three previous units.
The existing unfinished basement will remain. No living space will be in the basement.
Here's a view of the project. The first floor will be roughly 750 square feet of
living space with two bed, two bath. The second and third floors will be one unit,
1,500 square feet with five bedrooms and four baths. The reduction from triplex to duplex and
the large family-friendly unit sizes were some of the reasons why the community supported the
project at the RCO meeting. Returning to the refusal, I just want to point out we're seeking
used as a two-family dwelling in the single-family zoning district, and the prior usage was as a
triplex. The refusal even notes the CBA-granted approval for the triplex at this property
in 1953. The interior layout preexisted as three units, and the owner seeks to reduce density from
three to two units to be more in line with the neighborhood, and that is another major reason
why the RCO was in support of this variance. In order to obtain this variance, the applicant must
prove hardship, no detriment to public health, safety, and welfare, and the least minimum variance
is requested. Clients' application here does meet this standard for variance relief. The
unnecessary hardship here are the unique physical conditions of this small, narrow lot with the
existing three-story structure, with the dilapidated condition of the property when
purchased and due to these conditions and due to the need for extensive expensive interior
renovation the variance is required for economically viable use of the property
the interior living area is also too big to rent as a single family unit in this area
granting this variance will not be detrimental to the public health
welfare or impair adjacent property, nor will it alter the neighborhood, which has already
changed from a single family to a commercial and multifamily residential mix.
Again, as I noted before, there are multifamily residences throughout the area,
north on north 20th over those commercial properties, and south along the block on north
20th with multiple units, multiple satellite dishes, and multiple buzzers. The hardship to
the property cannot be cured by grants of the dimensional variance. This is the least minimum
variance. It has a de minimis impact of two units instead of one, which is still less dense.
it has a de minimis impact of two units instead of one which is still less dense than the prior
zoning for a triplex at this property therefore we believe the client meets the criteria for
variance relief and we would request you grant the variance for two-family dwelling at this property
as i stated the rco and neighbors supported the project and several neighbors in support
of the project are also in attendance should the board wish to hear from them
As I stated, we had no opposition from the RCO or the community and did not receive a letter.
That concludes my presentation. If the client could be called on.
Sure. Why don't we call your client and have your testimony adopted?
Thank you. Tammy, will you raise your hand?
Ms. Love, please unmute yourself.
Am I unmuted?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Tamara Love, T-A-M-A-R-I-A, Love, L-O-V-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Ms. Love, did you hear my testimony?
Do you agree that it's true to the best of your knowledge and belief?
And would you adopt it as your own?
And Ms. Love, just briefly, can you describe your connection to the neighborhood for the
board?
I grew up in a neighborhood.
I just recently moved, but I grew up in a neighborhood.
All of my family still lives in a neighborhood, and I do own several other properties in a
neighborhood.
Thank you, Ms. Love.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
This property is indicated for residential on the city plan, given its documented use history and physical site conditions.
We recommend the request of your hands to be ready.
Thank you.
MI 2022-006109-2356 North 20th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
We'll move on to number six.
MI 2022-006045, 5 East Chestnut Hill Avenue.
Vern Adestasio is the attorney.
We have a letter of support from Chestnut Hill Community Association,
which was the coordinating RCO.
letter of support from Chestnut Hill Conservatory with provisos. And Mr. Anastasio, we're ready to
go. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, 2016 Spruce, Philadelphia, 19103. Right. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify
your clients and the relationship to the property? Yeah. For today, I represent Ms. Kim Dukes,
who's one of the owners of the property in question. Okay. Our vice chair has just a few
questions for you, sir. Thank you. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree with the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to his accuracy? I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and
exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing everything has been emailed
thank you please proceed to share your screen thanks 5 east chestnut hill avenue
rather straightforward proposal here uh what we're asking for is the construction of a detached
structure which would basically be a carriage house that would house a single family dwelling
above three interior parking spaces. This is a larger parcel in at the top of the hill at
Chested Hill. We've gotten three refusals. First, because there's more than one principal building
allowed on the lot. Second is a side yard, and I'll explain to you why we can't meet the seven
feet, but we're pretty close at five feet four. And the use is multifamily. The property has
historically been multi-families, six families, five families, plus commercial. We initially
asked for four in total, three in the main house, one at the new structure. We've reduced that now
to just two in the main house, one in the new structure. So we're closer to compliance with
just three units. So let me pull out here and show you what we're talking about. This is Germantown
Avenue here on the left. Here's the existing home. Here are some photos of the existing home.
Here's the existing home. Here's some photos of the existing home.
And this is the rendering of what we're proposing, the carriage house that will house three car garages at the bottom and one family dwelling above.
There's some more renderings from the driveway entering the property.
as you can see here looking from chestnut hill hospital
here is the property in question there's the entire lot
here's the hospital here's our mother of consolation parish church
this is the property here's germantown avenue here's east chestnut hill
here's the church here's any immediate neighbor that is set all the way back here on germantown
Avenue. But the dentist, we've got the hospital parking garage. As you all know, Germantown Avenue
is a commercial mixed-use property street. This is the lot again. And here is what we're proposing
right here is the structure that will be standalone. Again, first floor will be 1,148
square feet three car garage and one dwelling unit above property as you can see is zoned rsd3
here's the landscaping proposal that we presented before the board i'm sure you know in
chestnut hill there are five separate meetings that we go through with the community to make
sure that all concerns are addressed. One of them was appropriate greening. We are over-stimulating
this site, over-landscaping it to make sure that there is appropriate buffers.
Again, here's the house. Here's the proposed structure. Now, this structure that we're
proposing actually will replace something that was already there. Historically, there was
approximately 1,500 square foot barn that sat here on the site for many, many years. It ultimately
was either fell down or torn down, but here's proof of that through the historic photos that
we have. So there was, in fact, a structure on the site that served for parking, I suppose,
horses at the time, but there was a barn right there at the site for a very long time. We're
just replacing it moving it closer to the property line here's the interior car one car two car three
some storage a foyer and going upstairs to the one family dwelling
here are some renderings some side
and here are some other photos existing gravel markings now as a matter of right if we wanted
to build something. We could, as a matter of right, subdivide this property today and build a large
2,568 square foot building allowed by right and put residential and maybe some parking and something
like that. That's not necessarily anything we want to do. We just wanted to show you what could
be built as a matter of right when it comes to crowding that space. That's not what we're
interested in. We are interested in, again, some off-street parking spots here and the
structure that will house one family dwelling.
Let's take a look at some of the history. As you can see, dating all the way back,
we've got five units and an owner's studio and an office. We even have at some point six family
dwelling and two doctor's offices. All of this is historic. As far as housing a single-family house,
there's nothing on record that shows that this lot ever housed a single-family home. In fact,
we had, as a matter of right, a five-family dwelling in the main house. Here's two doctor's
offices and six family dwelling. I'm going back to 1967. I'm submitting today an exhibit packet
totaling 109 pages. In addition to the 109 pages, I've also submitted under separate cover
to the zoning board an additional five pages for a total of 114 pages of exhibits today.
and let's get down to we did in fact meet with the community
and met with them five times as a matter of fact uh per the protocols of the chest
I met with them five times, as a matter of fact, per the protocols of the Chestnut Hill Community Association.
Here were the public meetings, and we invited the public to everything.
We do have proof of mailing, which is right here.
34 individual households were mailed on December 6th of 2022, inviting them to all the different
meetings. And as a result, Chestnut Hill Community Association sends a letter of support with
some provisos, and we can talk about them. We have David Richardson, who is an immediate
neighbor also sending an email of support. We've got 8724 Germantown Avenue signing in support.
We've got Tia Burke, another immediate neighbor, 12 East Chestnut Hill Avenue in support.
8836 germantown avenue in support our mother of consolation parish in support
the chest and hill conservancy in support again with a couple provisors that we can discuss if
you'd like and i'm going to move the other ones into into evidence as well margaret and jim at
2 East Chestnut Hill Avenue, and 41 East Chestnut Hill Avenue.
This exhibit packet also includes the deed, proof of taxes paid, and because the historic
legal use of this parcel has always been five or six family dwelling units with in fact commercial
uses because the proposed carriage house just returns a structure to the lot that once housed
a 1,500-square-foot barn, because through the process, we've secured support from overwhelming
majority of all immediate stakeholders. We respectfully request the granting of this
variance. And with that, I'd like to call Kim Dukes to raise her virtual hand to be recognized.
Ms. Dukes, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
uh yes hello chairman uh bergman uh my name is kim dukes and i am the owner of the property at five
east i could you could you just spell your name please for a court reporter d-u-k-e-s my uh name
as far as the ownership of the property is actually ilgen fritz i-l-g-e-n-f-r-i-t-z but i'm married to
Ian Dukes. He is a co-owner. Sure. And his name is I-A-I-N-D-U-K-E-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Of course, yes. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Dukes, did you hear my presentation to the board this afternoon?
Yes. Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? Yes. You adopted it as your own
testimony? Yes. Mr. Chair, I move all evidence and testimony into evidence and rest my case.
Thank you. Okay. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chair. No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson. Just state your name. I believe I swore you once today.
Yes, sir. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Bass, Room 508 City Hall.
Okay, Councilwoman is in non-opposition to the project, but she is in support of those provisos which are enforceable and agreeable with both parties.
So she's in non-opposition for this case.
Thank you very much for calling it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare. Mr. Chair, I think I should just
clarify the provisos for the record, if you don't mind.
We went over them, but go ahead. You can do it.
The first proviso is the revised plans presented. I'm sure Attorney Emerson will speak more about
that after the vote during the vote uh the total number of units for the entire parcel will be no
more than three two in the main house and one and that's in the revised plans for her revised plans
right uh the third proviso that was suggested is just not something this board nor l and i can
enforce and therefore not something we can sign on to however my client is committed in perpetuity
to ensuring that there are no other,
Other, you know, the open space remains open, but to suggest that this board or we can sign on to a deed restriction for open space would be beyond the reach of this procedure.
you know, the open space remains open.
But to suggest that this board
We've already had that legal advice from our council.
Yep. Thank you.
Okay. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential on the city plan.
Given its documented use history, we recommend the request for variance for granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-006-045, 5 East Chester Hill Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA on March 8th, 2023.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.