Yes, it is.
It's a fence right across from us, and that fence is right there.
So you can see in conjunction for our fence and theirs, theirs is here close to the intersection,
and ours is all the way back to the side yard of our property.
We wanted to make sure that when we put up the fence that it would not obstruct pedestrians or sight lines for cars.
And here is a picture of the intersection to show you the distance from the fence.
I'm standing on my sunport steps to show you the distance from the fence to the intersection.
So when cars are approaching, here is the sign where you can't park here.
And here are the lines where you can't park there.
So all of that is unobstructed for sight lines as well as walking purposes.
And here is the intersection showing cars coming to the corner.
And it shows that the fence has no obstruction to that.
All right. Questions from the board.
I guess I don't have a comment. I guess I don't have a comment. I guess it's not really a question.
I understand your your concern and all the things that you raised.
um i guess i'm just it just it it this is my own opinion i think the fence takes away from
the neighborhood completely um i just i just do if i look at the fence that your neighbor put up
right next to you it's it's a estate fencing it is very attractive um it it keeps the quality of
these these lawns um in the neighborhood so just and that's just my opinion i think that i think it
it takes away from the quality of the neighborhood other questions that's just my opinion
other comments comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair comments uh
from the virtual audience mr chad do not see any hands raised for the commission
Commission thank you chairman and good morning David Fecto with the city planning Commission
thank you chairman and good morning David Fecto with the city planning commission
chairman and board members
chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsd3 residential
single-family detached zoning at this location the city rezoned this neighborhood in 1967
in a council supported map change the appellant built defense without the benefit of permits
that does not meet the height and opacity standards in the zoning code the appellant has not shown
that they would suffer an economic detriment if forced to comply with the standards in the code
the city planning commission recommends the board deny the proposed dimensional variances
thank you MI 2025 000-592-2296 Bryn Mawr Avenue I vote yes I'm Michael John my vote is no
Cheryl Gaston my vote is yes Tana Graham my vote is yes Ryan McAdams my vote is yes
uh you have your votes thank you so much we really appreciate you all thank you thank you
Number six, MI2025, 000622, 6441 North 20th Street.
David Darcer Villarreal is the attorney for the owner.
Let's see here.
Chair, I have a hand up from Luis Castillo.
Do I allow him to speak briefly to see if they're wrong with the case?
no that's an expediter but why don't we see if we get unless the owners with the expediter
I'm about to speak briefly
Luis Castillo please unmute yes I'm here can you hear me is the is the is the owner there
I am the applicant the attorney is the attorney there yeah I know the applicant I'll be hard to
mr ramon jackets he's the owner of the program sir i i need the attorney there's we have an
attorney listed for the owner you don't have the attorney listed in the in this case
we have the owner
all right then put the own put the owner it's kenny put the owner on please yes sir mr justice
is Ramon
Ramon yes could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer
we're having difficulty hearing can we can you please turn on the video so we can see Mr. Vasquez
let me promote tomorrow real quick i'm sorry okay thank you
i'll be coming back in as a panel shortly
the next one
okay i could be is the who is the owner in the uh orange shirt yes could you please state your
name sir and spell for the stenographer hold hold on no no no
Now, you can't do that, right?
I mean, if he needs an interpreter, we'll have to get him an interpreter.
Perfect.
And Luis Castillo, L-U-I-S?
Now, answer my question.
Can he understand or do we need an interpreter?
He needs an interpreter because he doesn't speak English.
He understands?
No, he doesn't.
He doesn't do.
All right.
So this case is going to be continued.
And we'll have to have an interpreter the next time, all right?
So this case has continued to 6, 10, 26 at 9.30 a.m.
And Mr. Castillo, previously an attorney appeared on behalf of Mr. Vasquez.
Is he no longer retaining an attorney?
We can contact the attorney for the next time if you want it, if you need it.
Well, did he, has he retained an attorney?
Is he paying someone to represent him in this case as an attorney?
yes okay well then the attorney if he's doing that the attorney is the one that needs to appear
okay yes thank you thank you number seven mi 2025 000 6299 34 65 north third street joseph
Vaccaro is the attorney.
I'll be back in another panel shortly, Mr. Chair.
I'll be back to another time that's shortly, Mr. Chair.
Good morning. Can you see and hear me?
And counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes. Good morning. May it please the board. My name is Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O, attorney for the applicant, Francisco Rosario.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
RCO is in non-opposition, and also the council member is in non-opposition. Our vice chair has a few questions, Mr. Vaccaro.
Thank you.
good morning have you uh submitted your documents and exhibits five days in advance of this hearing
yes with the exception of the tax clearance um we anticipate uh being able to submit a tax
clearance certificate if not later this afternoon this week is that okay okay in that case we'll
need to hold this this we can hear it but we can hold it for we'll need to hold it until we receive
the tax clearance in terms of having a vote much appreciated okay and do you waive the reading of
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes okay thank you you can share your screen and proceed
with your case thank you very much uh just let the record reflect that i have uh mr francisco
rosario he's sitting uh right next to me in the office where i am um can you see it's coming up
now yeah we have okay so you see what uh the screenshot of the property from yep no no i see
the city of philadelphia property yep right city of philadelphia property okay so if i could start
the um the presentation um my client owns this property um and it's a it's technically an empty
property it's a vacant lot technically um and that's why i'm showing you on the first three
pages. Going back to 2015, there's no improvement on the property. It's an empty lot. The property
is approximately 840 square feet with a 14-foot frontage zoned as RM1. Here's a satellite
view of where the property is, so I could zoom in. It's on the far north block. It's
It's on the far north of the block, of the 3400 block of North Third Street, just south of the Amtrak line.
That's the Amtrak line with Glenwood Avenue, just south of Tayoga.
It's the second lot in from the corner.
The property on the corner, which is owned by Luz Ramos, she participated at the RCO meeting, and she was in support of my client's application.
By way of history, this property was sold in 2019 by way of sheriff sale to Alberto Caro, and then Mr. Caro sold the property to Luz Caldozila in 2020, and in 2022, Francisco had purchased the property from Luis Caldozila.
I've included those deeds in my packet. I'm showing where the property is. Here's a screenshot of the property. It's right behind the tree, at least as of when the Google people took the photograph.
Here's another view of when the Google people took the photograph, the stop sign where my cursor is floating here. That's Glenwood Avenue. And then you have abandoned factories and the Amtrak line going further to the left.
Here's the refusal.
Here are the proposed plans.
Here's a picture.
My client had put up the gate to the building, and I have some other photographs which I could show you as I proceed with the presentation.
My cursor is over the neighboring property, that's Luz's property, who was in support of my client's plan.
With the application for appeal, if I could just scroll down.
Here are the deeds that I had described.
And when my client had purchased the property, here's the gate that I was describing.
Another view of the gate.
And the purpose of this application, yes, the refusal and the application describes a garage.
Under no circumstances does my client want to use this property to store any vehicles.
to store any vehicles uh there's no there is no curb cut there's no intention to put in a curb
There is no curb cut.
There's no intention.
cut this is the neighboring property this is loses neighboring property she uses it
basically as a backyard where she stores her vehicles um
he's a francisco was in the metal work business uh he has a he has a shop at 3006 north 6th street
It's about a mile away. If you make a left at the intersection of 3rd and Glenwood, make a left on Glenwood, make another left onto 6th Street, and just north of 6th and Indiana is where my client's metal shop is.
He has a lot of metal, a lot of equipment, and a lot of materials.
His intention is to legalize the use of this property for materials and equipment and tools.
I'm showing you some of the materials and equipment inside his property.
Here's a view of the inside.
Another view of the inside looking out towards Third Street.
He had put up these two plywood doors after he had purchased the property.
here's a view of the back alley he's not encroaching onto the back alley
here's another view of the back alley that trash is not on his property
here's a view of the back alley looking towards glenwood avenue and again and again this is
loses property my cursor is over loses property with the fence and the and the short wall
This is looking south, along with the other photographs. So he's not doing any work on the property. He doesn't plan on doing any work on the property. The work hours and work days are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and all the work, all the metal work is being done at 3006 North 6th.
Any work is done off site. This particular site on 3rd Street is strictly for storage of materials and equipment and tools. So all he's doing is going to the property, dropping off, picking up and moving on his way.
He's not parking any of his vehicles on the block. He's not parking any of the vehicles, any of his vehicles on the site, in the site, none of that. He's not doing any of the work there either. Everything is being done either at his customers' homes, or at his customer sites, or at his shop on 6th Street.
As was indicated, we have a letter of support. I'm sorry, we have a letter of non-opposition from ASEE. There was a question of water runoff, which is going into 3424, the neighboring property to the south.
Obviously, if the board were to grant this variance for the use, my client is still going to have to go back to L&I to submit for the appropriate permits to build a more appropriate structure with the appropriate water runoff and water drainage system so that any issues on that neighboring property could be remediated and alleviated.
There was also a question about waste disposal. My client has a commercial services agreement with Metropolitan Waste Systems. I'm showing you their agreement. It's a one-page agreement. And again, any waste is not being generated at this property on 3rd Street. Any and all waste is being generated at and disposed of from his 6th Street property.
It's being billed at 3006 North 6th.
Yes, there's a related property on 3rd Street, but he's not doing any work there.
We have the letter of non-opposition from ASE.
And again, as it's a fair summary of the RCO meeting where my client participated, lose the neighboring property to the north.
She voiced her support.
We discussed the water runoff.
We had also discussed the waste management and the fact that my client's not doing any work, nor does he plan on doing any work or storage of his vehicles on the property in question at Third Street.
on the property in question at third street um he put up the posters
He put up the poster.
and i have francisco sitting to my i have francisco sitting to my right francisco did you
hear my my presentation yeah did you do joe joe joe joe mr remember i have to swear him in right
oh yes you do sure sir could you please state your name as bill for the stenographer
take your name francisco rosario and you could you spell it please for the stenographer
the last name is r-o-r-a-r-i-o joe could he do it one more time simply because i'm not sure
their stenographer heard the first part can you spell it again okay the name my name is francisco
all right thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
do you swear to tell the truth yeah council please proceed okay did you hear my presentation
to the board yeah is it the truth yeah and would you adopt it as your own if you were going to
testify okay did you hear his answers yes to all three questions we did okay uh mr rosario
mr rosario how many workers do you have two and there's all the work being done on sixth street
correct and how many vehicles do you have and the vehicles do you store them on sixth street yeah
okay do you store any vehicles on third street this property do you store any vehicles on this
property not on this property do you do any work on this property no does it have any electric no
no no okay any plumbing no okay and um if the board were to give you this variance you're gonna
fix up the building and make the building right so that there's not going to be any water runoff
and it's going to be a proper building in accordance with the codes right yeah okay
mr vicario have you talked to the person next door that owns the property that we're talking
about the runoff we we haven't spoken with that person but it's it's our understanding that um
that uh that person uh that that person was discussed at the rco meeting and that's how
it got mentioned all right questions from the board so how are you getting the you say you're
not using it for the business but how are you getting the materials that are stored in there
to the property you're bringing it by truck or how are you doing correct correct he pulls up the
truck he pulls up the truck they park the truck temporarily they drop off whatever they need to
drop off they pick up whatever they need to pick up and then they're on their way so you use this
property is basically an adjunct to the business is that storage okay I could show you if I could
stop sharing this they have another picture from Google Maps bear with me
do you see a google maps uh screen it should come up in a minute okay okay you see it yeah we see it
okay so if i could zoom in a bit where the red dot is this is his property on sixth street
so this is the vertical is six the horizontal is indiana so that's his property where he does
his work that's his workshop um i'm going against the flow of traffic but we go up
make a right up Glenwood and here's third street the property that's the subject of this appeal
where my cursor is so that's where my my earlier in my presentation you go up toward Glenwood make
a left make another left down sixth and here it is it's 0.8 miles
and if you want to go the Allegheny the Allegheny Avenue route it's 0.9 miles
okay thank you thank you questions yeah so what's happening with the rest of the yard with the rest
of the lot well if the rest of the lot doesn't belong to him the rest of the lot belongs to
lose ramos uh she's using it as her backyard for her business um let me see here if i could
the structure covers the whole lot that one story structure covers the whole this whole parcel no
no no no let me go back to let me go back to the screen sharing of the photos that we took
of this lot. We're not encroaching on her property. We're not using her property for anything.
We're not encroaching on her property.
We're not using her property for anything.
Nope, not this one.
Nope, not this one.
So that's the front of your property.