what the numbers are.