just give me a count
sure take your time
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this meeting in the Philadelphia Zoning Board.
With me is our board member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Tenetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Michael Johns.
he if he's not here he'll be here very shortly he just got on the phone our board member taya
winn mr chairman also here is our attorney ryan mcsherry and also our board zoning board director
ian haggerty and our board administrator administrator lakeisha dandy recording of
this hearing will be posted on the zba website by participating you consent to be recorded
This is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities.
Whether remote or in-person, if you're called to speak, you must state and spell your name
and then wait to be sworn in.
Once you've been sworn in, please state your name each time before beginning your testimony.
Any person may enter their appearance to become an interested party to a case.
There are three ways to enter your appearance.
You can identify the case property address on your Zoom webinar registration.
You can see a staff member, or you can call the CBA appearance line by the close of business tomorrow.
Call 267-270-5548.
Leave a message that includes your email address and address the property of the appeal case.
The filing guidance is for our remote attendees.
First, when directed, you must raise your virtual hand in order to be recognized to speak.
Second, if you're called to testify, you will be prompted to join as a panelist.
Please accept the request and turn on your camera.
Third, the webinar Q&A is for questions about the hearing.
Do not comment on cases in the Q&A.
Fourth, if you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
For our in-person attendees, please refrain from talking, eating, or drinking during the hearings.
Verbal and physical aggression will not be tolerated.
Restrooms are across from the elevators.
A water fountain is just outside the room to the right.
When speaking on the record, you must speak directly into the microphone in order to be heard by all attendees in the court reporter.
In the event of an emergency, please follow the directions given over the public address system or by the staff.
The main exit is through the double doors at the rear of the room.
The nearest stairwell is to the left outside the doors.
In case of an evacuation, the rally point is at Love Park, directly across Art Street.
Please remain there so we can account for you.
Let's look at our schedule, please.
With you?
Number one, MI 2024-006-03-2113-Chelton.
E-Bron's is the listed applicant, Coney Investments, LLC.
Ian, are you here, Ian?
Ian, this is the one that Hillary thinks we have an issue with.
No proof of mailing, no RCO letter, summary of notice or notice.
That's correct, Chair.
We're missing required exhibits for this case.
Do we see any hands?
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hand.
I will be your co-host for this session.
I have a hand up from both Joseph Ficarro
and Charles Richardson.
I'll let Mr. Vaccaro speak first.
Morning.
Mr. Vaccaro, please state your name and spell for the sonographer.
Good morning. My name is Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O. I was just raising my hand to confirm the address that you were talking about.
Good morning.
My name is Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O.
2113 Chelten Avenue, sir.
That's not my case.
Oh, thank you.
I'll hold my hand. Sorry.
Mr. Richardson.
Is Mr. Richardson in the audience?
They've been allowed to speak, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Certainly.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Richardson, do you have information on this case?
There's been no RCO meeting and no contact from the applicant to the coordinating RCO.
So looking for a continuance on this.
Thank you very much for calling in.
We appreciate it.
So MI 2024, 000603, 2113 Chilton Avenue.
This case is continued to 102225 at 930 a.m.
Number three, MI 2024, 002-712-2300 North 25th Street.
Joseph Vaccaro is the attorney.
There's a request for continuance from Council Member Young's office.
Mr. Vaccaro.
okay mr vaccaro has been about to speak mr just for the record just for the record could you
please state your name because you've already been sworn thank you uh good morning joseph
vaccaro va cc aro on behalf of the applicant and i would join in that request for a continuance
In fact, I sent my own letter.
Okay, thank you.
So MI 2024-002-712-2300 North 25th Street.
Cases continue to 10-22-25 at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you very much.
That concludes my business.
Can I have an excuse?
Yes, you can.
Thank you.
number seven mi 2024 003 554 636 west algandy avenue um this is the second listing we do not
have any um exhibits is anyone from um mildred elmo elmo construction listed owner mildred books
is the task, Business Consulting and Management.
Chair, I have a handout from a number ending in 0859.
I can allow them to speak if you wish.
0859, you have been allowed to speak.
Please don't wait to be sworn in.
Hi, good morning.
Hi, good morning.
Could you please state your name?
that's spelled for the sonographer?
Angelique McKinney, A-N-G-E-L-I-Q-U-E-M-C-K-I-N-N-U-I.
I think you were involved in the case prior, am I right?
2113 Shelton Avenue.
Yeah, okay.
So that case is being continued.
But I turned in everything.
I got my email saying they received all my information.
Hold on.
First of all, spell your name for the stenographer.
A-N-G-E-L-I-Q-U-E-M-C-K-I-N-N-E-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
We do not have all of your paperwork. And have you ever had an RCO may need?
You did?
Yes, I had one on the 25th of March.
Okay, so we do not see your proof. We don't see your proof of mailing. We do not have a deed from you. And we do not see your proof of tax compliance.
I sent all of that in and I got an email from
let me get her email
yeah so listen to me listen to me
this case has been continued all the office and the office will help
Call the office and the office will help figure out where you stand and what you need for the next hearing.
figure out where you stand and what you need for the
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
Number seven.
Do we see anybody from number seven?
Yeah, I do not see any hands raised for that matter.
Thank you.
So MI 2024-003-554-636 West Allegheny Avenue.
This is the second listing.
We still do not have any documents.
I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Ty Owen, my vote is to dismiss.
Number 13, MI 2024-007-221-3014 Wesley High Avenue.
This case is continued to 10-22-25.
And number 17, MI 2024-007-232-2100 Master Street, TA-25589.
This case is continued to 10-22-25.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Yes, sir.
I have a hand up from Adib.
I did have a hand up from him, but I...
It was a hand up from Adib Mahdi.
I have allowed him to speak.
Good morning, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Adib, A-D-I-B, last name M-A-H-D-I, Mahdi.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case are you talking about, sir?
West Allegheny Avenue
you just made a ruling on it
Mr. Chairman
no one answered
we had a request for a contingence
from Council Member Young's office
we have no exhibits
this is the second listing yes uh mr chairman i've uh prepared the architectural work for the
uh the owner uh they have secured a um a hearing before the um the rco of the area the coordinating
committee uh coordinating of rco um 12th and cambria hold on hold on let me tell you where
we stand. We have dismissed the case. What I want you to do is have the owner or his representative
contact the office and talk to them about next steps, okay? Thank you very much. Thank you.
Okay, so no, any anyone else requested continuance?
number five mi 2024 003 407 2020 west 65th street this is the second listing
um no exhibits cecilia peterson oh yeah you're you're here
um we one of you come up a minute
miss patterson could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
cecilia patterson c-e-c-e-l-i-a patterson p-a-t-t-e-r-s-o-n right do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes miss patterson we do not have
any exhibits from you. I have everything here and I did make some phone calls. I don't know how to
scan these and I have the deed. Okay. Okay. This is what we're going to do. We're going to have to
continue. We're going to continue the case, but what I want you to do is contact the office
and they will tell you how to take care of that. Okay. Okay. All right. And thank you very much
for coming down. We do appreciate it. Okay. All right. Thank you. So, um, excuse me, Mr. Bergman,
May I have a date because I need it for my ward leader?
So the date is going to be 10-22-25.
So MI 2024-003-407-2020 West 65th Street.
This case is continued to 10-22-25.
This case is continued to 10-22-25.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And number six, MI 2024, 003-511-5724 Vine Street.
No exhibit, second listing.
Antonio Montgomery is the tenant applicant.
yeah i do not see any hands for this matter but uh there is a hand up from a three five five two
that may be miss uh fernandez oh from miss from who miss fernandez miss adrian fernandez okay well
i don't believe she's involved in this 5724 vine street so let's handle that first then we'll get
there okay so mi 2024 003 511 5724 vine street um this is the second listing we have received
exhibits so i'm going to continue this mark must be heard it will be continued to 10 22 25
bring miss fernandez on
you've been allowed to speak
morning Adrienne
could you please state your name as spelled for the sonographer
Adrienne Fernandez my last name is spelled
F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z
do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
I'm asking about three
pardon me
I'm asking about
3101 North Bancroft
Street
which one's that
so I'm getting ready
to call that right now
we do not have exhibits for that
particular case
so MI 2024
MI 2024
808-3101
North Bancroft Street.
No exhibits. The listed
owner is Bulldog, LLC,
Mildred Brooks,
and TAS Consulting.
Ms. Fernandez, you have
comments about this case?
Ms. Fernandez?
Yes, I'm mute.
The owner
said that she was going to contact her attorney.
She had two addresses.
One was continued.
That was 3014 Wesley High Avenue.
However, even though she said she would ask him to continue both,
I didn't hear it mentioned, so I didn't know what was going on.
All right, so this case here, MI 2024, 006808, 3101 North Bancom Street.
No exhibits, first listing.
this case is a continual mark must be heard to 10-22-25 at 9 30 a.m. Thank you for calling in.
Thank you. You're welcome. Number 14, MI 2024-007-222-526-66th Avenue, this case has been withdrawn.
Okay, let's go to our add-on list.
Number one, MI 2024-005-574-1510 North 25th Street.
The vote in this matter has been continued until Wednesday, April 9th at 9.30 a.m.
Number two, MI 2024-004-380-1914 Lithgow Street.
The vote in this matter has been continued to Wednesday, April 9th at 9.30 a.m.
Number three, MI 2024-007-026-1149 Jean Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Single family household to remain.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
My vote is yes with Proviso.
And Chair, just to clarify the address on that last one was.
1-1-2-4-9.
Yes, correct.
1-1-2-4-9 Jeans Police.
And the next one, number four, MI 2024-007-029-1212 Jeans Street.
I vote yes.
would provide a single household living to remain.
With proviso, single household living to remain.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Taya Nguyen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Okay, we're going to go to our regular list.
Number 10, MI 2024-2024-004-695-4708, Roosevelt Boulevard.
Do we have a Spanish interpreter?
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
I have a hand up from Rosa Martinez.
I will promote them to panelists immediately.
chair i believe martinez is the appellant um if there's a spanish interpreter in the virtual
audience could you please raise your hand thank you i also have a hand up from brenda
Schwartz I have to speak. Okay. Hello. Do we have an interpreter?
Good morning, Ms. Schwartz. Good morning. Bernadette Schwartz. B-E-R-N-A-D-E-T-T-E.
last name shorts like a pair of pants
S-H-O-R-T-S
I was in reference to the
location on
North 66th Street
and I just wanted to double
we're handling case
we'll get back to you shortly okay
do we have an interpreter
I don't see any other hands raised Mr. Chair
hello you're gonna hold it all right we're gonna hold that case for a little bit
while he's looking at that for a second yeah yeah i'm gonna cover the hearing
hello are you the are you the interpreter rosa martinez now miss martinez we're gonna
come back to this case shortly we're trying to see where the interpreter is all right all right
thank you thank you and and number um 11 mi 2024 004 699 4715 pearson avenue do we have an
interpreter for that case once again chair i do not see any hands raised so we're going to hold
both those. We're checking right now to see
where the interpreter may be, and then we'll get back to it.
Okay? Wait a minute, Tom.
Sorry to interrupt, but I have a hand up
from Marlon Valderales.
Marlon Valderales?
No, Marlon Valderales.
I have allowed him to speak.
Excuse me.
Is this Pearson?
What if you're my interpreter?
Yes, I'm Marlon Valladares.
I need my interpreter.
Yeah, but we're going to have an
interpreter come on. We have to wait. We can't
hear the case yet, okay? We're going to come back to it. Okay. All right. Thank you.
You're going to proceed, Mr. Chair. All right. Number two.
MI 2024-001-377-4742 Rose Hill Street.
I'm promoting them to panelists to meet at late.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the snogger?
I'm H-U-O-T.
That's my first name.
My last name is Y-I-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So this application is for use as a two-family household living in an existing structure.
two-family household living is prohibited in the RSA 3 zoning district. Accessory parking is
required for the increased number of dwelling units. Have you submitted all of your appropriate
exhibits? Yes. Okay, could you please start share your screen and start your presentation?
Okay, could you please start, share your screen and start your presentation?
It's on a, not that phone, it's on, how do I screen?
Mr. Yim, could you turn on your computer?
I don't, I don't know how it is.
okay um all right so um here's what we're going to do we're going to have to
continue your case and i want you to call the office and they will work with you on your next
presentation on the proper way to do it okay oh so you're okay can i can i have the my my daughter
us talking a little bit.
Yeah, but you have
to make the presentation, sir.
it be shared
on McQueda Coates' screen?
Say that again.
Can McQueda
Coates share her screen?
If someone can share the screen and
put it up now, he can testify
from that, but please do it
right away and he's the only one allowed to testify thank you yes yes she can share her
share the screen right now yes okay by the kind of quotes she's been promoted to panelists she'll
be coming back in shortly i mean thank you so much
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I need.
Oh, I need one.
okay could you please start him and maybe if you could could you make that just a little larger
start your presentation please sir okay
hello hello yes sir okay tell us who is what you want to do
I want the zoning to duplex right now, so.
Yeah, but when I hired the contractor, I thought he had everything, but when we paid them and
And then now they don't have like, you know, there's only, I mean, the paper, like, can
I let my daughters explain a little bit?
You've got to do the testimony yourself.
Would you please show us the rest of your photos?
That's the first floor.
This is the step to go to the basement, yeah.
And this one is the two parking.
And the two parking in the backyard.
And the front door, I mean the front.
The front of the house.
Yeah, the front of the house.
They have the tree before, but it's broken down now.
And what else?
This is the toilet.
on the bed, on the first floor, and the second floor.
I don't know the first floor.
That's the first floor.
Okay, they are, you know, the construction are done,
but we need the paper, I mean.
Did you do the construction with permits?
uh we uh you know we hide them them but we don't know they have the
they have the permit they have the permit or not you know
and how long has the property been like this
about almost almost three years and have you had it rented no and we live in downstairs for now
And we're leaving downstairs for now.
Questions from the board.
Were the utilities separated?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
how many bedrooms is the second unit one bedroom and kitchen and one bathroom
okay and then it's on the first floor and in the basement no the first floor I think
living room
two bed
rooms.
You live on the first floor?
Yeah. Where's the new apartment?
No, no.
The new one is upstairs.
Okay, on the second floor?
Yeah. Okay, so you live
on the first floor with access to the basement
and this new apartment
is only on the second floor?
Yeah. Okay, and they
intern exit through the front door
to the property?
You both intern exit through the same front door
to the property?
Front door, and then
we go in, and then we separate right there.
Is there other duplexes on your block?
How many?
Do you know?
What I know is one on the
corner that's duplex,
and my next door
that's duplex.
A few, I think, yeah.
Other questions from the board?
The pictures that are on the screen now,
can you move them up or down?
Thank you.
Are those the only pictures that you have?
Yeah, yeah.
And these pictures again are showing which floor?
The second floor?
This one is the first floor.
I'm sorry, say that again?
It's the first floor.
And one other question.
So the two parking spaces, I'm assuming one would be for each unit, right?
Do you have any pictures of this second floor unit?
Oh, hi. Yeah, I tried to check the picture. I think it's only one picture.
And where is that? These, these, these are, from what I understand, these are the first
floor units. So you put in a second unit. Where are the pictures of this second unit
that you put in in the bathroom kitchen in the bathroom what's the kitchen yeah the kitchen
or the kitchen and the bathroom that's uh yeah that's all i have the second floor
okay because he said before it was the first floor but it's
yeah all right so do you okay
questions from our attorney
Ryan McShurry
no chair
questions are from the audience or the virtual audience
chair I do not see any hands raised
for the matter
planning commission
Ron Bednar city planning
first name Ron R-O-N last name
Bednar B-E-D-N-A-R
do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
about the truth? I do. Please proceed. Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA 3 residential
single-family zoning at this location. There's no unique physical circumstances or condition of the
property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code. City Planning
Commission recommends that the Board deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units.
Thank you. MI 2024-001-377-4742, Rose Hill Street, I vote yes with proviso. Certificate of Occam C to be obtained.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you. Number...
number nine mi 2024
number nine mi 2024 004 579 150 brown street lewis and vanessa porto are the owners
it's a pro se there's a letter of authorization received
there's non-opposition from council member squilla and a letter of support from northern
liberties neighbors association this is coming back in as a family home to a duplex
i'm sorry they're coming back in as a panelist
Louis Porto.
Good morning, Chair.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Absolutely.
Louis Porto, last name P-O-R-T-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I swear.
This application is for uses of two-family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed use, two-family household living, is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
Have you submitted all your exhibits?
I have.
Why don't you start your presentation and share your screen?
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Are you able to see my presentation right now?
So this is a rendering of the home right now.
I have the LNI refusal and the mailings that were sent out to all of the neighboring properties as required.
exterior photo of the home it's a very large home 3200 square feet three stories finished
basement currently is a four bedroom three and a half bathroom with an office
this is a picture of the backyard facing north
and same backyard just facing in the other direction
this is one of the bedrooms
living room, kitchen space, as it is today.
Master bedroom, the finished basement with an exit well.
The proposed renovation would be to make the building into two, two-bedroom apartments.
The first unit, which would be the first floor and the basement, would be a bi-level unit,
two-bedroom, two-bath with the backyard at 1,600 square feet. To access the property,
you would be coming in right through the front door and going to your right. That would be the
first floor unit. The half bathroom that we have currently would be made into a full bathroom,
so there will only be a small modification to accommodate the change.
In the basement, there will be no work required.
Everything would stay as it is today.
For the second unit, which would be bi-level for the second and third floor,
when you come up the steps, you would end up here.
the front bedroom would be turned into the kitchen living space. The bathroom would remain
where it is today. The office would remain where it is today. And the rear bedroom would continue
to remain at the same location with no changes. The top floor would continue to be a master bedroom.
No changes would be made on this end. This property has had various uses recorded in the
past it actually used to be a grocery store on the first floor which was here and then it had
a separate entrance for for the residential unit which was on the second and third floor
and this is just like a rendering of what it probably looked like back then
150 brown street it's a it's a much larger lot than all of the neighboring properties
It's unique because it faces two streets, olive on the south and brown on the north, which makes it ideal for a multifamily property also because of the size of the lot in comparison to the neighboring single-family homes in the area.
It's not the only property that would be a multifamily.
There's actually commercial uses and multifamily uses on the same block.
commercial uses and multi-family uses on the same block and on much smaller lots than this property.
As I mentioned before, 150 Brown is a larger size than its neighboring properties in both RSA
and RMN1 districts. It is larger by about 700 square feet, enough to almost build a separate
dwelling based on the size. In fact, on just about a block away on Fairmount Street,
two multifamily homes were just built on much smaller lots than this one.
Mr. Porto, how many on your block itself, how many are multiple family now?
Oh, I think there's about six properties that are multifamily currently.
In that on your block?
Correct.
Right. And you live here right now?
And you want to give us the reason why you want to do the conversion.
It's mainly because of real estate taxes and the cost of maintaining the home is a very large home.
That would be the main reason why I chair.
And why don't you explain the basement living to us?
Yes, absolutely.
So I can show you what it looks like today.
This is actually a rendering of, this is the basement.
This is a picture of the basement as it is today.
It has an egress well in the rear.
It has a full-size bathroom here.
It is approximately 650 square feet, I believe, is the basement alone.
I don't think I have that measurement independently, but it's a large basement that is currently finished.
That is a picture in its current condition.
Are there any other windows in the basement beside the egress well?
There isn't one.
Other questions from the board?
The egress well is a walkout.
It's like it's a regular sized door and then you walk out to the backyard.
It has a small ladder.
You walk up.
Right.
That might not legally comply as a bedroom, just letting you know.
If that is the case, then I would be satisfied with making it a one-bedroom on the first floor.
If it's denied by the ones we, I guess, apply for the building permits.
Other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the audience?
Virtual?
Do you let any hands with the Chair?
Planning Commission Ron Bednar city planning comprehensive plan recommends no change the existing RSA five residential zoning at this location, the applicant's property is close to commercial corridor and transit station and it's irregularly a lot large lot for zoning district, therefore the city planning commission recommends that the board grant variance for two family household living.
So, all right. So, MI 2024, 004-79-150 Brown Street. I vote yes with proviso. No bedrooms in the basement.
Are we saying no bedroom or no basement living?
So, Chair, if I could recommend a proviso to be no household living at the basement level?
Right. All right. So instead of bedrooms, no household living in the basement.
I don't agree with that. So how do I say I don't have a problem with what with household living in the basement in this situation?
Because you've got the clear, got the egress that works.
How do I how do I vote on that?
OK, so so let's let's let's let's go again.
I mean, it may not sound right, but where you are, Michael, you don't want bedrooms in the basement, are I correct?
So long as it complies, I really don't have a problem with the bedroom in the basement so long as it complies with code.
It's got a door that has a window, so it's got light and air, and it's got a full egress out to, you know, not just a window, it's a door.
So I actually like that better. So I don't have a problem with the health of living in the basement or bedroom so long as it complies.
OK, so let's. And if I may.
Here's what we'll do is that obviously we have a couple of different views of this.
What we'll do is we'll vote on this for you next Wednesday morning at 930.
next Wednesday morning. Do I need to be
Next Wednesday morning, do I need to be present?
present? You don't have to be present, but you
You don't have to be present, but you can listen in.
can listen in.
The case is closed
and we'll just vote on it next
Wednesday at 930. And then we'll figure out
where we stand, okay?
Thank you. Number 15.
2024-007-223-2858
North 26th Street.
John's is the owner applicant.
Mr. Chair, they have been promoted to Panama City. We'll be rejoining shortly.
Could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Can you hear me?
I can.
Hi, I'm going to...
State your name as Bell for the stenographer.
My name is De'Ara Johns, D-I-E-R-A-H, last name J-O-H-N-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
So this application is for uses of two-family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed use, two-family household living, is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
Have you submitted all your appropriate exhibits?
Yes. Share your screen to start your presentation, please.
How do I?
There could be a green button on the bottom.
i think it's asking me to update my settings okay
it says zoom will not be able to record the content on your screen and until it isn't quit
let me see do we have a tech person can give her some advice
miss johns could you repeat the the message that came up for you
it was asking me to put something in quick okay you know how to make this bigger oh my goodness
that's all right that's no problem um do you have the documents that you want to share already open
on your computer i do can you see it okay so no not yet but um if you click that green share button
at the bottom of the screen it should ask you if you want to share a window or an application yeah
there you go beautiful thank you okay so the refusal um the permit we have your refusal we
see that okay so why don't you explain to us what you're trying to do so basically um 28 58 north
26th street um previously as of last year it was um it had a zoning um
usage that allowed it to be used as a multi-family however um i i was receiving
bills from the trash department and i couldn't understand why i was receiving the bill so when
I went to court to have the, to eliminate the bills. I received, I won the case. However,
I kept receiving bills. So when I reached out to my OP guy, I explained to him that the house was
zoned as a single family and that no one was living in a home and it continued to stand as
a single family. I didn't know that when I stated those things to him, that that was going to
interrupt my usage code I do have proof of those emails
and so he emailed me back and let me know that the usage
would be updated to 050
050 so that actually
interrupted my
the variance that I did have on there this was
the messages that I had from him and I
Could you show us photos of your property, please?
Oh, yeah, I can show you the photos of the property.
Let me reset.
So this is the front of the property.
I recently had the porch redone because there were some violations that I needed to get cleared up.
As you can see, on this side, there is an entrance to the first floor and then there is a basement.
As you can see on this side, there is an entrance to the first floor and then there's...
And then on this side, there is an entrance to the second floor and then third floor.
So that's why I said it already stands as a multifamily because it has two separate entrances, two separate electric water and all of that.
This is a side view of the property.
Another side view.
Another side view.
So, this is the first apartment. It was demoed last year when I was trying to get everything reconstructed. I'm still trying to get the funding to have this completed. So, this is the first floor. Towards the back, there was a bathroom back there, and then you see the door. That door leads out to the backyard.
Or, and on the side here where you can't, where like the refrigerator is, there's a stairwell that leads down to the basement and the basement also has a door as well.
This is the bathroom that I was talking about that's towards the back here.
This is the bathroom.
And this is like the forward facing.
So this would be the living room of the first floor apartment.
and this is the same thing the first floor this is just undemo same thing the first floor just
not demo and then you can see the entrance to the basement right here this is the entrance
of the second apartment this is the stairwell leads up to this right here is a bedroom and
here would be the kitchen and dining room area. This side is also the same floor, the living room
area. This is the bedroom I was referring to in this picture. This is the bedroom on the
second apartment, first, second floor. This is the stairwell that leads up to the third floor.
and this is the third floor hallway this is the bedroom within the third floor
this is the bathroom on the third floor
um i wasn't able to obtain pictures of the backyard because this door
um on the first floor apartment that leads to the backyard is nailed shut and then the gate
that leads to the boards the alleyway is also um locked up but i was for um given a picture by my
oh wait how long have you owned the property um so my father purchased it for me back in 2016
16, I didn't come into actually owning it and taking over until 2023.
Right.
I was too young to.
And it's been vacant since 16?
No, it hasn't been vacant since 16.
It's been vacant since I want to say 2020.
I received, I had to go through the board where I had to learn,
I learned that I had to get a vacant property license.
and then when I let him know that I was getting work done to it he told me that I would be okay
that I wouldn't need the vacant property license because I am getting permits to have the work done
for it but when I reached out to him because I was receiving a trash fees I didn't know that I
I couldn't find on the website anywhere that it was on for multifamily so when I did get a chance
to actually go through this process and speak to my rcl she explained to me well it's not going to
change the zoning it's going to change the zoning usage because to change the zoning i guess she said
that would be more work i had to go to before the city council so the usage was already prior to me
reaching out to the guy and explaining no a single family it was already um granted as a
as a um as a use for multi-family which is why i was receiving the trash bills there's also a um
so this was granted back in 1951 and i believe it was standing within that usage from 1951
but me being unaware that the usage code was what it was i kind of interrupted that
questions from the board I have a quick question so the RCO asks for interior trash storage
am I going to assume that the trash storage would be in the basement
um the trash storage um maybe it could be in a backyard um okay so the um one of the provisals
the trash storage maybe it could be in the backyard
that the rco said was that they wanted interior trash storage so do you have anywhere in the
interior that you could store the trash um yeah i can store it in the basement i'm i'm confused
by what you mean by trash storage um so the rco swamp poodle neighborhood parcels and she may be
here to back that up but they asked for a provision in order for your for them to support
this project and they said they wanted interior trash stores so that means they looking for you
to store the trash somewhere within the unit and i was just asking you do you have a place within
the unit to store the trash right i'm i'm i'm guess i'm not really understanding your question
if the purpose would be for them to rent it out so i would assume that they would have trash cans
and then they would take... So you would put
trash cans in the basement for the first
floor unit and
for each of your units?
Oh, yeah. They have some space in the basement for them to
store the trash before they take it out
to the curb? Oh, yeah.
That's fine. Is that something you're okay with?
Yes, that's fine. Okay. Does the second
floor unit have access to the basement?
Does the second unit?
Yeah. No, the second
unit doesn't have access to the basement or
the first floor. So the second unit,
I can go back to the picture
if you'd like me to do you have plans of what you're proposing to put back in yes
um second and then do you know roughly what's the square footage of the first and the second
floors um i have it all outlined here okay yeah this is the um basement um
okay so yeah this is the basement and then this is i guess the backyard because there is a door
here and steps up yep right so then this is the first first floor you come in this is the living
room you go downstairs that's the bed that's the um basement you come into the kitchen
and then bathroom and then a bedroom right here and then out the backyard
this is the second floor for the second apartment um
where's the okay so you go up the steps and then you have the living room here
i guess a washroom here the kitchen and then the bedroom
and then you come up the steps again you have the second bedroom the bathroom then that's just
open there's no um there's no room here there's like a door here there's no room okay
other questions from the board so do both uh units have access to the backyard
do both units have access to the backyard so one of the units currently have access to the backyard
with the back door which would be the first unit the second unit will not have access to the
backyard okay so just to help satisfy the rcl where would the second unit store their trash
because it seems like the first unit can do it stored in the basement or the backyard but the
second unit where would they store their trash basically you need a closet a vented closet or
something okay so yeah on the second floor there is like so before you go out well you can't go
out there is like a little closet here um i can show you go to the pictures it's fairly it's like
a good size so i can make that a storage but i'm i just never under i don't understand the idea
because i need to take your you got to put your trash somewhere you can't put it in front of the
house and they don't have access to the yard or access to the basement so where in your second
floor apartment would you store trash so there is this um closet right here on the third floor
that i could possibly put a trash can or some type of trash bins in there for them to store it in
there um is that a doorway on the third floor right here yes that is a doorway but it's going
will be closed off because let me see if I can go to the picture. I'm not sure why that
it was just like that when it was given to me.
And while you're pulling up the pictures I would just suggestion to
put all the permits on file because it does look like there were no permits on this when it was
put all the permits on file
because it does look like there were
converted. But if it was converted in 1951, that would make sense. Yeah, that's what it was. It
was converted long ago. Yeah, but even your demo currently, I would make sure you get permits.
Okay, no problem. This is that door on the third floor that goes out. So that's going to be
completely sealed off it's not going to be access to the roof unless the con the um architects
comes around and find a way to put a to make that an actual part of the third floor i was thinking
about that but right now then you'd be coming back the zoning right
one thing about your plan on the first floor having uh having to go through a
bedroom to go to a yard is horrible so if you're if you're in the process of looking at a plan you
should talk to your architect to make sure you don't have to walk through a bedroom to go to the
backyard to go to a bedroom to go to the backyard okay yeah all right yeah right
other questions um no but i will say that this board questions for this oh i will say the basement
also goes to the backyard as well.
There's a door in the basement that goes to...
I just don't have pictures of the basement because
there's a lot of stuff there.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the audience?
I do not see any hands raised for this matter, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Well, the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to existing zoning
at this location,
Given the documented history and its physical condition of the site, I recommend the request of variance to be granted. Thank you.
Hello, Mr. Chair. I'm very sorry to interrupt you, but I have a hand up from a number ending in 3552, Mr. Fernandez, Ms. Adrian Fernandez.
Good morning, Adrian.
Hello?
adrian adrian you've already been sworn just for the record state your name
okay adrian fernandez swample to rco please proceed with your presentation
okay i just wanted to request um that the three provisos if they would be permitted
with this letter of support which are limit of two units fashion recycling stored indoors except
on collection days and no basement living no bedrooms in the basement thank you is there
anyone else in a virtual audience? Planning Commission, do you? Good. Okay. So MI 2024-007-223-2858
North 26th Street, I vote yes with proviso. Maximum two dwelling units, interior trash storage,
no household living in basement. Michael Johns, my vote is yes with provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisos. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with provisos.
tie when my vote is yes with provisos thank you thank you chair pardon the interruption um
items number 10 and 11. uh we had requests for spanish interpreters for each of those cases
the interpretation service is unable to provide interpreters for this hearing so we're going to
offer a short continuance for both of those cases to april 23rd at 2 p.m so if you could call those
out, please.
Can we break with you?
Number 10.
11. MI 2024-004-695-4708 East Roosevelt Boulevard. What's that date?
The date is April 23rd, 2025 at 2 o'clock p.m.
April 2025 at 2 o'clock p.m.
At number 11. MI 2024-004-699-4715 Pearson Avenue. That case is continued to do April 25.
April 23rd.
April 23 at 2 p.m.?
Correct. Thank you.
Number four, MI 2024-003-406-1406 East Point-Mencing Avenue.
The attorney is Rachel Dennis.
We will be coming back in as a panelist shortly, sir.
It will be coming back in as a panelist.
My counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
Hi, good afternoon, members of the zoning board.
My name is Rachel Dennis.
I represent Skywide Real Estate LLC, and my name is spelled R-A-C-H-E-L.
Last name Dennis, D-E-N-N-I-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client relationship to the property?
My client is Skywide Real Estate LLC, and it's President Tim Gu, who is the owner of
the property at 1406 East Moyamensing Avenue.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with the accuracy of it?
Okay, please start your presentation.
I also have my client here who I'd like to take his testimony as well as an expert who I'd like to take his testimony as well.
I'm just requesting, do they become part of the now?
Should I ask them to raise their hands?
Well, why don't you do this?
Why don't you start your presentation, then we'll bring them on when you're done.
Okay, great.
Good afternoon, members of the Zoning Board.
As I stated earlier, my name is Rachel Dennis, and I represent Skywide Real Estate LLC and
its president, Tim Gu, the owner of 1406 East Moya-Mensing Avenue, who is seeking a
variance to allow the completion of this renovation project.
This case is about rectifying an unintentional architectural oversight that led to the height
discrepancy.
tim relied on professionals licensed architects to ensure compliance but the architectural plans
miscalculated the building's height due to inaccurate documentation of the existing structure
and miscalculations of the the floor heights of that existing structure this mistake went
undetected through multiple approval stages including by the city of philadelphia which
allowed the property to pass the framing inspection the inspection stated that framing
was installed in accordance with approved plans and building code, so they moved forward with
the construction, thus showing the challenges and identifying the issue in this case. Now the
property stands at 40 feet 11 inches tall, just under 3 feet above the 38-foot height restriction
in RSA 5. Demolishing and reconstructing the top floor is really not a viable option here,
unfortunately. As you will hear, the building cannot be brought into compliance by reframing
the fourth floor, as doing so would create a ceiling height less than the code minimum.
In addition, it would create substantial financial burden for my client.
Additionally, the variance will not set a precedent for other properties to exceed height
limitations, as this issue is uniquely tied to these architectural miscalculations, rather
than an intentional attempt to evade zoning restrictions.
We have community support, as my clients collected signatures from neighbors.
Can I make a suggestion? If you would, in your presentation, maybe should show what you're talking about on the thing and stuff. Right. Okay.
Sure, sure. Yes, I would get that with testimony. We have community supporters. My clients collected signatures from neighbors who want to see the project completed.
Importantly, the height does not obstruct sunlight, alter the neighborhood's character, or negatively impact any adjacent properties.
As you can see in the picture, this is the building. It's already 75% complete. It was originally a three-story building, and it was renovated to become a four-floor building.
As you can see, this is what it looks like right now. This is the back of the property right in the middle here, and then these are pictures from the front of the property.
the red line in this picture shows where it cuts off because of there's also a deck that's not
actually part of the property kind of making the property look a little bit taller than it actually
is because there's this deck on top and that's the siding for the deck which is not obviously
part not part of the calculations in the height you will hear from my client tim goo he's the
homeowner who will testify about his reliance on professionals and how this issue could not have
been caught prior to substantial renovation of the home and the complete addition of the fourth
floor. You'll hear from our architectural expert, Jesse Smith, who's going to explain the
miscalculations by the original architect on the project, which ultimately led to this issue.
And finally, I'll bring in Annette Deutsch, who is the wife of Tim and who was planning to live
in the property, and will speak to the community support for the project's completion. We ask that
the board recognize the unique circumstances of this case and grant the requested variance
and grant the requested variance to allow Tim and Annette to complete their home and move into it.
to allow Tim and Annette to complete their home and move into it.
I would like to, you know, call Tim to testify and ask him a couple questions that might clarify for the board some of the issues that occurred in this case.
Tell me what happened when you went to the RCO. Did you go to the RCO?
Yes, yes, we went to the RCO and we presented there.
And, you know, by the end of the RCO meeting, there was an opposition related to the height.
There was quite a kerfuffle about people being concerned that it was going to be an Airbnb, which isn't the issue here.
And it's not going to be an Airbnb that requires special permitting.
So by the end of the meeting, everyone there was either in support or they just at that point said they didn't oppose.
They wanted the building to be complete and finalized.
You know, we left feeling pretty good about the RCO.
So they submitted their letter. Ultimately, the letter says that there is community support and that there is specific individuals that came up and expressed their concern with the fact that the zoning permit was passed, that the framing inspection happened and that was passed.
And then this fourth floor was constructed based on that. And so they wanted to know why at that point it had passed the framing inspection, shouldn't it have been caught?
And I think that really outlines the complexity of the height of this house. But nobody at the RCO meeting had an issue with the actual height. The building's a beautiful building and, you know, they're kind of excited to see it complete so that it's no longer, you know, looking like a construction area.
Ultimately, the RCO did oppose, basically saying that they, I'll let them speak for
themselves if they're here on why they opposed it, but it was not because of lack of community
support.
Okay, so you want to bring your client on to adopt your testimony and take additional
testimony?
What is the client's name, may I ask?
Tim Gu.
Okay, then we'll be rejoining us in Panama shortly.
Thank you.
Hi, could you please state your name, sir, and spell for the stenographer?
My name is T-I-A-N-Y-U-A-N.
My last name is G-U.
Tianyangu.
do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes please proceed counsel good afternoon tim uh can you tell me your relationship
to the property at 1406 east moya mensing avenue um yeah so me and my wife um plan to move into
this property once it's built and we yeah that's and are you the owner and president of skywide
real estate llc that's right i am can you describe the nature of the renovation project at 1406 east
moya mensing avenue um yeah we uh nature you mean like how many floors and whatnot yeah what was
the basis of the project what was it going to look like and and what you know was it a renovation
versus rebuild can you just explain to the board a little bit about what the project was
yeah basically uh we we we bought we bought this house and then um planning to have our family
move in here me and my wife's gonna live on the property and then we're gonna have how
other family members potentially live with us and then we um because so we we our understanding is
that we are allowed to build a fourth story um so so so we um based off that fab we designed
our home um for the master to be on the fourth floor and then the guests our family live on the
third floor. And the second floor will be kind of like the family gathering area. And the first
floor will just kind of be kind of like an entry area, decoration area. And then that's pretty much
what our original plan was. And the fourth floor, was that supposed to be a master bedroom? What's
on the fourth floor? The fourth floor is going to be where me and my wife is going to live. It's
going to be the master bedroom. So there's no other, on the third floor, there was never any
master bedroom created, correct? No, because it was for like guests and family, friends and whatnot.
So when you were looking into renovating the property, did you hire an architectural firm
to do the plans and drawings of what the property would look like with a fourth floor?
Yeah. So when we hired the architect Plato Associates, we basically, you know,
show them this is what we wanted to do um we because um so they said that everything is okay
we can do a four story um we are able to you know that that that's when we you know thinking yeah
we are able to you know that that's when we you know thinking you know we have to put like a
we have to put like a
master on the fourth floor so that way it makes sense for the layout for the entire building
great and i want to put i would like to put a document up on the screen so i'll stop share
my current screen and then share this document here yeah great and
And Tim, does this document look familiar to you?
This is the plan that the architect wrote.
And do you see that there's a plan approval in the corner, a sticker in the bottom left corner?
The city approved it.
um and at any point did plato studio tell you that it would not be feasible
due to zoning requirements to add a fourth floor to the pre-existing structure
um and you know looking at this document did they create this drawing and plans that included
the fourth floor? Yes, they do.
And to your knowledge, you know, was it your understanding that these plans complied with
the zoning height requirement of 38 feet? That's right. And do you have any background
in architecture? You have a degree in architecture? No, I do not. I went to school for finance.
Did you have any reason to believe that your home would not be in compliance with the zoning
height restriction? Not at the moment when I first started the project. And you, you know,
as the company that built it, you built it according to the structural plans that were
provided to you by Plato Studios. That's right. And in order to move forward with the renovation,
you were required to also pass framing inspection? That's right. Wish I already passed it.
And I'd like to share another document on the screen.
Tim, are you able to see this document?
yes i am are you familiar with this document yes um i i met with the inspector on site and then
he passed me um and this this is the inspection report for the framing correct right and can you
read to me the inspector's comments in this document framing install in accordance with
approved plant and building code fire blocking and draft stock install where you required great
Right. And this was normal to you. You know, any project that you've ever done, this was what looks like a normal inspection.
Pretty standard. There's nothing crazy going on.
So when did you first learn about the height discrepancy?
So I guess one day the inspector, this specific inspector called me and just say, there's an issue.
He want me to meet me on site. And then me and he met on site.
and then he he he didn't bring a tape so i actually provided with him with a laser tape
and then um and then me and him went upstairs and then he was saying that they they have received a
report saying that our building is taller than what it's supposed to be so then me and him on
site measured it we we weren't even we weren't really able to measure the exact height of the
building so we actually measured it from the third floor so when we measure on the third floor
approximately is like a couple of feet taller.
That's when they say, well, you know, I'm sorry,
I have to stop this work right now.
So, and then you have to figure out from there.
That's when I find out, you know,
the building was built too tall.
And how far along was construction at that point?
That's, we are ready for drywall.
So that's the point where we are ready for drywall is like,
the next thing we're going to do is drywall.
But he stopped me before I was able to put the drywall in.
And would you say like if you had to give that a percentage of, you know, out of the house being built 100 percent, what percentage was the house built?
I would say at least like 75 percent, 80 percent done. Framing, electrical, everything is in, you know, windows on site.
I'm just going to put in the drywall and then just finish that. That's it. We're done.
What would it take to bring the building into compliance without a variance?
my understanding is i had to remove uh i have to remove the fourth floor and then i have to remove
um i have to change the layout of the entire building because um because of i have a fourth
floor i actually had like a tall ceiling on the second floor but i had to take everything down
take everything down and then basically we lay out the building and then take the floor down
and then basically lay out the building and then take the floor down to
to so you would also have to take the third floor down correct
um and what impact would that have on you financially and logistically um i just don't
have the money right now to do it just because i had a budget and then i i'm running out of
the money and then i'm paying for a loan um it's been two years i'm paying for like a high interest
long right now just to get this project done and I've been waiting you know it's just to get
something so pretty much I don't really have any plan I don't I don't really have the money to get
everything done. And you are planning to move into this home you were planning to move into it a year
ago when it was almost supposed to be complete where are you currently residing? So right now
I'm in an Airbnb with my wife we're just kind of waiting to get this to get approved and to get
this house built and then me and my wife can actually move into it um have you spoken to
the neighbors about the issue um yes i did and but my wife is the person who went around and
talked to the neighbor if you want to bring him on um and what would it mean to you to be granted
the variance uh you say what what it means yeah what would it mean to you to be granted the
variance? I think that it would change my life because right now I don't have anywhere to go.
I'm willing to get on to move into the building. I don't have any money to pay down the building.
I mean, I think it would just be life-changing for me. Thank you, Tim.
Do you need to, which architect are you bringing on? A new architect or the one who designed the
building? I have a new architect who reviewed the original plans that were set out by the
original architect you're bringing him on now yes all right name of the architect uh jesse smith
excuse me they'll be coming back in as a panama shortly thank you
good morning mr chair and the board hi could you please state your name and spell for the
stenographer yes my name is jesse smith j-e-s-s-e-s-m-i-t-h wait do you swear or firm that
the whole truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed counsel thank you
hi jesse um can you give me a little bit of background about your education sure um so i'm
the principal of jls architects i have a degree in architecture i'm a registered architect who
focuses the majority of my work in the greater philadelphia area and my team and i work on about
100 plus projects a year in philadelphia and um where do you currently work
i'm currently located in glenside pennsylvania and what's your title at the firm that you work
at i'm the principal of jls architects can you um explain the nature of your investigation
into the height discrepancy at 1406 east moyamensing avenue absolutely and if i may
i will also share my screen of the discrepancy document
so we prepared a document showing the discrepancy in the height between what was documented by
mr gu's architect and the actual field conditions and i want to go through those items and explain
how we got to where we are today so one of the main issues is that the average grade plane wasn't
being accurately reflected in the original documents. Mr. Gu has a property where from
the sidewalk at the front of his house to the rear door exiting into his backyard, there's a
two-foot change in grade. And what that means for us is the average ground level is not actually at
the sidewalk, it's actually a foot taller. And that's going to become more relevant as we start
talking about how we dimension the height of the building. And as neighbors and the Civic Association
and Mr. Gu dropped a tape measure from the top of the building and measured that height, that's
not accurately reflective of where the average grade plane is on the project. So we analyzed that
and said, where do we come up with such a large bust? Pennsport Pacific Association acknowledged
that there was a assumed bust of about four feet, eight inches. And we're here today to explain that
that bust is actually much less and it's much closer to about two feet, 11 inches. Still a
zoning bust, but less severity than has been documented. The documented dimension between the
first floor and the second floor, according to Mr. Gu's architectural drawings, was eight feet
nine inches. In reality, that dimension is actually nine foot two inches. That bust of five inches is
something that Mr. Gu was not aware of until this issue came to light. As we move up each floor of
until this issue came to light. As we move up each floor of the building, that documented bust
the building.
becomes greater and greater. So on the second floor and the third floor, there was also a
architectural drawing that showed that height as 8 foot 9. It was actually 10 foot 2. So we take
the 5 inch bust from before, and now we're adding another bust of 17 inches. Similarly, when we get
up to the third floor and the fourth floor, third floor was documented as 8 foot 9. It's again 10
foot two, another bust of one feet, five inches. The fourth floor and the underside of the roof
was documented at eight feet, which meant that Mr. Gu would have an eight foot ceiling in his
finished building. It's actually on site today at the lowest point, seven feet, 11 inches. So that
was an inch that worked in our favor. So this decreases the building height by one inch.
Something else that we uncovered during our investigation was that the roof structure
documented as part of the sign and sealed architectural drawings from Mr. Gu's architect
documented the roof to be about one foot thick. However, structural details and further architectural
details that Mr. Gu followed ended up requiring that assembly to be about one feet two inches
thick, which added an additional dimensional bust of two inches. And lastly, we had a roof structure
that was documented without a drainage pitch. So when Mr. Gu built the roof according to code
standards and best practices, he added a quarter inch per foot slope to the roof, which means that
the roof is a little bit higher at the front of the building and a little bit lower at the rear
of the building. That distance between the front and the back as measured in this angle over here
is about one feet four inches. So what happens is we add all these dimensional busts up and we come
up with what is a perceived bust of four feet eight inches. And we believe this is what Pennsport
Civic Association had documented. However, the issue at hand, which I'll zoom in a little bit
further on this document, is that we're not actually measuring from the average grade plane
as I originally noted. So the average grade plane is plus one foot above the sidewalk.
When we measure from that plus one foot up to the top of the roof, we're coming up with a height
that goes from our average grade level of one foot up to the top of roof at 41 feet 11 inches.
We subtract those two numbers and we get a building height that is permitted to be 38 feet, but in this case is actually 40 feet 11 inches. So we have a bust of 2 feet 11 inches. Are there any questions on that so far?
No, Jesse, if you would just also explain what documents you reviewed in order to come to this conclusion related to the miscalculation in the floor levels.
Absolutely. So we reviewed the documents prepared by Plato Studios, the sign-sealed architectural drawings, we reviewed the sign-sealed structural drawings, and we reviewed on-site measurements that were provided to us by Mr. Gu and his contracting team.
um so part of the problem here to break it down in pretty simple terms is that the original
architect that mismeasured the floor it's had the wrong measurements of the floor so when they said
you could add a fourth floor being eight you know eight feet tall um it would have made it above the
um the height for you know the the height maximum um but and because their calculations were off
though they expressed in their original drawings that it would not be is that correct that is
correct. And would these miscalculations be apparent to the builder at the time of construction?
No, they likely wouldn't be apparent to the builder at the time of construction because
the intent of this project was to match the existing floor levels. So in the field,
the contractors are intending to match the existing first, second, and third floor of
the existing house. And those minor discrepancies often go unnoticed until we're at a moment like
this. Would it be possible to add a fourth floor to this property in compliance with zoning height
requirements without first lowering the height of the pre-existing building floors? No, it would
not. So as I mentioned, the existing height at that fourth floor today on site is seven feet,
11 inches. So we're just above the code minimum for habitable space. In order to come into
compliance and drop the fourth floor by the two foot, 11 inches that's needed, that would create
a fourth floor ceiling that would be five feet. In your professional opinion, is this something
that an architect would normally catch and advise the client of when they're doing the initial mock
up? It should have been something in my opinion, it should have been something that would have
been caught during a professional field survey. And that part was unfortunately missed. And
now we're suffering those repercussions. Would it be possible to bring the building
into compliance by reframing the fourth floor? No, it would require removing the third floor
and the fourth floor framing and lowering those by that difference of about a foot and a half each.
In your opinion, how does this situation differ from maybe a situation where someone deliberately builds beyond the zoning limits?
In your opinion, how does this situation differ from maybe a situation where
I don't think there was intent for any harm.
This is something where the architecture team and Mr. Gu were assuming that the height of the building, as per the sign seal drawings, was accurate.
And they unfortunately didn't know that the height was not reflective of their documented height.
And in your opinion, is this something that normally would have been caught at the framing inspection by the city?
It could have been caught during the framing inspection.
That's up in the air as to whether or not it would have definitely been caught.
But those things sometimes are caught during the framing inspection.
They're sometimes caught like they are now by more of a community involvement.
Thank you.
And I'd just like to, you know, to the extent that it needs to be, I'd like to offer this document that's on his screen into the record as an exhibit in this case.
All right. Thank you.
Exhibit one. Thank you.
Is your presentation done, Counsel?
I would just like to actually call Annette Deutsch, that's Tim's wife, and just take her testimony real quickly.
And then I'll conclude my presentation.
But Tim's wife will be the same testimony, am I right?
No, she's going to talk about, she's the one who canvassed the neighborhood, and there's a petition that she got signed.
Okay, go ahead. Please, let's try to move this one.
Yes, I'll move it along. Thank you.
Her name's Annette Deutsch. She should be in the waiting room.
You should be patting this down.
Ms. Deutsch, are you present?
Hello.
Hello.
you're allowed to speak i could you please state your name and spell for this stenographer
hey we're having some internet problems annette are you there
there. That's fine, Tim, you can have her on. I believe that's
I don't know. Could you please state your name is spelled for
the stenographer. So my name is Annette Deutsch. Can you speak up a little bit, please? Can you
hear me? A little bit closer to the mic, if you would. I don't know where the mic is.
Okay. So my name for the record is Annette Deutsch, spelled last name D-E-U-T-S-C-H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
yes please proceed counsel I'm just going to share my screen
hi Annette can you tell me your relationship to the homeowner and to the property at 1406
East Moy-Mensing Avenue I can't hear you Annette can you can you repeat that
I'm his wife.
I think she's going to have to find a way to get closer to the mic.
We're having a hard time hearing her.
I'm his wife.
And it is your plans to move into the property with Tim?
And, you know, what efforts have you made to speak with the neighbors about this variance request?
So I went around the entire neighborhood and collected signatures from for support and explained to them the situation with why we are running into this discrepancy.
And how did the neighbors respond when you spoke with them generally?
So generally, most of the neighbors were in support. I collected, I believe, four pages of signed support from the neighbors. There was no discrepancy when it came to the reasoning for the building.
So generally, most of the neighbors were in support.
Um, did you show them a picture of the building when you were explaining the request for the
variance? Yes. I had a printed out paper. I had all the documentation to show them,
um, for any evidence as I was explaining. And, um, does this document on the screen
look familiar to you? Yes. Can you explain what this document is?
So this is the petition that I was handing out to the neighbors to be able to write their name, address, how to reach them, and if they were in support or against.
And this document, again, is four pages of signed signatures. Is that correct?
And then you also have a couple letters in support as well. Is that correct?
uh yes and uh those are up on the screen is one from gregory jones
yeah and he lives on east moyamensing avenue yes um one from suzanne ward
on third street and one from looks like uh crystal fair
at Dickinson. Yes. That's all. That's all I have for you. And I'd just like to introduce
this document into the record exhibit two. All right. Thank you. Questions from the board.
Yes. I have two questions. One, when the roof pitch was added, was that documented
in the building plan record um in the original architectural plan it was not documented there
i know ellen i listed that on the on the permit um but i i believe in the ultimate permit request
and tim can you clarify that question whether or not in the the the ellen i permit that did have
the um the pitched roof so on lmi permit it doesn't have but it's required by building code
like i mean we have to pitch the water on the roof somewhere but on the lmi document the roof
says it's flat if you know that part i understood but i'm asking did you get documentation or did
your contractor just add it in the field i i guess they just added in the field got it and
then my second question is did you have a construction administration contract when
you were under construction uh i don't have a construction administrative contract you mean
like somebody managing it. It's supposed to be the architect. So was Plato studio hired to do
construction administration during construction and sign off on the contractor's invoices?
That's not, I don't think that's typical, but. It is. That's actually pretty standard
construction process, but thank you for that answer my questions. Other questions from the
couple questions um was there a site survey done initially a topo survey yeah i believe
i think plato was a person who came out to do the survey they did they did a survey or had
their sub consultant do a survey so they would have been they came out to measure the building
so no one did a topos all right to determine the grades
no i i didn't know that they they can and measure everything i don't know like that
can you go back to the um the original plan that the cover sheet
i just want yeah let me i'll be happy to do that for you just and
And as you were going through the testimony, it sounded as if the floor to floor to or the ceiling heights on floors had changed from eight feet to nine feet to nine feet or eight feet to 10 feet.
And I can't imagine that during construction, a contractor didn't notify you of the difference between an eight foot height ceiling and to go to a nine foot height ceiling.
the cost of lumber is going to be different so that's that's a little worrisome to me that a
contractor would would spend more money on materials to build higher ceilings wait it that's
not that's not true though because particularly particularly since they have a set of plans that
have certain heights and and and you're you're building higher floor to floor to ceiling heights
and and and you're you're building higher floor to floor to ceiling heights that's that's that's
That's that's that's.
a little odd to me um did you pull up can you pull up that sheet the coverage not not second
if i could clarify uh this was not a build from the ground up so they didn't build the first
three floors they only built the eight foot floor at the top which the actual measurements of the
final floor was seven foot 11. So they weren't, they didn't build each floor and get the, you
know, for that, they just built the fourth floor above the pre-existing structure.
Post-single-family dwelling and a three-story building, right?
Modifications of existing three-story building.
So what part was, so three floors were existing and you were building a fourth floor?
If I can clarify, this is Jesse Smith, the expert witness. I'll pull up this comparative section. So the hatched area on either side, this is as it was drawn from Plato Studios on the left, and this is the actual, what we'll refer to as, as built on the right.
So the explanation of why the existing.
The shaded area is existing.
That is correct.
So why is the existing different from the existing on your point?
So that's a discrepancy from Mr. Gu's architect. So his architect documented it on the left. They built it. And upon building it, they realized that there was a discrepancy between what was documented and what the actual conditions are. And that is a height difference from actual documented of three foot three.
Okay, so the floor-to-floor heights and the floor-to-ceiling heights in actuality of the existing building are different than what was drawn initially.
That is correct.
So that height difference of 3 foot 3 inches is what we're trying to analyze.
And through that 3 foot 3 inches, we have a height bust of 2 foot 11 inches.
other questions from the board is the original facade intact it's wrapped in the images that
we've seen 10
yeah the original facade it's uh it's not intact we actually took the original facade of the front
down and then that the only um demolition that was done uh yeah that's the only demolition and
i guess the um the back of the house was uh demo too the back of the house but the middle of the
houses keep the same was there an extension done to the existing floor plates extension yeah the
fourth floor and the front front of the house is an extension yeah wait a minute but based on this
and I'm stuck. So the shaded area is the existing
house, correct? So there's an addition on both
ends, an addition on the height for fourth
floor. Yeah. So the house has been sort of almost
doubled in size. Okay. All right.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience and their
current audience here?
yeah i have a handle from craig melanosian i'm about them to speak uh i right now i have somebody
from uh uh pensport
could you turn on your mic please just for the record state your name and spell for the
stenographer sure my name is pat fitzmaurice p-a-t-r-i-c-k f-i-t-z-m-a-u-r-i-c-a
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please start your presentation and identify your representation of it.
Good morning, board.
My name is Pat Fitzmarice.
I'm the president of the Penn Sports Civic Association, so we're the RCO involved in this.
We submitted our letter a few months ago, and then we resubmitted it yesterday just for clarity.
I think our position and the reasons for it are pretty obvious in that letter, so I'll try to keep my remarks brief.
I just wanted to note in response to some of the comments made today, the owner of this building is Skywide Real Estate LLC.
It's not a person.
The contractor is Skywide Real Estate LLC.
That's noted on the materials that were just presented.
So they own it as a business.
They built it as a business.
They submitted documents to the city.
They didn't build in conformity with it.
And they got caught.
And now it sounds like they almost want to be rewarded for it.
Um, I know there's been comments about the individuals that live in this, but right now
I know there's been comments about the individuals that live in this, but right now that's just
that's just not what's reflected on Atlas.
When you look up the owner, um, you know, there was a mention about not being able to
pay the house until they finish it.
I don't know how that's possible if they're going to live in it or what their plans are,
but there's just a lot of conflict, I think, between what's being represented and what's
showing up on paperwork.
Um, I would note that if you go on the skywide real estate LLC webpage, they hold themselves
out as a builder in philadelphia of building houses i know that at our meeting they represented
and they represent on their website if you look up their portfolio that they built a house in
pence for well mercy street we wrote a letter for that and didn't oppose it because we just don't
randomly oppose things um but for this i mean like i said earlier i think that this is just
a situation where they built they got caught and now they're just seeking to be rewarded
um the only justification i heard was a financial one which they caused um so as far as hardship
goes which is the metric we're supposed to be looking at i just don't see it being present here
um as far as the height in our letter um we didn't go out and measure this building
um that figure either came from the city or from the applicant themselves um
i would just note that and i think the board's kind of picking up on this everything here is
kind of focused on this fourth floor um again this llc decided to put a fourth floor on um that was
their decision and obviously they built non-conformity um the last thing i'll just
mention and again this is in our letter but as far as the petition that was put up on the screen
and the prompt it says that this is by right obviously that's not the case here um so i just
wanted to kind of point that out for the board so i would just rely on the letter that we submitted
for any other questions or comments.
Counselor, do you have any questions?
No, you're on.
Can I ask one question?
So can I ask one question?
So is that true that this is owned by this company
and the company is the builder?
Yes, I represent Skywide Real Estate.
I apologize that that wasn't clear.
That was not our intention.
Well, no, it wasn't.
I mean, and probably I should have read up
and saw it clearly,
but it that is even more disturbing right and this that didn't let me finish that this that this
entity is a builder and and built something that doesn't the plans don't match what's built
and and they're a builder that's problematic it's it's not it it was presented almost as if
I'm this sort of homeowner and while I didn't know my Sylvia architect right didn't didn't
prepare plans correctly and oh by the way the guy that built it kind of just built stuff because you
know that's what he does and kind of didn't match and let me do it but the fact that it's the
builder and the owner is the builder that's problematic and that's that's i mean you don't
have to respond that's that's just that's just a comment that's just no i would yes i would like
to respond um the first question that i asked mr you is what his relation was to the company and
the building and the property, which is that he's the president of Skywide Real Estate. He is
planning on, he built this property, it's different than his other properties because he built this
property to live in with his wife. And he's testified under oath today that he will be the
one residing there and living there. So he's here both as the, you know, the builder who owns Skywide,
you know, he's the builder, he's president of Skywide Real Estate. And, you know, he ran the
project. That's not something that we're trying to hide from. That's just a fact here. But he is
planning on moving in, so to the extent that that wasn't clear, I thought that it was, and I
apologize if it was unclear to the board. I don't want to go back and forth, so I understand.
Well, and my final statement would just be that he's not an architect, though, and this was an
issue that, as you heard Mr. Smith discuss, that this is an issue that normally would not necessarily
be picked up by a builder who was just adding that floor there, and so this is an architect
issue that he's not the architect. He did hire the architect and that's part of it, but he expected
them to do the job according to what he hired them for. The issue is that he did not have
construction administration, which is the point when the architect would catch that. I also want
to know that I pulled up the original sale listing from Redfin and the heights of the original
building were not 10 foot two. So I think there's a lot of things. I think that the plan that we're
looking at is the existing conditions based on what has been constructed
and is not the original condition of the building at sale, which is the issue
today. Other questions from the audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Craig Maladossi and I have allowed
them to speak.
Craig.
I'm sorry, you can proceed
I have another hand up from Dakota Callick
Is there anyone else in the audience?
yeah decola cock i've allowed them to speak sure hello can everyone hear me hi yeah i can't could
you please state your name and spell for the stenographer yes my name is dakota d-a-k-o-t-a
last name is callick k-a-l-e-c-k would you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do all right are you in favor of this project or against i'm in favor
Okay, could you give us a quick reason why?
Yeah, the only reason I'm in favor, I mean, I can't speak to what everybody else has spoken to.
I'm not an architect, and I'm not a builder.
I'm just a neighbor.
I know Tim.
Tim's a good builder, and I am a neighbor here locally in Pennsport.
The project looks amazing.
It looks beautiful, but it's been halted for a long time.
My only concern is if based on what everyone's saying, if you'd have to bring the fourth floor down and it creates such a financial hardship, if the current owner can't complete the project, it's going to sit a lot longer.
And I'm not sure that any additional builder will be able to pick it up financially as well.
So my only concern is just I would love for the property to be done and finished with.
It's created somewhat of a construction site there, which I see every day.
And I think that if we had to go through the hardship of taking it down and the owner is not able to do so, it's just going to sit for a lot longer.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. Is there anyone else in the audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, a Daniel Evanchen.
How many more hands do you have?
Just one after him.
All right, sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, Daniel Evanchen, E-V-E-N-C-H-E-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am. I live at 1421 South 2nd Street.
Are you in favor of this or against?
I am in favor.
All right. Any different reasons than what we've heard?
The only thing I'll add to the previous, I believe his name was Dakota's reasoning, which is the same as mine, is the property prior to construction and now currently, as it's just been sitting boarded up,
has become a little bit of a hotspot for vagrants.
And so walking my dog at night past this property
feels rather unsafe.
I would love for this to be a finished project
and a home in the community.
So that way, you know, it is no longer attracting,
I'll call it unsavory behavior.
Thank you very much for taking the time.
Do we have one more hand?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Patrick Williams, I've allowed him to speak.
hi could you please state your name is spelled for the stenographer
so i'm gonna start working on that Patrick Williams
Mr. Williams you're breaking up
Mr. Williams
thank you
Mr. Williams
yes Patrick Williams
P-A-T-R-I-C-K-W-I-L-I-A-M-S
That's where we're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir.
Are you in favor of this project or against?
In favor.
Thank you very much for calling us.
We appreciate it.
Planning Commission.
Sir, Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location to RSA 5, Residential Single Family, to RM1, Residential Multifamily.
the applicant has not shown that complying with the height requirements in RSA 5 district would
cause a detriment to the property. The City Planning Commission therefore recommends that
the board deny the proposed height variance. Okay. Counsel, you're still here? Yes, I'm here.
All right. Counsel, we're going to hold this vote until next Wednesday so the board can really have
some time in the executive session to talk about exactly where we stand next Wednesday at 9 30 a.m.
we will do the vote okay okay thank you thank you okay we're going to do number 16 MI 2024
007 230 635 West Roosevelt Boulevard Lynette Marie Santiago is the attorney
Lynette Marie Santiago is the attorney.
Good morning.
Good morning.
We're sorry we left you there so long.
Could you please state your name as spelled with a stenographer?
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Lynette Santiago-Lorenz, L-Y-N-E-T-T-E-S-A-N-T-I-A-G-O, and here with me are Todd Philippi, the church's architect, and I represent the applicant, Zion Assembly of God.
Excuse me, this is the court reporter. Could I ask the attorney to pull the microphone closer to her? Thank you.
Absolutely, thank you.
Again, I'm Lunette Santiago. I represent the applicant, Zion Assembly of God, the church.
My name is L-Y-N-E-T-T-E-S-A-N-T-I-A-G-O.
And here with me are the applicant's architect, Todd Phillippe, and Pastor Jose Colon, the church's pastor.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal? Do you agree with its accuracy?
Absolutely.
Why don't you share your screen and start your presentation?
This is Ian Haggerty, the director.
This application, I believe, has a revised plan that includes a pretty significant change
in the amount of additional square footage that's being proposed.
And we believe that this might require a new refusal.
Is that your understanding, counsel?
that it would require a new refusal yeah i i think what why don't we do you have the numbers
there uh the original application was for a 300 square foot edition whereas their proposed plans
show it's 1771 square foot edition is that is that accurate why don't you bring your architect
Yes. Thank you. Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer? It's Todd
Phillippe, T-O-D-D-P-H-I-L-L-I-P-P-I. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Please counsel, I ask your questions so we
see where we can start. Would you kindly identify yourself and modest your relations with the
applicant? Yes, I am. When do you get a little closer? Principal architect for church architects,
I've been specializing in churches for 25 years, have been licensed in Pennsylvania since 1987, have testified at multiple zoning hearings throughout the state, represented the church for architecture for the last about 12 years.
We had previously received a zoning approval for the same type of application regarding parking.
The reason that the proviso was submitted afterwards is that our first effort was to get the denial for the parking.
We knew that was the one area we would not comply in order that the church could re-approach the city about obtaining the vacant land surrounding the church.
It's part of the Logan Triangle. And about 12 years ago, they had been told that they would be given land as part of the redevelopment that was proposed in order to put parking.
So the first step that we needed was to get substantiation to go to the council person to let them know that the church cannot do their project by right without the parking in hopes that it would begin negotiations again in order to get the adjacent land.
that was not successful not because the council person was not in favor of it but because
they really had no authority to be able to do anything relative to the land
so in order to expedite the denial from zoning we removed that section of the plan just so that we
could get the denial the inclusion of that will not require a variance for the only rejection
that we would get, again, would be for the parking, for the 31 parking spaces that would
be required.
So from that standpoint, we did not want to appear before the board without showing the
same project that was shown to the community board when we met with them, and they supported
the project.
So that is the reason why we added the proviso, so that it would not be a different building
than we showed to the community group.
than we showed to the community group this is what the church would like to construct
This is what the church would like to consider.
it does comply with zoning with the exception of the parking and so that's why we are here for that
one very council i i i think ultimately we would need an amended refusal to to go forward yes so
the issue um i'm sorry to say is that we are not in a position to be able to verify that there is
There are no additional refusals generated by the proviso plan, correct?
So only L&I has the authority.
And so there's going to have to be a process for which a plan examiner looks at the amended plans
and then determines whether or not it generates additional refusals,
which would need to be considered by the board.
The board can't take up consideration of the project because if it approves the proviso plans,
it's thereby granting a variance for everything that's been considered here and we've skipped a
step of identifying potential additional refusals it um and we can't just take your word on it so i
you know with my apologies i i do believe that you will need to leave to amend this um uh with the
with lni and receive an amended refusal before the board can consider it in that event would we be
able to get a remove the provisio from it and get the variance just for the 31 parking spaces and
then it would be our obligation to come before this board again should there be another issue
raised by the zoning hearing so we would remove the procedure i i mean ultimately if you're willing
to proceed with with the original plans and and and not you know provide the not proceed with the
revise plans, then yes.
So we're talking about just parking?
Yes. Correct.
Great. All right. Why don't you start?
We'll keep it right to parking,
okay? Okay, great.
and madams,
this is a fairly simple case.
Basically, the church
right now, the sanctuary
is located on the
lower floor of the basement, so
So we would like to switch the sanctuary to be part of the main level, and I'm happy to
show you pictures.
And right now Sunday school is being held on the main level.
So we would like to switch the levels to put Sunday school in the basement and allow accessibility
for other lead members and anyone that needs assistance to be able to take an elevator
and go to services on the first floor.
But aren't we aren't we just doing parking?
Correct sir.
it was denied because it's cmx 3 and it requires 31 parking spots right okay continue
so the building has been there my understanding is for a very long time over 100 years old and
the church has been there for nearly 40 years sir and i will go ahead and oh by the way so the rco
does support our application as well as cancel woman bass and i will uh hand it over to our
architect Todd to explain the projects and the scope? So the the building was originally intended
if you can bring up maybe the photo of the front of the building the building was originally
intended to have a sanctuary on the what would be considered the main level and it was built with a
temporary roof over top of that and this is going back now about a hundred years and that
floor that was determined to be the future sanctuary is where the sunday school classes
are now currently and the church has been meeting in the basement it has a capacity of 190 seats
in the basement our intention is to construct the church on that floor that it was intended
to be and it would have a capacity of 299 seats and for that we would need 31 parking spaces at
the required ratio of one to ten there is no place on the property where parking can be constructed
parking has been on the street for the last hundred well maybe not a hundred years but
parking has been always on the street for the church currently there are no constructed
properties surrounding the church. It's all part of this Logan Triangle. All the parking today is
on the street. It would continue on the street. And so that's why we're asking for the variance
from the requirement to construct 31 parking spaces. Questions from the board? What would
be the plan once the Logan Triangle is redeveloped? The hope would be to be able to get
hope would be to be able to get parking to get property next to the church to be able to construct
parking to get property
parking and would the plan be in the future to consolidate the lots with whatever the new parking
lot is yes other questions no so i may add ambassador cologne if you could kindly confirm
uh the previous pastor passed away but they were in conversations with the land bank sure
With the land bank or with the developer of the site?
Because you said both in your previous testimony.
Why don't you let him be next to the mic?
First of all, could you state your name?
My name is Jose Colon, J-O-S-E, last name C-O-L-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I believe our late pastor, he was in conversations with the Redevelopment Authority.
who he was dealing with in reference to the land.
Do you know what year that was and if it was before or after the city's RFP
for the property in 2012?
I want to say it was 2012.
And then when the subsequent RFP went out in 2016
and it was awarded to Goldenberg Group,
had you been in conversation with the then DeLavella prior to the site?
I could not answer that.
Our pastor, he was the one dealing with that,
and he's no longer with us.
understood right any other questions questions I would just note that you
know or it is inclined to vote yes that the proviso be made that that this is
just for the original plans and I think what I'm what we're going to do is if we
go through this the vote the next week next Wednesday and then we'll have what
we want to say in the positive way okay questions or comments from the virtual
sure um okay so you're saying that you're going to switch the floor so that the services will be
on the first floor and you're going to increase the number of seats um well i guess so where are
people parking now and now you're going to have this increase of uh what another 100 people or
so where are these people going to uh park the the parking is now on the street the parking would
continue on the street it's surrounded by uh both 7th street which currently is blockaded off at the
end and then also on wyoming avenue so there's vacant property all around and the parking would
continue on the street. And this is just
on the street proper. It's not on other
sites. Correct. There is no parking around there
now, just on street parking. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a header from
Charles Richardson. I forgot them to speak. Hi, Mr. Richardson.
and you've already been sworn, just state your name, please.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N,
Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City.
Yeah, you've already been sworn.
Just please proceed.
Got a question here because of the fact that it looks like the plans are
different than what, you know,
now we're talking about parking spaces versus, you know,
in addition to the building, that type of thing.
And I'm a little confused now because of the fact that it's, you know, and I know that they were talking to the Redevelopment Authority, and that was prior to, I believe, even the pandemic, you know, trying to get Lander in that area.
um you know the councilwoman at this point is going to withhold any uh statement on that on
this because of the fact that this it sounds like things have changed since the uh rco
was considering something completely different and we were going to uh go with non-opposition
but now at this point we need to actually look back and reassess what's going on there
mr mr richardson thank you we appreciate anyone else in the audience
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up from Daniel Trutman. I've allowed them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for this thonographer?
Sorry, that was a mistake. I've lowered my hand now.
All right, thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the audience?
No further heads, Mr. Chair.
planning do you want to vote now or do you want to wait to see uh yeah what our proviso is we'll
vote uh this is ron bednar city planning property is currently indicated for commercial mixed use
Property is currently indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan.
on the city plan given a document
Given the documented use history, its physical condition, the site, we recommend the variance be granted.
All right, thank you.
We're going to vote on this next Wednesday, and you don't have to come down, but you just listen in, okay?
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
MI 2024-004-578-1722 Ridge Avenue.
Bernard Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from Francisville
and a letter of opposition from Council Member Young.
They'll be coming back into Zepanima shortly.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Counselor. I don't think we've observed you yet today, so could you please state your name and spell for this thought?
Sure. It's Vern Anastasio, V-E-R-N-A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Do you use Vern to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Did you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Danielle Lawless.
Mr. Chair, did you say that you received letters of opposition?
We have a letter of opposition from United Francisville.
We have a letter of opposition from Council Member Young.
This is all news to me, to us.
We were notified yesterday via email from the RCO of Francisville that it was a split decision.
There were actually as many people in support of the project as there was opposed.
So we have seen nothing.
They list here a vote of five to four opposed, right?
And one abstained.
And then the councilman wrote a letter that basically says it does not fit the character of the neighborhood and places hardship on the community.
We're still seeing the image of the church.
okay thank you mr chair i i was unaware of either of those letters um so taking a little off guard
on that but that's okay we were told that it was a split decision right do you waive the reading
the refusal do you agree with its accuracy the refusal of course yeah right why don't we proceed
thank you here's the property in question right here on this island
and a very odd sort of triangle.
What we are proposing is sort of like a mini flat iron building
because this is prima facie evidence of a unique physical condition of the property
that makes developing this site incredibly challenging,
which is why for many years it has, while development has been around
and CMX2 development all over this particular neighborhood.
This particular property has not enjoyed any of that,
and I'll show you what I'm talking about here.
Pull this out a little bit.
This is the shack that's been sitting on this weird triangle parcel for a very long time.
and it sit there year after year after year as brand new residential multifamily development
as you can see here on my left go up all up and down ridge avenue
1700 block of rage 1600 block 1500 block all new construction
and all surrounding this very odd piece of real estate
that not only has had this vacant shack on it for many years,
but also serves as a de facto parking lot for illegal parking.
So that's the current use,
which I would argue is an extreme detriment to the community.
And what we are proposing here is, as a matter of fact,
very low impact. What we're asking for is a first floor ground level commercial,
which is consistent with the CMX classification. We simply want to put a professional office on
the first floor. As you know, that the property itself is owned CMX 2.5. So it could certainly
be a lot more than that, a lot more impact, but we're going to go for a low-impact commercial
with a professional use, a large majority.
with a professional use. A large majority of these refusals are dimensional variances
and that's because of the unique physical condition of the property making side yards
impossible, making any kind of real outdoor space impossible. So what we've done is we've done the
best we could to improvise here. Here's the parcel in question. There'll be a roof deck,
a pilot house. Let's take a look at the proposal. First, we'll get rid of the ugly old shack that's
been there forever and clean it up as far as illegal parking is concerned. This is the basement.
It'll be just storage for the commercial first floor.
Nothing more than that.
Here's the commercial unit.
400 square feet in total with an ADA accessible restroom.
And again, it'll be for professional offices, administrative offices only.
Above that, on the second floor,
you're going to have a nice one-bedroom apartment, which would be by right.
As you can see here, we have a living room, a kitchen, and a bedroom.
And the second floor, pretty much the same. Kitchen, living room, and a bedroom.
Each, we've agreed to interior trash storage for both the commercial and residential units.
We've also, of course, agreed to commercial trash pickup, exterior lighting, and exterior cameras.
Here's the roof deck.
And that'll be for the benefit of the residential units below.
As you can see, there's a shared stair here.
Here are some renderings with the Ridge Avenue elevation.
As you can see, the design is very much in tandem with homes across the street.
This is all CMX2, most of it, that surrounds this property.
There's RM1 across the street, which is residential multi, and there is some RSA5 as well.
So what we are proposing is completely consistent with, especially given the development constraints that such an odd little parcel provides us, is completely consistent with the community.
Because of the weird shape of the parcel, outdoor space is really not necessarily something that could be offered on the ground level, so we added it here.
so each unit has a nice little terrace for some outdoor space and as you can
say all of these here this row of homes all brand new multifamily zero
road commercial, although it's zoned for commercial mixed use, and what we would do would be actually
more consistent with these all 100% residential homes in the CMX 2.5 district.
the fact that all this residential development has happened surrounding this little island
while this island sits blighted uh is in fact evidence of its unique
and challenging condition that would make compliance impracticable in this particular
case. Because of those development challenges, getting those two units will make all the
difference. And yet there's only two bedrooms on that whole island. We're still only going to have
two bedrooms, which is actually fewer bedrooms than if there were a single-family home.
This is all the information
And all the addresses that were mailed
82 individual households
Were notified
We have proof of tax
And the deed
And as I said at the beginning, it was my understanding that it was a split decision, but we received no official correspondence from anyone that we met with.
And as I said at the beginning
It was my understanding that it was a split
And my client did, in fact, meet with the RCO more than once.
So because of the unique physical condition of the property and the situation in the this, you know, we're looking at a unicorn here.
As you can see, this is the only parcel like this anywhere near there, given that the what I would consider a very close decision from the RCO with one vote separating those who supported us versus those who did not.
Given the viability challenges of building anything on this unusual space, given its close proximity to public transportation, and because there's absolutely no evidence that this will negatively impact the community with trash on the inside, security lighting, security cameras, property management.
And my client actually operating her office on the first floor, we respectfully request the granting of the variants, considering the unique physical condition in this particular case.
And with that, I'd like to bring Danielle Lawless.
Danielle Lawless, we'll be joining as a panel shortly.
Thank you.
Hello, this is Danielle.
Hi, Danielle, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yeah, so you can hear me. Great. Danielle Lawless, D-A-N-I-E-L-L-E. Last name's Lawless, L-A-W-L-E-S-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Would you turn your camera on?
Oh, gosh. I'm not sure that I know how to.
Okay, so I'm a police machine.
Thank you. Ms. Lawless, did you hear my presentation to the board?
Yes, I did.
this afternoon is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge it is and may i also add
something to that yes of course so as you can tell it's almost like a billboard so that building is
completely graffitied constantly intact um at all times and so much so that the city of philadelphia
just routinely comes out um and then paints it and paints it and paints it it's been going on
for decades um so it's it's a major blight to the community i also have lived in francisville for
last 14 years, and I'm a real estate agent, and I would be putting my office on the first floor.
So, you know, I see it as a great thing coming to the community. So that's just my two cents.
Verna, you done? Yeah, let the record reflect that the evidence is submitted, that the property is
and has been historically continually blighted while other development rises above it.
with that, I have nothing else. Questions from the board. Could you talk about the commercial
activities that'll be happening on the site and how many people you'll anticipate being in that
space? Yeah, sure. She's a realtor, so it's going to be a real estate office, but it's only 400
square feet, so it's going to be her and maybe another other person. Nowhere near the kind of
activity that a 2.5 commercial designation could bring, but no, it's not necessarily a place
where hordes of people will be coming.
And is the assumed activity
is just going to be people coming in
to talk and sign paperwork?
Yeah, most of the time that's all done off-site,
but yeah, that would be it.
And then is there a reason
that this was conceptualized as two units
instead of one,
given the small nature of the floor plates?
Yeah, marketability.
I can bring my client on to testify
that because she knows the area and she works in this area as a realtor, one bedroom apartment of
this particular size would be more approachable to folks who are looking in this particular area,
which are mostly younger people. So two smaller units will be a bit more likely to be filled
than one larger emptier unit. Other questions? Yeah, I have a quick question. Could you tell me
the height of the building in relation to the other buildings that you pointed out
in the surrounding area? Yeah, the ones that I pointed out across the street
are, hold on for one second.
Are, hold on for one second.
Their height is less than theirs, but I'll bring that up.
yeah we're at uh at the top of the pergola is 33 feet uh and then here we have is 38 feet
I think she's talking about what are the other buildings in the area in comparison.
They tower over this.
They, too, are zoned CMX 2.5.
And the newer construction homes that I pointed out to you in the photos earlier are above 38 feet and nine.
Ours does not exceed 38.
Question.
What size are the units on the first and second floor?
The commercial space is about 400 square feet, and then not counting the bathroom.
Here we got 483 square feet in each of the living units.
What did you say?
Okay. And are you planning to basically mirror some of the exterior with respect to this building?
I can barely hear you.
I said, are you planning to mirror the exterior of or use the same exterior kind of building materials as the surrounding new construction for this?
I'm going to be polite and say that some of the newer stuff is not necessarily something that my client would be interested in.
The cheaper press board doesn't seem to last longer than 10 years.
So as you can see here, we're doing pattern, we're doing bricking to be more consistent with some of the smaller homes also in the area.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
You mentioned trash storage in the units, but I don't see anything designated when you planned.
On the interior, you wouldn't, because that came out as a result of our RCO meeting.
But interior trash storage will be in each of the units.
So you're going to add that?
Yes, sir.
Can you point out on the plan where you intend to have that go?
uh it's not on the plan uh it came out but can you just point out on the plan where the
interior trash storage would go sure
understanding that we can't see it but yeah i can give you a roundabout yeah yeah yeah it's
going to be right right up uh between the kitchens and the living rooms hold on i'm sorry
there we go
I'm trying to keep it big
so you all can see it so my apologies
yeah so each of the unit
has a sort of a natural divide
between the kitchen and the living area
so we're thinking of a bump out here
do you know what the width is between that
and the refrigerator
I personally
do not
it looks too tight
to fit a closet
with an old garbage receptacle
it looks like it's three feet
i don't know what this area here is but the plan is to put something between the living room and
the kitchen that will store the trash and if you can't dimensionally fit that what would be the
alternative plan it no there is going to be a closet in each unit for the trash and that could
be a proviso. Other questions? Questions from the audience, virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair. Council? Yes, I do not believe we have received a proof
of posting for this. We have not? No. Byrne, do you have that? You know, I can get that
to you separately if you'd like I don't I didn't see it in my exhibit packet and my apologies for
that but I can certainly get it to you in that case we need to continue the matter until we
receive that before we can vote just you want to postpone the vote for a week until I can get it
to you sure planning you want to take a position yeah we will
well planning you want to take a position yeah we will so ron bednar city planning
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing cmx 2.5 commercial mixed use zoning at
this location the applicants uh property is undersized and irregularly shaped however
the variance is not the least modification possible of the use um in question the um
City Planning Commission therefore recommends that the board grant the dimensional variances, but deny the variance for two-family household living.
Thank you.
I appreciate that. Just for the record, again, the unique physical condition of this property and the development challenges are going to require any smart development to be two units, but at the same time, manageable in size so that they could actually be occupied to remove the blight. Thank you.
So this matter is closed, and we will vote next Wednesday at 9.30, and hopefully you'll have that information for us.
Yeah, we'll send it to you right away.
All right. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the audience whose case has not been called?
Yes, Mr. Chair. I have a handout from David Schuette.
That's our mistake. Thank you.
should you please unmute
good afternoon hi counsel sorry we uh almost missed you there not a problem
so mi2024007253717 east chelton avenue david schudy is the attorney council could you please
state your name and spell for the stenographer we'll be coming back in as a panel shortly mr
good afternoon
David Schody
I'm with Chapman Pepper Lock
we represent the property owner
why not
prosper Inc in this matter
just for the record could you spell your name
for this tonight
last name is spelled T-S-H-U-D-Y
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Have you submitted all your appropriate exhibits? Yes, we have. Yes, we have. Um, do you, um, do you, do you waive the reading of the refusal? Yes. And agree with its accuracy? Yes. Please proceed. Okay. Um, let me just figure out how to share my screen here. Okay. So I think there should be a green button there, right? Green button. Oh, there it is. It says share. Yep. Uh, and.
sent a letter of support
yeah you find your
you're coming up okay great great yes we represent the property owner why not prosper who owns
717 East Shelton Avenue. In
2016, the property owner was granted
a use permit following a zoning
hearing to allow for the use of the property for five women that were
recently incarcerated to live and a proviso
of a five-year expiration. That five-year has since
expired, but the property has continued to be used by
Why Not Prosper for that use. Why Not Prosper is
a 501c3, originally founded in 2001
to support formerly incarcerated women. Since
2006, when it started owning
the property, when it acquired the property, based upon the
deed here, which we'll scroll down to.
since it's owned, the property has been using the property to assist women that were recently incarcerated.
In the virtual audience today is Reverend Michelle Simmons, who is the founder and CEO of Why Not Prosper.
We're really not asking to do anything to the exterior or interior of the building
it to continue the use of the building for the for the transition transitional care and
transitional living of of our recent incarcerated women i'm showing you some exterior shots of the
building and some interior shots of the building and where properties located in the cmx2 zoning
And we're properties located in the CMX 2 zoning district, which does not permit for the transitional use that that we're discussing here.
So, again, we're just merely asking to continue the historic use of the building for the charitable purpose.
Want to bring your client on? Yes. Reverend Simmons, do you want to come on?
Okay, excuse me, they have been promoted to panelists to be rejoined shortly.
hi could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer
yes my name is
Michelle M-I-C-H-E-L-L-E
last name
Simmons
S-I-M-M-O-N-S
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
that is correct I do
please proceed counsel
Reverend Simmons
good afternoon
And did everything I say in the introductory and presentation, is that true and correct?
Yes, you did good.
I'll just add one little thing to it.
Yes, we're just asking for the same use.
We've been in this location for 20 years.
Matter of fact, yeah, 23 years.
And every five years when I first came to zoning, when we first went in 06, they said it was provisional, like to see what we was doing.
because of the population and make sure we've been you know okay and then we continue to have
to come back every five years so this is like our standard come back in five years however
COVID hit us this year and I didn't do the reapply thing um and so they made us start over
from scratch but we've been a beacon in this community for 23 years and we have support
of the community and support of the councilwoman um and and our hayward our state rep um so i think
everything is absolutely the same um so i there's nothing else i could add about the use it's the
same thing we've been doing since we move in here and we do have two other matters um i wish they
could all be brought up today we have uh 56 16 and 56 24 um which is all why not prosper all the
same purposes i think it's on the docket for 330 um so yes there's no changes there's no construction
um and i just want to request that we don't got to keep coming back every five years i don't know
if i get to request that um and then also that we could bind them all on the same um
docket which may be too late to do that right um council you have anything further no i mean
you know as as uh reverend sims pointed out uh uh we'll be back before you at 3 30 this afternoon
for another property yeah questions from the board can we see any interior pictures of where the
the residents would actually be residing?
Oh, I don't think we have.
That's the kitchen.
So it's a shared kitchen?
Uh-huh.
For 717.
What's happening on each floor of the building?
Okay, so the first floor was the community floor.
You see, with the balloons,
where now this is the second floor,
which is a kitchen.
That's community.
This is kitchen.
Keep going.
and upstairs is just uh two bedrooms and how many people are gonna how many beds are in each
bedroom uh when we first went they gave us a total of seven but um we are also licensed by the state
so there's no bunk beds allowed so we just have five that's the only amount of people we could
hold in this space it's two bedrooms and the uh perter square footage two go in one and three go
in the other okay and then so it's shared shared bedrooms and bathroom facilities yes it's uh two
bathrooms uh uh it's two full bathrooms and two bedrooms correct ma'am okay and then in terms of
just like living space are they able to occupy the first floor when it's not in community use
yeah it's their space uh anyway but we just call it the community room
and then are there staff on site 24 7 yes ma'am
and then are there staff on site 24 7 yes ma'am i have a quick question uh so in the time that
you had the uh the last uh variants has there been any incidences um um from the community
perspective any complaints at the community no we haven't had any instances um the only one thing
we did have a young lady had a seizure that was medical but the community love us we give our food
twice a week um from shop right give us meats and breads and so the community absolutely love us it
was 30 community members at this rco meeting so we haven't had no instances with the letters you
know why not prospect uh heaps of type ship bar as point systems and violations or rules and things
of that nature so like i said we've been here 23 years and we've graduated uh thousands of
women's from this house.
Other questions
from the board?
Questions or comments from our
attorney? No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the
virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have a hand up from Charles Richardson.
I have allowed them to speak.
I'm Mr. Richardson.
There will be
rejoining as panelists shortly.
Mr. Richardson
There we are
Mr. Chair, hi, Charles Richardson
Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass
Room 508 City Hall
Councilwoman is
supportive of the
granting of the variance
Thank you
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any free of our hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
While the property is currently indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan,
there are insufficient social services to meet residents' needs in this area.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission has no objection to the granting of the request of variance.
MI 2024-007-253-717 East Cheltenham Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Hi, Owen, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
See you this afternoon.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the audience?
No, Chair, do not take any further of their hands.
All right, thank you.
See everybody at 2 p.m., except our counsel, probably.
I think so, yes.
good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this meeting of the
philadelphia zoning with me is our board member charlotte l gaston present mr chair or board
member tenetta graham present mr chair our board member michael johns present mr chairman our
board member tya winn as it mr president is hillary emerson our attorney and our board
director, Ian Haggerty. Also, here is our board administrator, Lakeisha Dandy. Recording in this
hearing will be posted on the ZBA website. By participating, you consent to be recorded. This
is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities. Whether remote or in person, if you're called to
speak, you must state and spell your name and then wait to be sworn in. Once you've been sworn in,
please state your name each time before beginning your testimony. Any person may enter an appearance
to become an interested party to the case.
There are three ways to enter your appearance.
You can identify the case property address on your Zoom webinar.
You can see a staff member, or you can call the ZBA appearance line
by the close of business tomorrow.
Call 267-270-5548.
Leave a message that includes your email address
and the address of the property of the appeal.
The following guidance is for remote attendees.
First, when directed by the chair, you must raise your hand in order to be recognized to speak.
Second, if you're called to testify, you will be prompted to join as a panelist.
Please accept the request and turn it in on your camera.
Third, the webinar Q&A is for questions about the hearing.
Do not comment on cases in the Q&A.
Fourth, if you're participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute.
For our in-person attendees, please refrain from talking, eating, drinking during the hearings.
Verbal and physical aggression will not be tolerated.
restrooms are across from the elevator water fountain is just outside the room to the right
Restrooms are across from the elevator.
Water fountain is just outside the room to the right.
when speaking on the record you must speak directly into the microphone
in order to be heard by all attendees
in the event of emergency please follow the directions given over the public address system
or by the staff the main exit is through the double doors at the rear of the room the nearest
steer well is to the left outside the doors. In case of evacuation, the rally point is Love Park
directly across Art Street. Please remain there so we can account for you. Let's look at our schedule.
number four mi 2024 zero zero three nine two seven fifty three forty four
5344 ray street this case is continued it will be continued to 9 10 25 at 2 p.m number six
MI 2024-004-374, this case will be, Vern Anastasio will come in and request a continuance.
Vern Anastasio has been about to speak, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Fern, you've already been sworn.
Could you give us an update, please, on 1427 Diamond?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
We are in the process of negotiating with the RCO.
We're very close.
We have one more meeting, so my apologies to ask for yet another continuance.
But I do need to do that to button this baby up.
Thank you.
So 1427 Diamond Street will be continued to 9-10-25.
Thank you.
Right.
And then number 10.
MI 2024-006-066-1921 West Norris Street. This case has been continued to 9-10-25.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Handel.
be your calls for the session. I do not see any hands raised at this time for continuances.
Thank you.
We're going to our add-on list. MI 2024-006-883-219-25 Cecil B. Moore Avenue.
I vote yes with provisos. Her refusal dated 3-14-25. Revised plans, two pages,
stamped by ZBA, March 26, 2026. Maximum 15... Excuse me. I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. That should
have been April 2nd since today's April 2nd, 2025. Oh, okay. On April 2nd, 2026. 25. 25.
Okay. Maximum
15 dwelling units. The new min overlay district
applicant acknowledgement form must be reused by the planning commission
prior to the permit and interior trash storage for both
commercial and residential uses.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with provisors. Cheryl Gaston,
my vote is yes with provisors. Tynetta Graham, my vote is yes with provisors.
I win. My vote is yes with Proviso.
Number two, MI 2024-007-329-1102-204-East Columbia Avenue.
I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tannetta Graham, my vote is yes.
I win. My vote is yes.
Number three.
Excuse me, Chair. I'm sorry. This is the reporter.
Could I ask Member Gaston to repeat her vote, please?
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Can you hear me?
I do now.
Thank you.
Number three, 2024-007-379-4913 to 15 Frankfort Avenue.
My vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
ION, my vote is yes.
And number four, MI 2024, 005-747-3513 North 23rd Street.
005 747 3513 north 23rd street the resulting resumption hearing for this matter has been
rescheduled to wednesday may 14th at 2 p.m don't worry what's the first uh pro say do you have the
number i don't think we have any on the 2 p.m list yep you can go in order okay
number one mi 2024 001 867 1112 roy street rachel pritzker is the attorney
no council
um could you please state your name and spell for the slump
for it. Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Could you identify your client,
a relationship to the property? Yes. My client is Phoenix Multisport, Inc. And joining with me
today in person is their Philadelphia manager, Lauren Johnston. And online, we have our CEO,
Scott Strode, and our Signature Events Senior Manager, Chris Bellina.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal, and do you agree with secrecy?
Have all your documents been sent in five days prior?
Please share your screen and start.
See my screen?
This is a little bit of a trick doing it in person.
Okay. So this is 112 Roy Street, which is going to be, it's really five parcels that we're
consolidating to one. So it's 112 to 20 Roy Street. And we're proposing a consolidation of
those lots. And then for use as assembly and entertainment gymnasium with eight off street
parking spaces. You'll notice that on the refusal, the zoning district is I2. You'll see when I show
the zoning maps that it's rm1 there was an accidental remapping of this parcel that's
being corrected i believe next month so it is going to be i2 and it will stay i2 but
just want to address that when you see some of the documents on the zoning page are different
the only refusal that we have for this project is for the use which again is assembly and
entertainment gymnasium, which is not permitted in I-2. I'm going to skip forward to
this is the zoning map of the property. As I mentioned, it's coming up as
um rm1 but it is i2 and as you can see this is sort of an irregularly shaped parcel
um it basically is uh these four lots here and then we're consulting with this large lot where
there's an existing warehouse before i go through um the hardship argument i'm going to just show
you the property and then explain the use of the structure and the organization behind it and then
go through hardship and have the architects come on as you can see aerially again pretty large
parcel it's on the corner of roy street and north 11th street this is a good aerial just showing
you the existing structure it's going to be a partial demo of this structure but it's mostly
going to be a reuse of the existing structure that we're keeping and used for two levels for
the gymnasium space this is the exterior of the property it's been vacant since the last permit
on the properties from 2002 so and it was a warehouse and storage use at that time it hasn't
had any permits pulled in the last over 20 years this is the first submission so talk about a
little bit the hardship on the industrial side and the industrial zoning but it's mostly surrounded
by commercial light industrial and mixed use as well more zoning posters just to show the size and
scale of this. Then go down. Just all the posters. I just to show some exterior and
interior photos. Again, this is a two story. It's 36 feet warehouse. It's about 6000 a
little over 6000 square feet, the warehouses and then the land is a little over 11000
um the warehouses and then the land is a little over 11 000 square feet once consolidated
thousands per feet at once.
just so you can kind of see it from the street
and then just some interior photos of this space also mentioned the zoning permit additional photos
inside and then i mentioned the prior permit which was granted by this board a variance
granted by this board for the use at that time back in 2002 so it just shows that there's been
since at least the last 20 some odd years a need for variance is granted for the use of
this site based on its zoning classification this site is going to be used by the phoenix
which they are not only going to be the tenant but they're the owners of the building as well
i want to share a little bit about their organization before i discuss the hardship
And also, it's worth mentioning that right across the street at 1052-54 Royce Street, this board granted a variance for the same use.
For assembly and entertainment, we're doing a gymnasium.
They did a nightclub.
We're not doing a nightclub.
But just to show that this is not out of character with the neighborhood as well.
And that was a CMX 2 parcel.
The Phoenix is a national nonprofit organization established in 2006.
And they basically provide different life fitness, wellness events, yoga, community outreach, different programming with both their organization and in partnership with other organizations and communities all over the country.
They've been in Philadelphia, correct me if I'm wrong, since 2017.
And they have about 85 volunteers here and have helped, I think, what, 15,000 individuals in their time here.
This is going to be their first brick and mortar in Philadelphia.
This is not their first experience with Philadelphia.
They're doing some projects in the 4th Councilmanic District, working in collaboration with other community groups as well.
So they're not really new to Philly.
This is just the first time they're going to establish an actual location here.
Different than other organizations that help with people who struggle with substance abuse and are in recovery from addiction, this is not a clinic or a treatment center.
this is a substance-free gym with an organization that provides group fitness boxing line dancing
rock gyms and activities like that there's no medical treatment there's no needle exchange
this is a substance-free gym and we'll go through the architectural plan so you'll see that
i think a lot of the confusion around this project which i'll talk about briefly was
just related to not understanding that this is a substance-free gym this is not a clinic this is not
something worth any kind of medical treatment. And I think that given what's been going on in
our city and across the country, organizations like this that are bringing this sort of positive
change into neighborhoods, cleaning up a blighted warehouse and offering a substance-free space
with sort of productive activities like this should be welcome. I just want to be really
clear again, this is a sober community. This is led by volunteers. They're already in Philadelphia
since 2017 and this is not a treatment center it's not a detox center we're applying for use
for a gymnasium just to show some of the community activities that they do and then
we also just included some of the outreach that we did and just this brief presentation
just to show the kind of activities and community engagement that this organization does and the
The sober component is just that they require that anybody that wants to use their facility is free from drugs and alcohol for at least 48 hours.
They have people trained there to make sure that they can identify those individuals and help people.
But it's not their mission to help with any kind of medical, but just keep a safe and sober environment for people who want to engage in athletic activities and community activities around folks who may have similar ideas.
so this is a little bit about them i want to just um if we can promote our architects uh briefly
that's evan from low design i'm going to just go through the hardship a little bit here and then
he'll go through the presentation for the architectural side so to find an unnecessary
hardship for use variants we're arguing that there are unique unique physical circumstances
and conditions, such as the irregularity of the size and shape of the lot, which we discussed
earlier, that cannot be inconforming with the code. Also, given the physical characteristics
of the existing warehouse, and also just the base zoning of I-2, the ability to use this
in a medium industrial manner, given the vacancy, the size and scale, the lack of location near
any kind of ports or transportation has made it so it's sat for now 20 years with no active
with no active uses on the space. It's an 11,000 square, a little over 11,000 square
uses on the space. It's an 11,000 square, a little over 11,000 square for parcel.
foot parcel with a 6,200 square foot building. And the other important component of this,
which I'll discuss the community outreach stuff was that, you know, there is protections under
the Americans with Disabilities Act for organizations and individuals who are who
struggle with substance abuse and have a substance abuse disorder to make sure that there's no
discrimination, both from the zoning and other perspective as far as allowing them to work and
be organized in the community. And this is a kind of space where that is exactly what the Phoenix
does. They help support these kind of individuals as long as they are sober. So I just want to
Evan Lippin from Low Design. They've been about to speak. Thanks, Evan. Can you share your screen
and just go through the plans
briefly. Hi, Evan. Could you please
first state your name and spell for the
stenographer? Sure. It's
Evan Litvin. That's L-I-T
V-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Please
proceed, counsel. Evan,
are you able to pull the plans up and just
go through them? Yes.
Thank you.
Okay. Well, thanks, Rachel.
and thank you to the board. I will give a brief presentation or brief description of the project,
as Rachel mentioned. Start here. As Rachel mentioned, we are consolidating five parcels
into one. The building will include a level three alteration to the existing building on the site.
And as Rachel mentioned, the only refusal in this project is for the proposed use as a gym
and community space with eight accessory parking spaces, including one accessible space.
The building is in shell condition today and requires a significant amount of work to stabilize
it. While the building is in rough shape, this project will not only bring it back to life as
a piece of Philadelphia industrial history, it will now include an active use. The project will
include a significant masonry restoration, new windows, and storefront including along the full
extent of each street frontage on Roy and 11th Street. It includes an outdoor landscaped courtyard
including several murals. There will be ample exterior lighting. Signage will be part of a
future zoning submission. We're not going to discuss that today. And trash will be stored
inside and removed by a commercial service. The interior will maintain many of the industrial
elements of the project, including exposed brick and structure. These spaces will be repurposed
to include an open gym space, yoga studio, a lounge, and various gathering spaces,
locker facilities, multi-purpose spaces, small offices, and other ancillary spaces.
The Phoenix is making a significant investment in this building and location, taking on a complex restoration project.
When completed, this project will both preserve a unique piece of this neighborhood's history while repurposing it for a much needed highly beneficial use that will bring vibrancy to this block of Roy and 11th Street.
And I'm just wanting to share a few renderings to give a sense of what the interior will look like once completed.
This is the main interior gym space. We'll be creating a small double height space
within the existing structure to get a sense of the new entrance
and the investment that will go into windows and masonry.
There will be much improved street frontage and street presence with eyes on the street and a
clear, active use and transparency, and the landscape courtyard that will be used for
various uses ranging from exercise to other group activities.
And I will leave it right there. Thank you. I just want to make sure if the board has any
questions for the architects. Why don't we wait to see at the end of your presentation and we'll
see what kind of questions i have okay um i'm gonna just um re-share my screen to just go through
so we met with um the nice town table improvement team back in may and we did a virtual meeting with
them um and sent out notices to everybody who lived within 250 feet of the property on the
same block and they authored us two days later a letter uh three yeses and two nos at that meeting
there's three yeses and two no's at that meeting i was present um lauren was present or chris was
i was present
present um and the only concern was that um there was a neighbor on the call who was sitting with
another neighbor who wanted to ask some questions in person so they asked us would you have another
meeting because there was low turnout you know um to to answer some questions we said no problem
that meeting um was supposed to be an informal q a as per the emails um it was not supposed to be a
formal meeting as there was no notice then i would have sent formal notice for a second meeting
i also was not in attendance at that meeting because it was an informal q a and i didn't think
that the attorney needed to show up for an informal q a between what will hopefully be a very uh well
respected community partner and the community um and they ended up not only uh and the rco was not
supposed to attend that meeting, they not only ended up attending that meeting, they
ended up authoring a whole new letter for that meeting and bringing people to sign a
petition in opposition of this. The letter that they, the petition that they sent, which
I have emails going back and forth, you couldn't read half the names, there was no addresses,
there was no signatures, so I couldn't verify if the people that attended this meeting had
even been in the community, where they came from, you know, so we could make sure if they
were not getting mail or whatever. And again, like I said, I wasn't there because it was
supposed to be an informal Q&A. After that meeting, our organization decided to author a new letter
that they submitted to the council office with 24 people and opposed and one yes. And as you can see
on the screen, was the Q&A meeting with the near neighbors scheduled? We did. We told them when it
was going to be scheduled and made sure that we knew that this was going to be no formal notice.
This was a Q&A with the near neighbors to ask more questions about it after we had a yes
vote and support. After they got that letter, I wrote them and said, hey, listen, there's a lot
of inaccuracies in this letter. First of all, saying that I was there. Second of all, you guys
weren't supposed to even be a part of this. And they said, oh, no, we're just authoring the letter.
Your team is the ones that told us all this information. Well, obviously, that was not the
case. And we tried to go back and forth. Instead, where we kind of got nowhere, we decided to hold
a couple other informal meetings with people who really did want to know more about how we were
going to work together, answer concerns that they had. And really, the only opposition was them
thinking that this was going to incite more drug activity, that this was going to invite more
people to come to the neighborhood, as opposed to really understanding that the mission of this
is to provide a substance free space. This is not a clinic. There's no medical anything going on
here. And as of right now, I've been to this property probably 15 times going back and forth
with them through this. There's a ton of drug activity going on there now. And this is a blighted
building with no fencing and no lighting, and it's not cleaned up. So I don't know that it's,
I'm not an expert in these facilities to say that it wouldn't bring people there, but there's no way
it would be at the level that they're thinking. And instead, it would provide a safe environment
where people could go and people 18 and older could go if they needed a safe space as well.
And all the lighting and security and the investment that they're providing, I think,
will do almost the exact opposite, hopefully. I just included the petition so that you could see