Thank you.
No further questions.
Next person, please.
And then I'll give the board a chance to answer.
That makes sense.
And get as close as you can to the mic.
Mr. Chairman, in the interest of brevity, I have Mr. Siegel's resume marked as Exhibit A13.
I'm going to offer him to you as an expert in real estate development.
He has 20 plus years of experience.
He leads the development in Philadelphia in the Mid-Atlantic region for Hines, and he's
currently the president of the Philadelphia chapter for NAIOP, which is the Commercial
Real Estate Development Association in the city.
Thank you.
Mr. Siegel, did you hear my testimony to the board?
And would you adopt and affirm that testimony?
Is it for your own?
And Mr. Segal, I'm correct that your experience extends beyond just Philadelphia in terms of real estate development?
Correct. My experience is up and down the Mid-Atlantic from Philadelphia down to Washington, D.C.
And do you have experience designing commercial office buildings?
Yes, I do.
And do you have an opinion on the importance of the amenities that are associated with new commercial office buildings?
Yeah, the amenities today are critically important to the future success of office.
The amenities today are critically important to the future success of office. We've seen a bifurcation in the value and the use and utility of office buildings. The ones that are not amenitized are the ones that are failing and are ripe for conversion. The ones that are highly amenitized really provide the ability to attract and retain talent to support employers like Chubb and make the decisions to be within the city of Philadelphia.
We've seen a bifurcation.
So you would agree with me that the accessory roof deck, such as the one proposed for the Chubb building, is just as important as any other amenity within the office building?
Correct. I agree.
And based off your 20-plus years of experience in the industry, have you seen the importance of these amenities on accessory buildings evolve over time?
Correct. They started out fairly basic, and the concept of hospitality has merged from hotels into residential and now into office space where people want to find a communal area where they can be together and socialize and create a better work experience.
Again, that helps attract and retain talent, which is critically important to amenities and employers to make their employment and location decisions.
And do you have a professional opinion on the application that's before the board today?
My professional opinion will be to grant the requested variance.
And based off your 20 plus years of experience, do you have an opinion on the hardship that was cited by the applicant for the grant of that variance?
I would agree with the testimony provided that there is hardship based on the impact to potentially change the location of the wall.
um thank you uh kristen same thing mr chairman miss sage's resume is marked as exhibit a10 she's
been before this board on a number of occasions she has 17 years of architecture she'll be offered
as an expert in architectural design we will be brief here kristen did you hear my testimony
to the board uh would you adopt and affirm that testimony as if you're your own yes i would do
you have anything you would like to add to the testimony that i presented to the board
nothing to add okay mr chairman that concludes the questions that i have for my witnesses we
We're happy to answer any questions for the questions from the board.
Good question.
Why did you decide to remove the covering?
Is there a particular reason?
So that, that was a, in conjunction with the long-winded answer.
So we, we, we get the zoning approved in 2022.
That, that is an advance of when we start the tenant design.
So we are getting the approved world before we have Chubb involved.
Once Chubb gets involved, the, the idea is to create the best function and flow of the
space.
So what we found was when we actually put our fingerprints on the design of the building, that the roof deck didn't work as well with that large pergola structure on it.
And the decision was made that it would function better afterward.
And again, all the testimony here in terms of if the deck was an afterthought, we would have kept it not going through all this heartburn.
I can assure you that.
But this is all aimed to provide the greatest new office building for the city of Philadelphia.
And we are happy to go through this process to get there.
It is just an anomaly in the code that is bringing us here.
And I'd argue that there's really no reasonable relationship between moving a pergola and the railings. It's just an anomaly or technicality that's causing us to be here.
Yeah, I have two questions. I'll go ahead, Mike.
No, if you could sum it up, what would you say was the community, the opposition's biggest issue?
I will take blame for it. It was me trying to explain the nuance in the code that really was lost.
them i'm not so sure that um if we had gone in there with an aesthetic reason or some other
reason i we were really i was trying to tell them that it's really an anomaly in the code that's
keeping us here and it really dove the conversation in my opinion into a complex discussion um and
and there were other uh comments that started evolving into the construction of the building
and irrelevant issues and to be honest the meeting really just kind of took a left turn
yeah what were the comments that the rco made in for those that were in opposition for the 13
votes that voted against the project what were their primary concerns uh i i from my perspective
is it was really just not understanding why we were here with the with the nuance in the code
yeah but then they still had to have like a reason that they took opposition right again that that
That was really the sum of the discussion once we were present in the meeting.
Okay, and then at what point was the design decision made to remove the pergola?
Summer of last year.
And it was already approved through building permits?
Correct.
Understood.
And so the plan that we saw today that showed the piers for those concrete piers no longer exist?
No, the piers exist.
What doesn't exist is the pergola structure.
Once you walk out from the piers and the roof, you look up and you look up at the sky.
in 2022 if you walked out and looked up you'd look up at a structure so there was a structure
at the edge of the concrete slab yes all the way to the edge of all the way to the edge of the
occupiable area what uh how deep from the edge of the building is the open air deck now uh two foot
from the setback line it's two feet seven inches and there's an exact inches dimension on the plan
okay so council the real issues too you you had just been to the community
I'm sorry. The last time you were here, right, was last summer. We were here for the special exception. But I'm saying you've been to the community then, too. We were that community then, too. And then you had to come back to me. Yeah. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for actually raising that because it was I'm sure this board will appreciate. We broke this up intentionally because, as the board appreciates, the legal standard for a special exception is dramatically different than that of a variance, even a dimensional variance.
I'm sorry.
The last time you were here, right, was last summer?
We were here for the special.
and it was critical for us that those that those standards not be conflated so we wanted to get
the use of proof through the special exception and we were transparent at that time that we
were going to come back in a two-step process and come back and deal with the dimensional
variance for the railings other questions from the board questions from our attorney
not at this time mr chair questions from the virtual audience or the current audience
yes chair i have a hand up from a amelia maya i have allowed them
hi amelia could you please state your name it's spelled for the sonographer
she'll be rejoining as a panelist shortly
hello can you hear me i'm milia yes could you please state your name and spell yes stenographer
my name is emilia e-m-i-l-i-a and last name is m-a-i-a right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth of course amelia are you a neighbor yes i live
right next door okay please proceed i i am calling because i already oppose uh this change i live
right next door and it's going to impact my roof deck where i have been living for the last 12 years
and i have told the lawyer and the people that were at their meeting that that is going to lead
to more people in the roof deck and that is going to create more noise
to where we actually been living.
And there was a clear argument that we put towards the lawyers
and the people from the building that it was going to turn our ability
to enjoy our roof deck to change that because there's going to be
more people in the roof deck, more noise.
And therefore, we are very much opposed to that.
Amelia, can I ask a question?
Were you opposed to the original deck too?
I wasn't aware of this meeting.
So when I found out, I came right away to that meeting.
I'm saying the original deck when they were here last summer,
were you opposed to that?
I wasn't aware of those meetings at the time.
Thank you very much.
You are very welcome.
You have any questions?
So I do know where the neighbor lives,
over in front of Walden Walk.
Again, I would point out two things. That is on their sides where they have the 62 and a half setback there. I would also point out that when we came before you, we had said that we were in agreement with LS&A on a proviso that there'd be no amplified sound on the deck.
We would be more than willing to trace that or repeat that proviso on the grant of approval here. So we've already gone through the use issues with LS&A. LS&A voted to not oppose this with the proviso. We agreed to the proviso.
So, all right, thank you.
Anyone else in a virtual audience?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon.
David Fechto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from CMX4 to CMX5 commercial mixed use.
The appellant has shown that a roof deck will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected,
and the variance from the setback provisions in the code reflects an existing condition.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant a proposed special exception for a roof deck
and grant a proposed dimensional variance for not complying with the five-foot setback from the front building lock.
Thank you. MI 2024-007-375-2024, Art Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Number two, MI 2024, 002120963 North Lawrence Street.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the Northern Liberties Neighbors Association.
Hillary, we still have a tax issue with this one.
As far as I know, yes.
As far as I know, yes.
We're coming back in a...
We're coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
All right.
There we go.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, counsel.
How are you?
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Richard DeMarco, last name spelled D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Brian Mayberry.
He's on the Zoom, and he's the owner.
You waive the reading of the refusal and agree with its accuracy?
Please share your screen and start your testimony,
and I understand all your exhibits were in within five days.
Am I correct?
For the tax issue, right?
Yeah, I was going to point that out, Mr. Chairman.
Let me get the exhibits up.
The client believes he'll have tax clearance in about two weeks.
We're going to hear it and hold it, okay?
Exactly.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And before I forget, we did revise the plan pursuant to the request of the Northern Liberty
Civic Association.
So we would ask for, we did submit the revised plan proviso form.
We would ask for the revised plan to be approved with two pages stamped by the board.
And I can forward those separately if you need to.
Well, we'll do that after the tax going back.
Of course.
All right.
Thank you.
Exactly.
I'm going to get that in front of you.
All right.
So I want to start with the refusal.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, their dimensional refusals in nature. We're building
two single family, proposing to build two single family homes. The lot is unusual, as I'll show
you in a moment. The variances are lot area for the smaller lot. And what I'll do is I'll refer
to the two homes. One is the larger home and secondly, as the smaller home. For the smaller
home, the refusal is the lot area. But when I show you the survey and you'll see what we started