Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have 33 attendees, and we can start as you wish.
Good morning. My name is Bill Bergman, and I'm only chairing this morning's DBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shaheed.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
President, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
He's here. He's muted, but Jim is here.
Also here is Hillary Emerson, our attorney.
And our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographers, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the address
of the property in question. And lastly, the question and answer box on the screen is not
for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya
something. Let's look at today's continuances. Number two, MI 2022-001-365-9212 Delaware Avenue,
that case is continued. Number six, MI 2022-001-362-9214 Delaware Avenue, that case is
continue. Number seven, MI 2022-001-359-9216 Delaware Avenue. Number nine, MI 2022-006-332-6142.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. This is Hillary. Sorry, 9216 is also continued, correct? Yes. All right,
Thank you. Number nine, MI 2022 006332 6142 Tulip Street. That case is continued. Mark must be
tried. And number 11, MI 2022 001 367 9218 Delver Avenue. That case is continued. Is there anyone
in the audience has comments relative to the continuations that I just announced?
There is one hand up, Jennifer Bazidolo. Good morning. Good morning. Could you state your
name, please, and spell for the court reporter. Sure. My name is Jennifer Bazidlo, B-A-Z-Y-D-L-O.
Right. You swear we're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. Proceed. I just wanted to inform the board that for all of the Delaware Ave
cases 9-2, 1-2 through 18, I will be replacing Mr. Young as counsel as he has moved to a
um, city position, um, and is conflicted out. Thank you very much for, for calling in. We
appreciate that. Thanks. Are there any other requests for continuance?
Yes, there are two other hands up. Uh, Kitty, Tim, I'll have them speak first.
yeah i'll be doing some translation for miss kitty tam so this is for for case zp-2021-009418
that's zero zero nine four one eight well wait wait wait one minute what's the location
location is six one six north 11th street
one nine one two three
that's number yes that's number 13 on the list um we have no exhibits this is the fourth listing
and jeffrey young is listed as the attorney in this matter oh okay yeah so i i think that
wait one minute hillary can we use an interpreter that's not one of our interpreters no
i'm sorry she can't speak english uh if i need you what i want her i would please put her on
and would you please yes hi how are you sir all right do me a favor state your name
and spell for the court reporter my name's kitty 10 k-i-t-t-y last name 10 t-a-m
do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
do you swear to or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes okay so 616 north 11th street this is the fourth listing we have no exhibits
uh so this no no she she has to speak you you can't talk sir
and if she if she needs an interpreter we'll continue which you'll get an interpreter
I'm owner.
I know.
I'm aware.
But what I'm saying is we do not have any hearing.
The paperwork has not come in to us.
And this is Hillary.
Let me just interject here.
The property is also owned in the name of an LLC.
So you would need to be represented by an attorney.
but i also if i also recall that there was a tenant um at this property who is seeking
who's previously seeking the variance is that tenant still still seeking the variance
can yes yeah yeah no miss tam please miss tam is it is that miss miss cherry miss taliba cherry
yeah okay she's she
Go ahead.
Ms. Cherry, is there the tendons?
She read the property.
Was she not able to appear here today?
Or are you seeing the variance for her?
She not today.
So because my language is not very well,
so I will need to translate the help me.
So attorney anyway, right, Hillary? Well, so the property owner would. I'm not sure how the property is being rented, if it's under Miss Cherry's name individually or if she's running it as a business.
She did have legal representation. That was Mr. Young previously. So I suspect she may need an attorney. So I think we will need to continue this matter.
so here we're going to continue this matter the next time it has to be tried if you have any
questions please call the office and they will help you get instructions okay okay so number 13
MI 2021 003 854 616 North 11th Street that case has been continued mark must be tried
Thank you. Are there any other requests for continuance?
Chair, we have a calling user phone number ending in three five five two.
Okay. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter?
Calling user, please unmute yourself.
good morning can you hear me now yeah could you state your name please and spell it for the
court reporter yes adrian fernandez my last name is spelled f-e-r-n-a-n-d-e-z swanford
neighborhood parcels association rco all right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth yes what case this is for 2601 west westmoreland street
we sent a letter in requesting a continuance um the first problem was that uh wait wait
um the first problem was that uh wait wait wait one minute i just want to find it first
one minute i just want to find it first
is it on this morning's list uh miss miss fernandez um are you referring to 1901 west
westmoreland street oh yeah i'm sorry 1901 west westmoreland street all right that's number 10
on the list mr chair um is mr anastasio in the in the courtroom or in the in the on the line
Yes, Chair. Mr. Anastasio, you're unmuted.
Good morning, Chair. Could you spell your name, please, and state it for the court reporter?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Vern Anastasio. That's V-E-R-N. Last name is A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
um could you give any of the reasons why you're requesting a continuance please
yeah i'm not i'm not no i know that no i'm talking to the woman that called in
okay um this is mr fernando speaking um the first reason was that uh we did not receive
a notice of public meeting before today's hearing as required and the second reason is um if there
was a meeting it seems like it was like a private meeting with unaffected addresses and we received
no meeting summary form as that's required within five days after that meeting also
i believe the rco coordinator was allegheny west foundation because the rco coordinator was changed
and that rco coordinator did not consult with all of the affected rcos as required
before scheduling a meeting, if there was one.
I did receive two emails from Calvary United
and also from North Central Philadelphia.
Those two affected RCOs also say
that they did not receive a notice of a public meeting.
I don't know if they're here today or not,
but they were emailing about that.
There was a CDR, and that was completed.
however um the uh required meeting before zba um we did not have notice of it and also neighbors
were asking us about the meeting because they seem not to know when this meeting was so we're asking
that the rules for public meeting be followed so that our rights as affected parties and affected
addresses are um you know maintained council mr chair i i respectfully uh object to a continuance
this case has been in the system now for about two years uh we've met with uh more than one rco
uh and we've done two uh we've done mailings i have proof of that of course through the vista
a secured concept system, sent us over evidence of the mailings being mailed.
We had at least two separate public meetings with two different RCOs, plus a private meeting
at the request of the first coordinating RCO before it was moved.
I believe all parties were present, including Ms. Fernandez, at least at one of them.
And, you know, the mailing was complete. We have a letter of of non-opposition, in fact, of support from the coordinating RCO.
Based on that letter, I believe Mr. Richardson will testify that the council member's office supports the position of the coordinating RCO.
I see no reason why we need to, again, bring this into a third year.
Okay. So, so case, this is case number 10, MI 2021, 003-722-1901 Westmoreland Street. The case is number 10 on the list. We'll go on. Okay. We will call it when it's in its line.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just wanted to clarify for the record that when a case needs both CDR review as well as ZBA approval, only one public meeting is required.
And that is prior to the CDR committee review.
Once that meeting is held, there does not need to be a second public meeting for the zoning case.
So, with the zoning appeal.
That case will go on then today, okay?
Thank you.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Chair, we have John Taylor.
Good morning, Mr. Taylor.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
I apologize.
I'm not requesting a continuance.
I just may have hit the chat button by accident.
Okay, fine.
Thank you, sir.
That's fine.
Any other requests for a continuance?
Any other requests for a continuance?
I see no hands, Chair.
I see no handshake.
I have case number 14, MI-2022-001-328-914 West Gerrard Avenue.
No exhibits, third listing.
Demetrius Ware is the enlisted applicant.
Any hands in the audience?
hi yeah all right hi could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
demetrius where d-e-m-e-t-r-a-i-u-s-w-a-r-e where i have my partner with me wait a minute wait a
minute wait a minute do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes we do not have any exhibits on file for you sir yes i did submit the exhibit no no no
i'm talking to mr mr ware mr ware i'm sorry all right that that was my partner i'm sorry
i i sent them in october the 7th so i've been sent the exhibits you know to uh not sure the
email address but i sent the man because that was the problem i had last time when i had to continue
okay hillary do we have no record of any exhibits yet i i don't have any um the last the last
hearing was 10 12 and we didn't have exhibits at that time um i have not seen anything come in
come in sense and if they were sent that far back we would need updated exhibits
um anyway with updated posting photos and an updated tax so so mr ware this this case is
going to be continued mark must be tried any questions any questions at all call the office
okay i sent them february the 6th i sent them again so i don't well but but you're going to
have to send updated exhibits to us sir we can uh check the rco um box and then we can um just
let you know chair if you want to just put this on hold real fast i have email hillary if they
were what mr ware wait a minute hillary if they were sent in october do we need updated
well if they were if they were sent right if they were sent in february they wouldn't have
probably received the posters yet so we would still need posting photos um i mean but that
if they could show us that you know now if they had that all right so here's what as long as
they're as long as they're complete otherwise but here's what we'll do we'll we'll put this on hold
and we'll wait to the end
and then we'll call it again.
Okay, Lakeisha?
Thank you, Chair.
And I'll have somebody check that.
Okay, good.
All right.
So let's go to our regular list.
We're going to start with number three.
MI 2022-006-334-1238 Distant Street.
Arlene Santiago is the owner.
It's a pro se.
The application is for the legalization
of an erection of fences
at the front and side lots. Sizes and locations are shown on the plans. No change to existing
family household living use. Good morning, Chair. Ms. Santiago, could you raise your hand, please?
She's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair. Thank you. We have letters of support from the
community on the rise and a letter of support from Council Member Phillips. Also, letters of
support from neighbor at 1238 distant. Ms. Santiago, could you state your name please and
spell for the court reporter? Ms. Santiago? Yes. Why could you state your name and spell it please
for the court reporter.
Arlene Garcia Santiago is A-R-L-Y-N.
Last name, Garcia Santiago, G-A-R-C-A,
Santiago, S-A-N-T-I-A-G-O.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
All right.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, okay?
Good morning.
Good morning, ma'am.
have you emailed all the required
exhibits and documents to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this
hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed.
I see you have already shared your screen.
I'm sorry,
Chair, this is Tanya Sunkit,
the administrator. If I could just
ask Ms. Santiago, is there
something wrong with your video? We do need to see
your face.
Give me a second, Tanya.
Hold on.
One second.
I don't know why it's not showing the face.
I don't know why he's not showing the face.
We see a...
We see a black screen.
Just turn your video on.
You're not seeing the video, the share screen either?
Yes, we see that.
We just need to see the screen of the actual applicant.
I'm trying to open the window now.
I can't even get you on open.
Hold on.
You have a slider over your video, maybe, your camera?
Yeah, but I can't.
Give me one second.
I'm trying to open the screen, and I'm about to get this connected.
One second. One second. What's going on with this window? Your window's not open. One second, please.
Oh, my God. What's this? Where is this?
Why can't I get this open?
Okay, Chair, as you wish, we can proceed without the video.
However, Chair, if allowable, may you please confirm that the applicant who is supposed to present is the actual applicant under oath, just so we're all clear.
So, Ms. Santiago, state your name one more time.
Arlene Garcia Santiago.
Right.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
And you state on this, this is you making the presentation, not someone else.
Okay, so it's all you now.
You can't turn it over to anyone else, all right?
Thank you, kindly Chair.
So that's your application for zoning, right?
Move on.
Good morning.
My name is Arlene Garcia, property owner and resident at 1238 Distance Street, Philadelphia, PA19111.
What brought me here today was a legislation of side and front fence over six feet as per plans.
and the reasons for this was security and privacy for my kids and my pets that are part of my family
too. I submitted an application last year, 2022, for legalization. I had purchased this property,
was not aware of this need, it as zoning and building permit. This is why I'm here today.
Attached, you will find application, refusal, appeal, special exemption form, project information, flyer, date, letter of support from RCO, Community on the Rights Foundation on support of my project, certificate of mailings, pictures, floor plans on entire fence, signatures collected in support and letters.
this has made our blocks better
and we are making
our property nice and clean
just do my favor
go a little slower and show his defense
go back
two or three pictures
go back one more
so that's the front
Proceed.
Keep going.
We are manning our property nice and clean, not as before that was abandoned.
I'm unable to get a tax compliance insistent, but my property taxes are up to date with
mortgage.
And for these reasons, I'm here today to have a variance.
Thank you.
okay questions from the board
no chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands at this time chair planning commission please good morning chair david
effecto F-E-C-T-E-A-U with the City Planning Commission. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir, I do. Thank you. Proceed. Thank you,
sir. Good morning, Chair and members of the board. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single-family zoning at this location. There is no unique physical condition
or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with
the code. The applicant's hardship claim is self-created. The city planning commission
recommends that the board deny the proposed variances. MI 2022-006-334-1238 Distant Street.
One, two, three, eight, Distant Street. I vote yes.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, we're going to go to case number one, and we'll hear number four with a two.
So case number one is MI-2022-003-147-208 East Mount Airy Avenue.
Council Woman Bass has no objection to the granting of the variance.
There is a letter of support from East Mount Airy neighbors.
And then number four is MI 2022-003-146-208 East Mount Airy Avenue, Parcel C. East Mount Airy neighbors have a letter of support and also Councilperson Bass.
Sarah, we have Stephanie Magna coming back in as a panelist now.
Great.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Of course, Stephanie Magana.
Last name's M-A-G-A-G-N-A.
There's an 1835 Market Street suite, 1400-19103.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
My client is Stuart Udis.
He is the owner and developer of the properties.
he's on the call today we're also joined by kevin tatlow who's the project engineer and jacob
anderson okay our vice chair our vice chair has a few questions for you good morning counsel do
you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes i do have you
emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing yes thank you please proceed and share your screen sorry
excuse me this is this is hillary um just to clarify you're representing the the owners of
the properties mount airy flats for parcel d and mount airy homes for parcel c correct they're both
okay thank you sure um so as i said stewart and our project engineer and project architect are
here to answer any questions after our presentation but just as an initial kind of
Putting us in the world, these properties are now 210 and 214 East Mount Airy, formerly Persil C and Persil D of 208 East Mount Airy, based on a recent lot line adjustment approval.
These applications propose two residential redevelopment projects on adjacent parcels, which have been designed to complement one another and the surrounding neighborhood in the aesthetic and the scale of the project, as well as to use common infrastructure.
The project sits on a former portion of Fred's Mount Airy Motor site, which the developer recently purchased from the longtime family owners of that assemblage.
At the time it was purchased, the site was an assemblage of lots occupied by existing non-conforming but commercial uses and some residential uses on an oversized lot, which accompanied approximately about 67,000 square feet in total, but that shared one common interest at grade along East Mount Airy Avenue.
The size, the shape, and the non-conforming uses of the site add significant additional costs to developing this site related to bringing it back into residential use that are not customary in an RSA-free district and prevent strict development and compliance with code.
So this project is specifically designed to represent the lease modification from the use standards that's needed. We are otherwise mentally compliant and compliant with parking requirements, but the lease modification needed to allow the developer to absorb the fixed costs associated with bringing this to a residential use and also to construct a viable project in the neighborhood.
The current design as it stands, which we'll go through in a minute, represents a long community engagement process.
As the board chair mentioned, we do have letters of support in the packet, which we're happy to say we were able to reach a consensus of support with the neighborhood.
There is a letter of support from East Mount Airy Neighbors, who was the coordinating RCO in the packet, as well as a letter of support from the Neighborhood Gardens Trust, who will be running the conservation or be the beneficiaries of the conservation event for the existing community garden.
And there's also a community benefits agreement included in the packet, which is the developer's commitment to the design improvements that have been made specifically in response to neighborhood concerns.
And I'll note that that also, that agreement includes 13 petitions from adjacent property owners in support of the project.
The steward will run through the plans with specifics in a second, but as a summary high level, the project is going to preserve three existing residential uses.
The project is going to preserve three existing residential uses on separate lots within this assemblage and the lot line adjustment was done to reflect some of that preservation and bring the remainder of the property back into residential use in keeping with the general purpose of the RSE3 district and also the intentions of the RM district, which is the proposed remapped district for this site based on the planning commission's Philadelphia 2035 plan for this district.
The original design for this project was 24 townhomes on the site, 12 in front and 12 in the rear, and we shared that design with the project with the community initially last July received significant feedback and we've made numerous changes kind of in response to that feedback.
Stuart will go through the plan specific, but I want to highlight the most important ones.
The use of the rear portion of the lot here was changed from 12 townhomes and two separate
structures, or I'm sorry, three separate structures to 18 kind of minimum units in one building
that will have an end sale price at about 60% of the value of what the original proposed townhomes
would have been, which will provide some diversity in the housing stock in the neighborhood. We've
also, with the one building, have been able to increase the rear setback from 20 feet to 40 feet
kind of along the Sydney Street rear property line. We were also able to remove an outer circular
driveway, which increased our green space and provided about 8,700 square feet of additional
pervious coverage on the lot. And we'll be restructuring the retaining wall with a terrace
retaining wall along the Sydney Street property line as well. And there is the preservation of
the community garden, as I mentioned. So with that, I will turn it over to Stuart and kind of go
through more specifics of the site and the design. Stuart, if you have not already, can you identify
yourself with the board so they can call you and throw you in? Mr. Unis, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Good morning. Stuart Eunice, S-T-U-A-R-T, last name U-D-I-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thanks, Stuart. Just as to start, have you heard the comments I've provided this morning?
Yes, I have.
Do you believe that would be true and accurate?
Yes, I do.
sorry sir would you adopt them as your own yes okay great um okay can you walk us through um
i touched on it a little bit but can you explain a little bit of the site configuration and the
existing conditions of the property um originally the uh property was addressed 208 214 224 and 226
East Mountain Area Avenue. The assemblage, which is approximately 67,000 square feet, has been
owned by the same family for multiple generations. And despite being four separate tax parcels,
the assemblage was essentially used as one, which is why you can see the first image,
the original lot lines, where the former auto body shop and sales office
was split between two properties, 210 and between 208 and 214.
There was a single family home in the front of 208.
And then there was the parking lot, which was shared between the 214 and 208 building.
And then further down to the bottom of the screen, the 224 and 226 East Mountaine Avenue,
historically, each is a three-unit building.
The residence for those buildings, they previously parked on the side yard at 214.
and then there was a garage, or excuse me, the community garden in the rear of 224 and 226 East
Monterey Avenue. And then we recently have the lot lines adjusted here. Can you explain a little
bit about the configuration? Sure. The top of the screen in the front, that was a single family
house that was part of the original shared parcel with the garage building. So we brought that
parcel into conformance as an RSA-3 lot, and that will be rehabilitated as a single-family house.
And then the rest of the formerly commercial assemblage, which consisted of a four-unit
building in the front and then the auto body garage in the rear, that was broken into two
RSA-3 parcels. The front parcel being 214 East Monterey Avenue, and the rear is now deeded as
210 East Mountain Area Avenue. Some of the lot area of the 224 building was added to the parcels
210 and 214 just to maintain where the previous driveway or surface parking lot area
was extinguished. And then the 224 and 226 uses are being made.
was extinguished and then the 224 and 226 uses are being maintained and the community garden
it's our intention to enter into a conservation easement where we'll donate the development
rights to the neighborhood garden trust and this picture uh identifies in the yellow the
two development parcels and then the preservation of the residential uses in the garden area
on the outer sections of the site great um okay i'm going to scroll through the existing site
photos, Stuart, but can you walk us through some of the existing conditions and the grading
challenges that exist on the site? Or if you could scroll up a little bit, it might be helpful to
have this one as a visual. So from where the garage is located, closer to Boyer Street,
the top of the screen, towards where the garden is, in the bottom, there's approximately a 20-foot
grade change. In the rear of the property, there's an existing shared retaining wall that sits on the
property boundary between the Mount Airy Avenue parcels and the Sydney Street homes, and the
maximum height of that wall is approximately 14 feet. On the other side of that wall, there's a
three-foot easement alleyway. That easement alleyway is solely for the benefit of the Sydney
Street homes, and then on the other side of the easement alleyway, there is approximately 11-foot
rear yard to the back of the Sydney Street houses, and that wall continues about three-quarters of
the way down the Mount Airby properties, then due to some soil erosion, the easement
access is no longer available towards the bottom of the screen.
The garden area, as I mentioned, is in the bottom area of the screen.
And then where the parcel 214 enters Mount Airy Avenue towards the top.
That's the only location on the entire site that allows for vehicular or pedestrian access
to the site.
That's because of the train tracks that are up at the bottom of the screen due to the
grade change to get to the bridge.
So historically, all the properties within are here.
Great.
So this is the visual of where the access to the site is currently, and that will be
maintained.
Another visual of the entrance to the site with the auto body garage behind.
This is what was previously used as both the pedestrian as well as vehicular access to the side yard at 214 East Monterey Avenue.
That's where the residence of the two triplexes and the photo below, 224-256, that's where they would park.
Another photo of the existing auto body garage.
This is a photo of the surface parking lot. It shows the grade change from a vantage point
closer to where the garden is facing up towards the garden behind 224 and 226 up towards the
garage building. This is another photo of the grade and the surface parking from the back
of the site vantage point facing Mount Airy Avenue this depicts the the grade change which
is more severe between the surface parking and the community garden which is in the rear of the site
it also shows the grade change and relationship between the grade of Mount Airy Avenue and the
city street homes behind where the the homes are set approximately a grade below
This is the community garden behind 224 and 226 East Monterey Avenue.
This is the rear of the site.
The existing garage building is 11 feet from the property line.
It shows the relationship between the existing retaining wall and the Sydney Street houses on the other side of the Eastman Alleyway.
Another photo depicting that. Aerial photos of the site.
Counselor, I think it'd be helpful if you would show us what you're going to build.
I think we understand the site.
Great. So there was an original zoning plan that was proposed with this application.
If it's okay, I'd like to explain the original design and then some of the community feedback we got.
Yeah, that's good. That's great.
Can you explain kind of maybe the direction you gave your architect and coming up with a plan for the site?
Yes. So the intentions initially were to come up with a site plan for single family homes, which was tied closest to the RSA 3 use that respected all the dimensional guidelines of the RSA 3 district, as well as
that respected all the dimensional guidelines of the RSA State District, as well as preserved as
many of the residential buildings and the garden area behind 224 and 226 East Monterey Avenue.
And we came up with a site plan that consisted of 12 townhomes in the front and 12 larger townhomes
in the rear that was dimensionally compliant. But once we had this created, we recognized there were
certain flaws. Namely, the retaining wall, the shared retaining wall would have to be rebuilt
as it currently is, which provides very little light behind the city street houses. And also
the grading that we required for the 12 independent townhomes would require a retaining wall between
the development parcels and the 224-226 garden area that would have a maximum height of 14 feet.
That was necessitated by the grading necessary to get all the utilities and stormwater off the site.
And then there would have to be a rear circulating driveway that circulated the site.
It's the only way to provide the vehicular access to the site.
And while we knew that those were certain issues when we met with the community in July,
other things that were raised, including additional green space,
assurances that the garden area could be preserved,
And as of today, all the housing that's being built in the neighborhood is larger, single-family homes, and there's a request for more diversity and lower-priced housing units.
So we went back to the drawing board, particularly with respect to the rear parcel, because that's where most of the conditions existed.
And we came up with the idea to convert it to a single 18-unit building.
there are smaller units. We replaced the 1,230, 600 square foot townhomes with
18 units between 1,500 and 1,600 square feet. The housing price of those units are approximately
60% of the original townhomes. I'm going to pull up the new development
plans and we can walk through. While I do that, can you just explain a little bit of the rationale
behind the unit count, maybe the costs associated with developing the site and the original unit
count rationale? Sure. So no matter how the sites develop, the retaining walls have to be rebuilt
in the rear, and the walls have to be added for the grading between the development parcels and
224, and it's approximately 400 square feet of linear retaining wall has to be built. There is
the existing non-conforming use structures that have to be demolished, along with the surface
parking. And because the lots are over 15,000 square feet, no matter what's proposed from a
residential standpoint, the stormwater management kicks in and we have to address all the stormwater
requirements for the site as well. So those are all costs that are necessary regardless of how
it's brought back into residential conformance. Okay, great. So this is the new unit plan or the
new layout plan for Lot C. So, we made minor changes to this plan, right? So, the main changes
were to Parcel D, correct? Correct. Slight grading change for the front parcel, but the building
locations and types have not changed. Okay. So, the main changes in response to community feedback
are to Parcel D. So, maybe you can walk us through those. You started, but now we have them again.
Sure. So by consolidating it into one building, we were able to remove the rear circulating driveway that added 8,700 square feet of pervious lot area, which is about 20% of the site.
In addition, the setback was increased from 20 feet to 40 feet in response to particularly the Sydney Street homeowners request.
And what that allowed us to do is rather than simply rebuild the shed retaining wall as the same 14-foot wall in certain locations, slightly shorter than others, we're able to terrace the wall.
So the wall is broken into three sections and the top of the wall location is now removed 16 feet further away from the Sydney Street Homes and we'll be able to add landscaping there.
So that will reopen their easement alleyway and provide far more light behind their houses.
And it also allowed for us to modify the grading of the site for the benefit of 224 and 226.
Retaining wall between those parcels can now be built approximately six feet shorter in the rear.
And that'll provide far easier access to the 224 and 226 buildings,
which require access through the development parcels due to the grading of Mount Airy Avenue.
I'm sure there is an easement agreement recorded to provide access to 224 and 226. Is that correct?
Yes, that's correct.
Okay. Does that contemplate access during construction, before construction?
Okay. Does that contemplate access Dory construction?
Yes. There's language in the easement that provides access before, during, and after
construction along with a permanent easement road that will be utilized by the 224 and 226
East Monterey Avenue houses throughout access once the proposed development is completed.
Okay, great. I'll note for the Board that a copy of that easement agreement and the associated
exhibits showing the proposed conditions for that permanent access road are included at tab 11.
That was an important question for the RCO. We wanted to confirm that there is that access
easement there, which we believe addresses those concerns, but if there are others, we're happy to
answer questions on those. With that, I'll go to the renderings.
Out of curiosity, how high is the building in the rear of the condo building?
The height of the building is 38 feet, which is the RSA department.
Thank you.
We're not asking for any dimensional.
I know.
I understand.
So the picture, particularly on the rear, that depicts the changes that we've made,
namely the retaining wall, that rather than being rebuilt, is rebuilt as a terrace wall,
will offer the easement alleyway to be used and sets back the building and the wall from
the city street houses. Great. So just a few other items that were important to the neighbors
were trying to understand the environmental impacts of this project. I'll note for the board
that there is the phase two environmental report that's included in the packet. So Stuart and our
civil engineer can answer any questions if there are there. But more importantly, there were
questions about the stormwater design. We do have Kevin Tatlow, who is our civil engineer,
kind of here on the call. So I can call him briefly. I'd ask him to kind of walk through
some of the stormwater controls that are contemplated currently and what the process
is going to be moving forward with PWD. So Kevin, if you haven't already, can you identify yourself
for the board and raise your hand? Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the
court reporter? Good morning. Kevin Tatlow, Bowler Engineering. Could you spell it, please, for the
court reporter? Kevin Tatlow, T-A-T-L-O-W. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. So, Kevin, can you just explain
for us what the requirements are generally for PWD review of this site and where we are in that
process? Sure. So as far as the process prior to zoning, we submitted URSA plans for the water
department review and approval for the prerequisite for zoning. So what this plan shows is the
preliminary grading and storm management for the property. The stormwater management will meet the
water department requirements for water quality as well as flood control. We're proposing two
underground basins on the site uh that exhibit shown right there that item in red that's the
underground basin um to handle the parcel c portion of the property and then i believe
might be another exhibit showing the underground basin for parcel d yep correct and then we'll
also be providing a water quality structure, water quality filter prior to it going into the street
sewer. Okay. And the final design of this will need to be reviewed and approved by POD, is that
correct? Correct, yes. Part of the building permit process, that'll have to be reviewed with full site
plans, reports, things like that. Okay. The requirements to put in this stormwater, is that
specific to our current design or is that tied to kind of the redevelopment of the site?
The redevelopment of the site. Since this project is over 15,000 square feet of earth disturbance,
storm management is needed for this project regardless of the type of design.
Is there an alternative design that would provide better or worse conditions or is
what is proposed kind of the only option on the site?
uh for the the site what is proposed um is probably the best option because uh any basin
or stormwater infrastructure we put in we have to have an overflow pipe to connect into the city
street name so what we did is work back from tying into mount area to set our our basin elevations
to be able to capture both the proposed development and then be able to convey it out to the street as
well. And we made some changes to the design. How did those changes
And we made some changes to the design. How did those changes from the original plan to the current plan impact the stormwater plan, the stormwater management controls?
Yep. So the proposed changes significantly helped it, especially in the rear along the east property line.
that previously was a drive-out to the property line by shifting, making the building further
away from the property line and adding that green space, that decreases the amount of
impervious surface on the property to reduce the amount of runoff. So adding that additional
green space and removing impervious area significantly helped with the storm management
for the property. Thanks. So with that, I think we can turn it over to questions. We know that
there are some some near neighbors who I believe have tried to join the call and E-Man might be
here and any questions the board has. So, Council, how many how many meetings have you had with the
neighbors? Three. We met with them in July for the first community meeting and then we took
pulled the project out, revised the plans. We're submitting revised plans for parcel
reflect those changes and we did get a revised refusal for parcel d plans so the the plans that
were submitted to l and i in connection with that revised refusal are in the packet um so that took
a while um and then we brought it back we had our second community meeting with them in march and the
voting or march 14th and then our voting meeting with eman on march 28th um but i'll note that
stewart has had many other conversations with the sydney street neighbors in particular but other
neighbors in the community come. And if you have questions about that process.
Okay. No, no, no. That's fine. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Right. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Tina Marie Russell with her hand up. Ms. Russell, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning, Ms. Russell. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the record?
Tina Marie Russell. I'm sorry, that was a mistake on my part. I did not mean to raise my hand.
Okay, that's fine. Thank you, Tina. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience that has a comment?
Chair, we have Stephanie Hagan.
Ms. Hagan, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Good morning.
My name is Stephanie Hagan.
First name S-T-E-P-H-A-N-I-E.
Last name Hagan, H-A-G-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Okay, proceed.
So I'm a near neighbor of the property that Stuart has proposed. I'm on Boyer Street. So my backyard abuts the garage building at Fred's, the current auto garage.
Um, so when I'm in my bedroom in the evenings, I will look out, um, onto the townhomes, um, and Stuart will, his crew will need access to my backyard for some of the repairs that are being done.
I wanted to speak in support of the development. Stuart has been really responsive, really communicative since applying for the property. I've been in touch with him for a long time by email and by text.
Um, I know that some neighbors have expressed a concern about these buildings, um, aesthetically or worrying about more crowding in Mount Airy.
But as I know, the Philadelphia 2035 plan is to make our city more dense.
I think these townhomes are a nice compromise between a single family house that only certain people can afford and, you know, apartments that are that welcome more people to the community.
I'm also really impacted by the retaining wall that Stuart has brought up because my property
runs along that retaining wall. I've been in a former property that I was renting where the
retaining wall collapsed and the result of that was there was a wall and mud in my backyard that
never got removed. I had to move. So the retaining wall is like the thing that keeps me up at night
Um, so the retaining wall is like the thing that keeps me up at night. So I'm really pleased that, um, the retaining wall on that, that aligns with my property that joins my property is going to be repaired as part of this process.
Um, even though that part of the wall is not along, um, the property that Stuart has bought
the, he needs the whole wall to stand up. He needs that wall not to fall down. Um, so basically I'm,
I'm positively impacted by this development in a way that would be, um, really difficult to
sort of maneuver on my own by working with my neighbors since no one owns that wall,
but we're all responsible for that wall. So it's helpful for me that Stuart sort of becomes
responsible for the wall for a time and that he makes provisions for the condo association to
become the caretakers of that wall in the future. Thank you very much for calling in. We appreciate
your input. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? Chair, we have Saul Waskow with his hand
up. Mr. Wasco, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair. Hi, could you please state your
name and spell it, please, for the court reporter? Yes, my name is Saul Wasco. That's S-A-U-L-W-A-S-K-O-W.
Right. Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Sir, are you a neighbor? Yes, I'm a near neighbor. Okay. Yeah, I live in 226. Proceed.
Yes, I just wanted to express my support for this project, because I think it's very well thought out and will bring housing to the community that's needed.
All right. Thank you very much for taking the time to call, and we appreciate your input. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Kitty Tam with her hand up. Ms. Tao, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
hi could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
yeah my name is kitty tan wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute wasn't she in the earlier
case and the case is ep stash i know but we're not hearing that case right now
okay thank you yes you can put is there anyone else in the virtual audience
Chair, we have Gloria Rolfs with her hand up. Ms. Rolfs, please unmute yourself and wait for
the chair. Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Gloria Rolfs, G-L-O-R-I-A. Right. R-O-H-L-F-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Are you a neighbor? Yes, I'm a very near
neighbor. All right. Are you supportive of this program? Yes, I am, and I have a statement to that
regard. Okay. I live at 249 East Sydney Street, and I've lived here for 30 years. I'm one of more
than 20 neighbors whose properties back onto the proposed development. We near neighbors voted at
the RCO meeting to support this development because Stewart addressed our list of concerns.
We gave him a whole big list of concerns, and this will be an improvement over what is there now.
The developer revised his plans to allow a 40-foot setback between our property lines in his building, have terraced walls, better fencing, and more green space.
This development will provide better water management, more light, and more green space than now, and will keep the community garden.
Parking is included, so that will not be an issue.
I mean, it's similar to the Devon Enclave at the end of Sydney Street that has the parking included.
And this development will fit into the neighborhood and improve it.
Thank you very much for taking the time to pause and your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Emma Stern.
Ms. Stern, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Hi, yes, it's Emma, E-M-M-A, Stern, S-T-E-R-N.
All right. Do you swear if we're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
All right. We've had a lot of input from the neighbors. Do you support this program?
I do. I am in favor of the project.
Okay. Thank you very much for calling in. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no other hands at this time.
Thank you very much. Planning Commission.
thank you chair bergman david vecto with the city planning commission chair and members of the board
the comprehensive plan recommends a change to residential multi-family at this location
to promote transit adjacent development the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive
The proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan, so the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use variances for multifamily dwellings and multiple family dwellings on a single-family zone block.
plan so the city planning commission recommends
Thank you very much.
Hillary, we have a proviso for one.
Do we have anything for four?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
For number one, the proviso.
Let me do number one first, okay?
Okay, sure.
MI 2022-003-147-28208 East Mount Airy Avenue, Parcel D, I vote yes with proviso per amended
refusal dated 12-14-22. Chairman, regarding the proviso, if I can. So, as I said, there is an
access easement here that provides access, both vehicular and pedestrian, to 224 and 226 across
our development site, which we believe kind of addresses the concerns of Mount Airy that was
requested in the proviso. But if you are inclined to grant the proviso, we would simply ask that it
be broad enough to allow the final design to be approved by L&I and streets. Certainly those
properties are outside of the scope of the current application. There isn't a site plan for those
properties associated with this development. So the specific nature of the proviso requested a
driveway that crosses over that retaining wall um but certainly the intention and consistent with
the current design um but as those properties are outside of the current scope we would simply ask
that the proviso be broad enough um to mandate that we provide access um with the final design
other to lni and streets department review yes um so the i did see the proviso that was suggested
Like you said, it does involve properties that are outside the scope of this proposal.
So because of that, and also because it involves a private agreement between parties, it's not appropriate for the zoning board to enact a proviso related to that.
So the proviso we have is per amended refusal dated 12-14-22.
Thomas?
Thomas Holloman?
my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shahid my vote is yes
with proviso. Okay and and Billy what's our proviso for number four? There's revised plans
three pages stamped uh today April 5th 2023. Okay number four MI 2022 003 146 208 East
Mount Airy Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, three pages, stamped today,
April 5th. Am I right? April 5th. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much. All right,
Number five, for the record, number 14, MI 2022-001-328-914 West Drive Avenue.
That case is continued.
The owner has been notified.
So we're going to go to number five, MI 2022-006-10713 North 42nd Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Letter of support from the West Belmont Civic Association.
Chair, Mr. Jin is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good morning, counsel.
Could you state your name, Ms. Spell, please, for the record?
Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838.
Philadelphia EPA 19103 here on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is the owner, North Broad Holdings LLC.
Mr. David Goldenberg is here on behalf of the LLC.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the documentation previously submitted.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the documentation previously submitted.
We have submitted to the board copies of the refusal, support letter, photos, plans, and related documentation.
This is an application for a use of a CMX 2 zone property as a residential use only three household living, essentially seeking a variance to convert what would be a normally required commercial space into a residential space.
This lot is actually located at a triangular corner.
I will show the plans in a minute, but the community did give us support and asked that the residential use be approved,
mainly because of the location of the lot and some of the unique aspects of the lot.
What this is, this property actually is part of a triangular section between Warren Street and North 42nd Street.
What's unique about the lot is we do have a residential property next to us, and these properties further down in the triangle, this portion, are all RM1 designated zoning.
On the corner here, we have CMX2, partly because our lot, which is actually this blue door you see in this photograph, is part of what was and is an auto repair shop.
we have the only the lot itself that consists of the width of the lot and not we're not taking any
part of the auto business so this is a lot in and of itself which is actually shaped differently than
what is normally expected of lots like this where it's normally a rectangular shape due to the
triangular nature of this property, our lot essentially curves towards the back and gets
wider but is narrower in the front. Because of the way it's laid out and also because of the prior use
and the uses that are further to the south of us, the community agrees that a residential use makes
more sense to try to squeeze now a small commercial use into this space when there's a corner
auto business and mostly residential all around us otherwise, and with Lancaster Avenue, which is
the commercial corridor so nearby, does not make a lot of sense. And therefore, the community
supported our request for the residential use only. From a layout standpoint, I'm going to zoom
out a little bit to give the board easier view of the plans. So because of the way the lot
increases in the back and curves. The proposed layout of the building is also with a curvature,
but essentially it is a single unit on each floor with living space and bedrooms.
It's a very straightforward layout, but all three units have access through the entrance on 42nd
Street, and the rear yard is a triangular shape, which is somewhat unusual, but does
meet code requirements for open space. Our sole variance is, in fact, the lack of the commercial
space for the first 30 foot within the building. Again, because of the way the lot is, the front
is only about 15 feet wide. So with the walls, we're talking about a 14 foot space. It makes it
a rather narrow space for any commercial use. And that's essentially part of the hardship that we
feel exists. And based on the RM1 zoning next door, we feel that the conversion to all residential
makes the most sense at this location. So that concludes my presentation regarding this matter.
I'm happy to redirect to any specific part of the exhibits, and also my client is here to verify my
testimony. Why don't we have your client adopt your testimony? Thank you. Mr. Goldenberg, can you
raise your hand virtually to be identified?
Mr. Goldenberg, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Sir, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
My name is Dimitro Goldenberg, D-M-Y-T-R-O, Goldenberg, G-O-L-D-E-N-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Goldenberg, did you see my presentation and also hear my testimony before the board?
Yes, I did.
Can you verify what I have represented is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
Can you verify what I have represented is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, sir.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good morning, Chair.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission, Mr. Chairman and board members.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change to residential multifamily at this location.
The removal of the required ground floor commercial space is in keeping with that recommended zoning.
And so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022-006-310-713 North 42nd Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holland, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number eight, MI 2021-003-847-4911 Frankfurt Avenue.
John Taylor is the attorney.
We do not have an RCO letter at this point, but there was a meeting on 2923.
Mr. Taylor, Mr. Taylor, if you're in the, there he is, he's coming back in as a panelist
now chair.
Thank you.
Mr. Taylor, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter.
He should be back in shortly chair, he's coming in there.
Mr. Taylor, are you here?
He was on earlier.
I saw him when he cut in one time.
He's available, Chair.
He's just on mute.
All right.
Mr. Taylor.
There he is.
Mr. Taylor, could you state your name, please,
to spell for the court reporter?
My name is John Taylor, J-O-N-T-A-Y-L-O-R.
I'm here to...
Great.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I swear and affirm.
All right.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
My client is the owner of the property, Cindy Real Estate LLC, and Susan Jen is here to testify for the owner.
Thank you. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Out of curiosity, do you have a letter from the Frankfurt CDC?
We do not have a letter from the Frankfurt CDC.
And my anticipation is that they've actually refused the project, but haven't sent a letter.
Okay, thank you.
Proceed.
This is the, before I begin, I would like to show you the exhibit list.
The exhibit list includes a refusal, an application for appeal, project information form.
would you bring that back up or have it there's nothing on the screen but that's unfortunate
let me see here there you go
it includes a refusal application for appeal project project information form deed authorization
letter tax certification plans poster photographs photos front and stairwell photos basement photos
first floor photos third floor photos the second floor and prove that we sent notices to the rco
and we did have an rco meeting exhibit a shows the refusal
this was refused because the lot area was too small we also have three units
we also have three units three residential units and one commercial unit
three residential units and one commercial unit
this is actually we're seeking to legalize an existing use the three apartments are already
in the building as well as the commercial first floor unit
this was the application appeal which was filed pro se by cindy real estate llc earlier
The copy of the letter of authorization, the deed,
this is the tax clearance showing that all taxes have been paid
these are the plans that were submitted to uh lni they showed the the existing uh footprint of the
property is a one first floor is a commercial unit which i believe at this time is vacant
This property runs along the L up in the Kensington neighborhood.
The second floor has two apartments, one apartment in the front, one apartment in the rear, and a third-story apartment.
Shows that the posting of today's zoning meeting was on the front of the property.
Here's the poster, here's the mailbox, and here's a close-up of the poster.
These are photographs of the property.
This is the front of the property.
This is the front stairwell.
There's two apartments on the second floor?
Yes, Commissioner.
Show us the entrance to that, please.
The front entrance or?
Yeah, the apartment entrance is on the second floor.
there's right there's one there that's the third floor i think that's the third floor entrance
second floor entrance okay
here's the basement
And here's pictures of the first floor unit.
that's the commercial space right that's the commercial space commission
this is the rear of the property obviously the rear of the property is uh too small for the
proposed use but this was you know this was almost a pre-existing condition the house has
been around probably before the code and it's probably structurally impossible for it to be
build back any further also the the backyard conforms with the existing use of that neighborhood
and these are the pictures of the third floor residential unit it's a very nice unit
i think that's the l right there
these are the one of the second floor residential apartments
and this is the second floor rear apartment
this is the documentation showing that we had the rco meeting
and these are commercial licenses and rental licenses
so again the client bought this property a sheriff sale they believe that it was allowed
to have three residential units three residential units i think conforms with that neighborhood
the property has enough square feet for the additional units on the second and third floor
and we believe that the there's a unnecessary hardship on the client to not be able to have
three residential units and one commercial unit in this neighborhood.
Mr. Teller, were you at the meeting with the CDC?
I was.
And do you know what the vote was?
I don't know what the vote was.
I don't believe they're going to support this application.
That's a verbal.
So it's my representation to the ZBA.
i actually was expecting um a letter a writing okay all right um mr chair this is hillary um
we just we just received uh the the council office um uh council member lazada just sent over
um the letter excuse me one second uh the vote was um in opposition um and then the council
member is
also taking a position of
opposition.
I can forward that to Mr. Taylor
as well, but we just received that.
Thank you.
You want to have your testimony
adopted, Mr. Taylor?
Ms. Jen,
are you present?
Susan?
Ms. Jen,
If you're in the audience, can you raise your virtual hand?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Thank you.
You're an officer of the court.
We will accept your testimony.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Sloan Foulkes. Mr. Foulkes, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning, Mr. Foulkes.
Good morning, Chairman Bergman and ZBA Board. My name is Sloan Foulkes. I'm representing the Office of Council Member Ketsy M. Lozada. Spelling of my name is S-L-O-A-N-E, F-S in fire, O-L-K-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir. Thank you. Proceed, please. Yeah. First, I would like to apologize to the ZBA as well as Mr. Taylor. We didn't receive the letter from the RCO until late. And I thought that it would have been actually late Monday. I thought it would have been sent out Monday evening or Tuesday, but it hadn't at all.
So I did send Mr. Taylor a copy. If you check his email, you'll have a copy of the RCO letter as well as our letter. I want to read some things into the record.
The applicant has met with the RCO and has garnered a letter of opposition with the community's rationale as the following.
The applicant took out a make-safe permit to make the property safe.
However, the applicant has completed other work outside the realm of the permit, including electrical, plumbing, and structural.
They did not, at the meeting, show proof of permits being obtained for this work.
And finally, the interior walls were sealed without licensing and inspection reviewing the property upon completion.
This is the rationale of the RCO as to why they're opposing the various requests.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask me. Thank you.
Chairman, if I may make a quick response, a quick rebuttal.
First, thank you, Mr. Folks. Thank you. Proceed, counsel.
Well, again, I'm unable to comment on the prior construction work that was done at the property.
However, I will make the argument that this is an issue regarding the use of the property.
And if there was any code violation issues, if any, then that should be addressed in a separate legal proceeding by L&I.
I believe I'm arguing that it's really not relevant whether or not there could have been a code violation.
I'm arguing that this is really a question of zoning.
Okay, that's fine.
I rest.
Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
Anyone else from the virtual audience?
here we have miss tam with her hand up again no no thank you okay all right anyone else in the
Here we have Ms. Tam with.
virtual audience relative to this case i see no other hands chair planning commission thank you
chair bergman good morning david vecto with the city planning commission in 2014 the zoning map
was amended in this neighborhood in accord with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan
The proposed use matches a recorded use permit from 2017.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the variance.
I, 2021, 003-847-4911 Frankfurt Avenue.
I vote no.
Thomas Holloman.
My vote.
Thomas, let's go again, what was your vote?
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thomas, what was your vote?
Thomas
My vote is yes
Thank you
Mr. Taylor
Three no's and one yes
Thank you
Number 10
MI 2021
003 722
Westmoreland Street
Vern Anastasio
is the attorney. Letter of support for the Allegheny West Civic Association.
Good morning, counsel.
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair. Thank you.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair. You've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record,
please? Sure. Vern Anastasio. And could you identify your client and the relationship to
this property, please? Yep. I represent Credence Home Care, LLC. Okay. And our vice chair has just
a few questions for you, sir. Thank you. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do.
have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in
advance of this hearing i have please proceed and change thank you i am sharing my screen right now
1901 west westmoreland um mr chair members of the board what we are proposing on the ground level
will be adult daycare with administrative offices, a loading zone in the front. I'm
Westmoreland. And then also residents for independent living, senior citizens, 99 units.
We have a green roof that we'll walk you through in addition to other items. The refusal is
actually pretty standard. It is zoned I-1, whereas in this case, the refusal calls this
group living, and we are going to tweak that in the event that this board grants the variance.
Attorney Emerson will advise you on that, but it is for multifamily units, 99 of them.
it'll be geared towards senior citizens.
Our height is in excess of what is permitted
and the dimensional standards for parking spaces
because of the unique shape of the lot itself,
the width of our spots are about eight and a half feet each.
Whereas for age restricted folks of,
I think it's 60 years of age or older,
they should be 10 feet wide.
We were trying to get as many off-street parking spots
as we could in the parking lot.
And therefore we brought it down to a size
that still meets basic standards.
Many garages are no more than eight feet wide.
So with that, I will share with you
the rest of the proposal.
Page 2 is the revised proviso plans. We've gone through two meetings with RCOs, a personal
page two is the proviso revised provide
meeting with leadership of RCOs, and then of course the full spectrum of CDR review,
at least two meetings with CDR, and we've come up with a plan that works for everybody,
is a commodity and a neighborhood that has experienced lots of disinvestment for a long time
and producing a product that is desperately needed for folks who live in the neighborhood
in homes that are in desperate need of repair. They can't afford to repair them.
And this is a way to keep them in the community that they've been in for a long time.
I'll zoom in a little bit here.
I'll give you a general idea. Here are the 18 parking spaces. We have trash room.
Okay, one minute. And then
we have the adult activity space. We have offices. We'll have a kitchen and we'll have personal
lockers as well. And there's a residence entrance on the opposite side. And then we have residents
that go above the uh the actual parking spaces
and give me um
as you can see here there are studios one and two bedrooms there's an interior courtyard and a lounge
there's additional apartments on the third floor also there's
here's the third floor rear
here. You've got your floors five through seven. Again, all residential. This is your
typical type C unit, which is a studio, just under 500 square feet. As you can see, it's
all sort of open layout. We have your typical one bedroom, about 560 square feet.
and then we have a different type of one bedroom that is a little larger, about 648 square feet.
So they are the types of units. I am going to be bringing in the architect who can share with you
additional details in our exhibit packet that I'll move into evidence. We also spent a lot
of time talking about different materials that we'll be using a mixture of brick and stone some
metal siding some patina green window trim we've got roof gardens and some terracotta
force materials for water runoff this is the property from the opposite angle
As you can see, plenty of greening, and then additional green roof.
There's an elevation.
We have some photos of the proposed location.
The other corners, this is a corner property.
the other three corners are also zoned industrial. Obviously, it's an antiquated use.
It's on a corner property. It's primed for multifamily development since there are no
industrial uses presenting themselves these days. As I explained, the unique shape sort of limits
the number of off-street parking, but making the stalls each eight and a half feet do provide us
with 18 spots. And then offering these smaller units that will be, you know, innately affordable
for senior citizens is in fact an amenity that this neighborhood sorely lacks and is in desperate
need of. So we're meeting a need that the neighbors have wanted. As you can see, the other
old industrial uses that have been since abandoned and some
old industrial uses that have been since abandoned
and some structures that have even been torn down.
We'll see you next time.
There it is again.
So you can see the other industrial corners
and the site behind it.
None of it being used.
We have rendering of the courtyard.
And I think it probably would make good sense for us to get to the architect who can go into a little bit more detail about not only the courtyard and the landscaping.
We have the landscape architect here as well, but also the roof deck issues.
But I do want to submit that we have not only exterior photos, but interior photos as well.
of the long abandoned factory.
We have proof of posting
on all sides
only because it was brought to our attention earlier.
I wanna show you proof of mailing once,
proof of mailing twice
a letter from the leading RCO, Allegheny West Civic,
which stands in support of this variance
and encourages you to support the wishes of the community
and the RCO process by granting the variance.
With that, Michael Weidman, who is the project architect,
if you'd raise his hand,
And I'd like him to be recognized, made a panelist so that he can walk you through some of the other details of his design.
There, Mr. Weidman is coming back in as a panelist now.
Mr. Weidman, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Mr. Wiseman
Sorry, I was
Okay, just
State your name, please, and spell it for the
Court Reporter
Mark Weidman
W-I-E-D-M-A-N-N
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
The whole truth and nothing but the truth
Proceed, counsel
Mark, would you like me to stop sharing so you can share your materials?
Very good.
Green button on the bottom.
Am I not sharing yet?
We see you, sir.
We're looking for your materials.
I thought I had now screen two.
Here you go.
You're coming up.
now you gotta open up a document right can you see that uh it's the document's not open we see
there's a okay it's on my other screen
council would it be easier if you we do not we do now we do now okay
mark if you could just walk the board through your design uh and the roof and
um add anything that you'd like to add with respect over uh mr anastasia went through uh
pretty well it's it's a fairly simple composed project of residential units supporting parking
and adult daycare uh area and uh some administrative offices for the credence
company. This is a built-on existing three-story brick and concrete industrial.
A brick and concrete industrial building. We have added a couple floors to it. It generally conforms to most of the I2 bulk requirements, except that for the height variance, we're exceeding it by one story, about 12 feet.
and the use variants of course. So that's the picture looking up Westmoreland and down 19th Street.
This is the architectural site plan. It shows the existing building here, the addition here.
first floor has the underground parking there's a combination of eight and a half
and ten foot spaces as we could get them in there uh adult daycare and working with the
uh civic design review we have the front like recessed entry with the entrance to the
residential tower on Westmoreland Street for better view and more prominent access not being
under the train trestle. As you go up, the deeper units are the residential units, the deeper units
in the existing building because of its dimensions with larger one bedrooms. Then we have the regular
one bedrooms and studios along the back with most of stairways and some support space against
the train tracks where they cross over the property to shield the residents from that.
Again, you just keep going up. The site is sloped front to back. These are the units which
which Mr. Anastasia went through. I'll skip by. This is the existing building here.
These are the elevations that we worked with the CDR's comments, trying to keep some of
the industrial nature of the existing building with the brick and concrete and enhancing it with
some roof gardens above the existing stair towers at the front and stepping the building back you
know to try to create a little interest on on the street then as you and that's the westmoreland
Avenue. As you go down 19th Street, this is the trellis blocking the lower level. We put a brick
base there and again worked with some stronger materials like fiber cement panels and cast
concrete for the building and standard nice windows into each unit. Again, this is looking
down Westmoreland Street East. This is the existing building here. We've added three floors here,
and because the site slopes up, we were able to stick the garage underground and get one
additional story because the heights are a little lower. So it's six stories in the back residential
and five stories of residential in the front. Again, this is just another section showing how
the building steps back at the roof decks and gardens and where the train bridge is.
And these were the just the surrounding views, which Stranistagia already went through existing building.
And that's pretty much it from the for the architectural. This was a 3D view.
this is our building here in context with the other buildings against and set into the site okay
council do you have anyone else i'd like to uh ask cj from uh credence uh home
to raise his hand to adopt our testimony please
dj please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Kajetan Onoha. My first name is spelled C-A-J-E-T-A-N. And my last name is Onoha, O-N-U-O-H-A.
Yes, my name is Kajetan Onoha.
Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. C.J., did you hear my presentation and that and that of the architect this morning?
Yes. All right. Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes. Do you adopt it as your own? Yes.
Thank you. Mr. Chair, I do have available the civil engineer and the landscape architect, architecture architect.
However, for the sake of time.
No, I think your explanation and the architects really gave us a picture of what's there.
I understand.
I want to have questions from the board.
My first question, Vern, would be how many community meetings did you have?
We had two, at least two community meetings.
We had an initial RCO, which was subsequently removed from the process for reasons that
are between them and the council office.
And then we met with Allegheny West.
And that's, of course, a prerequisite to even getting to the CDR review.
C.J. also personally met with RCO leadership in an event entitled Meet the Developer where he met with them and they discussed employment opportunities for folks in the community.
All right. Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just had a quick question for Mr. Anastasio.
In your revised packet, you indicated that there are revised plans,
but I was unable to determine how many pages.
Can you tell me how many pages, if the board were to grant, would need to be approved?
Yeah, Mr. Weedman could probably tell you how many pages are different than the initial
submission.
Mark, are you able to tell us that?
Can you hear me?
I can tell you how many were in the final package that we turned into the CDR.
There were 26 sheets, including architectural, landscape, and a site plan.
How many of those, so there was a proviso plans form in the packet.
How many pages show the changes that were in the proviso, listed on the proviso plans form?
of the 26 mark
is typically we try to just um maybe do elevations and site plans to stamp not floor
plans because we recognize that those could change um through the building permit process
So that would be just of the plans.
I essentially need to know based on the proviso plans form, how many pages of plans would need to be stamped if the board approves that show those changes?
Mr. Reedman, if you just want to take a minute to review that, maybe we can move to public
testimony and commission recommendation.
That's fine.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Tina Marie Russell.
Ms. Russell, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning, Ms. Russell.
Ms. Russell?
Ms. Russell?
Good morning.
Good morning. This is Tina Marie Russell.
Hi. Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please, Tina?
Sure. T-I-N-A-M-A-R-I-E-R-U-S-S-E-L-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Okay. So we are North Central Philadelphia CDC. We are the RCO in the area as well.
So we opposed this plan for several reasons.
One, we wanted to start off by saying for the record
that all RCOs are equal.
There was no one over the other one
and all RCOs are to be considered as one.
So the second thing is that any delays
that was toward this applicant
had to do with the applicant.
One of the delays that we kept
as one of the beginning RCO coordinators was the fact that we could never get the applicant to
provide proof of senior-only housing. And why that's important from HUD. And why that's important
is because once a person, you have to have a proof because you want to separate the housing
for a particular type of person or housing situation. So you have to have proof from HUD
that this has been approved before you can say, I'm just going to make it for seniors,
because if they changed their mind later on,
you could take that same property
and use it for anything else,
even though you might have all the well intentions
to make it for seniors only.
So we also did not receive any notification
about any meeting.
There was never a meeting for the community held by us
for RCO purpose.
Meet the developer was just simply
about meeting the developers.
And it was developers there from all over
of not just North Philadelphia,
but also from other parts of the city.
So it was just meet the developer and all the other RCOs were not at that particular event.
So we never had a meeting for this particular activity because when we were going to host one, the owner had went to his trip to Africa.
And after that, we were changed to another.
We had more cases that we could hold.
So we had removed ourselves from this particular case.
We also got no documentation of mailings after the CDR was performed. We had no documentation of the divisions. We have not had any communication at all about this particular project since it's been removed from one RCO to another RCO. There's been no communication.
The most we got was from the CDR and that came from the CDR. So we are opposed and we think we would like to have the board view our request and to, before you make a decision on this particular application.
Mr. Chair, if I might, I'm not going to cross-examine Ms. Russell. I do want to, for the record, note that as we explained then and we continue to explain, we cannot be approved for the senior independent living unless or until a use permit is secured.
And we will be working with the council office, if you're kind enough to grant the variance, to move forward in filling the building with area senior citizens that desperately need a place to live in that area.
Secondly, it was the council office that intentionally removed North Central from the entire process for various reasons that I don't believe would benefit them if I got into.
But we leave that up to the council office and the coordinating RCO.
But our procedure was crystal clear.
We made it known the property was posted.
the mailings went out twice and everybody was notified of those meetings and this hearing
but north central was intentionally removed for whatever reason I'm sure Mr. Richardson is here
to echo the council's office's support for the RCO that they then selected in light of
what had transpired prior. Thank you. Thank you, counsel, and thank you, Ms. Russell.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience that wants to testify?
Here we have Charles Richardson with his hand up. Mr. Richardson, could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter? Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman
cindy bathroom 508 city hall i'm not going to get into whatever whatever swear me please
I'm not going to get into the reasons why changes to the RCO, the coordinating RCO.
The coordinating RCO has issued a letter of support, and based on that letter of support, the Councilwoman has no objection to granting the variances.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
We appreciate your time.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have someone with the phone number ending in 3552.
Caller, can you please unmute yourself and wait for the chair?
Good morning.
Can you hear me now?
Could you state your name?
I believe you've already been sworn in and spelled again for the court reporter.
yes i was sworn in this is adrian fernandez my name last name is spelled f-e-r-n-a-n-d-e-z
from the affected rco swamp widow neighborhood parcels association rco all right proceed
okay um we are opposed to this project because there's been inadequate and um
non-compliant notice of the public meeting before the public hearing
um there were there were a lot of problems why this project um the uh the hearing was delayed
and there were one or more continuances all of the continuances were due to actions of the
applicant slash applicant party um the major reason was that the applicant scheduled the
ZBA hearing without applying for a CDR that those transactions were documented and it was David
Fecto that said that that CDR had to be scheduled before any ZBA hearings to take place. There were
no public meetings at that time. Before the first, I think it was about a year ago, before the first
ZBA hearing was scheduled. So each delay was due to the CDR not being scheduled,
the owner not being available, and I also believe there were too many addresses that
were being assigned to the first RCO coordinator, which was NCP RCO. We received no proof of mailings
as we should receive. There was a lot of private communication between Allegheny West Foundation
after they were reassigned as the RCO coordinator and the applicant, and our zoning code has no
provisions for private processes with you know in the RCO process everything is public with the
affected RCOs and with the affected neighbors so if there is a meeting say with just RCOs
all the RCOs have to agree to that and planning has improved their RCO notification and they have
um they have placed a note there to make rco coordinators aware that all rcos have to be part
of the entire process and that statement is is uh verified in the zoning code as section 14303
e1 and it's um it gives specifications for neighborhood meetings and stresses that all
affected RCOs have to be consulted by an RCO coordinator. An RCO coordinator just being one
of those affected RCOs that is scheduling the meeting to make things more efficient. But we're
all equal without hierarchy. In this case, for this address, there were five affected RCOs and
169 affected neighbors. I know of no affected neighbors and only Allegheny West Foundation
which is one of the five RCOs that were notified and attended the meeting, there are some emails
about that that could be provided to help to understand that. It's also possible that there
were two refusals, and the dates of those refusals being that if there was a change refusal,
that change refusal was not part of any private meetings or alleged public meetings. So that's
also a problem because the public meeting should only be held on the actual refusal that is the
active refusal if it was updated, if it was amended or corrected. We have no presentation at all.
We have no presentation at all.
There was one for CDR.
At the CDR, I was the only testifier.
It's possible the council office may have testified.
There were no neighbors testifying,
no affected neighbors and no
other affected RCOs were testifying.
So that was also, but notice was sent out
by planning as required.
There were changes that were recommended.
from the two CDR meetings, and if those changes were reflected in drawings, and I believe
they were because we had not seen them, those changes were not presented in a public meeting
before the public hearing, which is a problem because we're not aware of what this hearing
is really about if we don't have the last refusal and if we don't have the last drawings.
As far as the senior housing, yes, neighbors do want senior housing, affordable senior housing. Yes, they do. However, we have to be, we have to have verification that that will be certified, whether it's through the state process and or a deed restriction, and that needs to be discussed.
if that has to be a proviso that also needs to be discussed in a public meeting because it is a very
critical manner because conversion of 99 units on one corner to neighbors that are not senior
even with seniors that's a lot especially with a daycare but if they're converted
that could be a nightmare of negative impacts in our community
um the this project proposes um 99 units um and a daycare center so therefore you have a lot of
traffic and parking uh issues that were also um not discussed uh with the affected parties the
public and the affected addresses because there was no notice of a public meeting and if mr burn
can supply that afterwards, we would appreciate that for all the public meetings and the private
meetings that HILA just happened. We never met the owner. Tim Russell made numerous attempts to try
to, I think she did meet the owner, but tried to get the owner to come to meetings. And we were
told the owner was in Africa. And that's one of the reasons why it was difficult to schedule
meetings when she was the first RCO coordinator that was appointed. And I imagine there was some
back and forth between
NCP, RCO.
Mr. Chair, I need to
object to the
Why don't we do this?
Object to the hearsay.
I know, I know. You're going to have a chance
to go talk.
Mr. Landis, why don't
we start to wrap this up?
Okay, I've not given any hearsay
at all. I'm only speaking about what I have
knowledge of. What I don't
have knowledge of, like presentations,
updated after the CDR
and if the refusal was changed.
I believe there's a refusal in August
and it may have been one in December of 2021 also.
But everything I'm speaking about
is what I have knowledge of.
Thank you very much for...
All right.
Thank you for calling.
We appreciate it.
Thank you.
Why don't I see if there's anyone else?
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Here, I see no other hands at this time.
Mr. Anastasio, why don't you? Thanks. I just want to make sure that we're very clear. I've provided
certified evidence today that on two separate occasions, my office mailed notice of both
community meeting and zoning board of adjustment hearing to 169 individual households. I've
submitted that evidence in writing today as part of my exhibit packet. That's number one. Number two,
Two, the CDR will not meet with us unless they are advised by the RCOs that a meeting has taken place.
So, again, we would not even be here and the CDR would not have either even met with us if we hadn't had proof of a meeting with the registered community organization.
The only private meeting that was brought up, and I only brought it up, was with North Central, the first RCO, which was summarily removed from the process for whatever reason.
We're not going to get into.
But everyone knew about these meetings.
Everybody got mailed.
Everyone knows about this hearing.
and because the location next to a train track would make it impossible to build single family
homes here because the industrial classification of the property is antiquated because we offer
Because we offer underground parking to accommodate the staff, and because the senior housing is a much-needed amenity that the community is desperate for after decades of disinvestment, I respectfully request the granting of this variance.
underground parking to accommodate the staff.
Thank you.
Could you ask your architect how many pages should the board vote for this, the entire board?
Is the architect there, Mark?
he's here yeah could he come back one please
i've got uh 10 sheets thank you mark hillary is that okay
that is fine mr chair um if the board grants i will need a separate pdf of those 10 sheets
so that I know what needs to be stamped.
We'll make that happen.
Thank you.
MI 2021 003 722 1901 was, yes.
I haven't testified, sorry.
Oh, I'm sorry, David.
I'm sorry, David.
I'm sorry.
I didn't mean that.
I would never want to bypass you.
I'm sorry.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
And I apologize for interrupting.
Good afternoon.
Good morning Chair and members of the Board, David Vecto City Planning Commission.
The case completed its Civic Design Review in November of 2022.
The Civic Design Review Committee's advisory recommendations are not an expression of the Planning Commission's recommendation or opinion regarding zoning variances, special exceptions, or other discretionary approvals associated with this proposal.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from I-1, medium industrial, to ICMX, industrial and commercial mixed use at this location.
The applicant has shown that a hardship exists that would prevent the building from being used as currently zoned or as the property is proposed to be zoned.
However, staff notes that the promised affordability of these units cannot be enforced by any city agency.
The City Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the dimensional and use variances.
Thank you. MI 2021-003-722-1901 Westmoreland Street. I vote yes. Proviso. Approved use is adult
care on the first floor with multiple family household living above and also revised plans
10 pages approved by ZBA April 5th today.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes, Mr. Vice President.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes, Mr. Vice President.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Counsel, you have the three votes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, sir.
All right.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience whose 9.30 a.m. case has not been called?
i've seen no hands at this time chair uh mr chair we can call number 12 1737 virgin street
we did receive exhibits for that and they are complete i'm sorry mi201-001-28-1737
bergen street mark fineman is the attorney this is a resumptive hearing hillary
i believe so we had a hearing before but we needed amended refusal we don't have the amended
refusal yet but council can testify today as to what is being requested under the amended refusal
we will get any testimony from planning and the public okay thank you mr fineman can you please
raise your hand he's coming back in as a panelist now chair okay
Good morning, Mr. Feynman.
Mr. Feynman?
my apologies i was on you know my my apologies i don't almost bypass you i'm really sorry could
you say your name please and spell for the court reporter yes thank you very much good morning
mark feinman f as in frank e-i-n-m-a-n uh esquire representing the applicant um property owner which
the applicant um property owner which is l and a installations llc and this is the truth the
which is L-N-
whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do and uh all your paperwork's in i'm right that is correct
right so why don't why don't you give us a summary because this is a resumptive hearing right
Thank you very much. I appreciate that. In October 12, 2022, we presented testimony at that time, along with the exhibits.
The property is a twin ranch style home in northeast Philadelphia in the Bell's Corner section of the city.
The application was for the legalization of the removal of one off street accessory interior parking space in the existing semi-detached structure and for one new off street accessory surface parking space.
Essentially, what had occurred here was the owner of the property had rented out to tenants as a family.
They were living in that property.
One of the family members of the tenant was injured in an accident and became paralyzed.
As a result of the paralysis and being confined, for the most part, to a wheelchair,
the family came to the landlord and asked whether or not they would be able to make some
revisions to the configuration of the property to enable them to stay there with their family
member living in the basement and not having to deal with steps and those issues that would be
encountered because of the paralysis. There were changes made, but they were not done with a permit,
And that's how this all surfaced. And and as a result of that, there had to be submission for the change that was refused.
And this appeal resulted from that. We went through the process.
We presented photographs. We presented the diagrams and showing essentially what had been desired and intended was to convert the basement quarters into living quarters.
Changing the interior garage into the bedroom area and sealing off that garage door.
When we presented last time, during the questioning, it became apparent that one of the issues that arose was that there are kitchen facilities that were placed into the basement area.
and therefore it was recognized that there needed to be an amended application submitted
to reflect that this area would be a residential dwelling area
and that the original application needed to be amended for that purpose.
There was a letter that was sent on October 13th to the Zoning Board of Adjustment
seeking permission to amend the actual application.
However, there was not one sent to L&I.
The packet that was introduced back in October has two things that are outdated, but those have been produced and actually were sent over.
That includes the current tax certification of clearance since that had expired.
And then there were four photographs, which would be the photographs showing the recent posting for this hearing.
And those were posted on March the 14th.
And that's the overview of it.
And as I've indicated, the idea behind it was the exterior parking space was the parking grounds that already existed there, just that we were now getting rid of the interior garage and converting that into living quarters.
We had meetings with the community RCO, and they were supportive.
And I believe that that letter was already submitted directly to the board previously.
And that was from a meeting that had taken place of May of 2022.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Sorry, Bill, trying to hit the button here.
No, no, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
no mr chair thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just have a quick question for Mr. Feynman. Mr. Feynman, can you confirm that the additional dwelling unit in the basement was presented to the RCO at their meeting?
mr chair this is hillary i just have a quick question for mr fineman um
I can confirm that. That was discussed at length with them. And as I indicated, they were supportive of that.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i've seen no hands at this time chair planning commission morning chair bergman david vecto with
the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change the residential single
family zoning at this location for proposed conditions rear yard parking and parking stall
depth exist on the whole block the application would match the character of the block the city
Planning Commission recommends the board grant the variances. Thank you. Do we have a proviso
for this? Mr. Chair, we need to hold for the amended refusal. I have the letter as of today
from Mr. Feingham, so we will go ahead and issue our authorization letter and get that done within
the next few weeks. Okay, Mr. Feingham, thank you very much. We will back you in a couple weeks,
okay? Thank you very much. Thank you for coming in today. We appreciate it. You're welcome.
Have a nice day.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, with that case, the record is closed except for receipt of the amended refusal.
Thank you very much, Hillary.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
See everybody at 2 o'clock.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's EBA hearings.
With me is our vice chair, David.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, James Snellman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
He should be on any minute, by the way.
Also here is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sung.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumkin.
Let's look at our continuances for this afternoon.
Number eight, MI 2022, 005-549-5900 Winsome Street. That case is continued. Mark must be tried.
And number 14 on our list, MI 2022-006-833, 1713 North 42nd Street, that case is continued.
Is there any comments relative to the two cases that have been continued?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
I see no hands at this time, Cher.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
Here it is here.
Number one, MI 2022-001-770-5021 Aspen Street.
I vote no.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Number two, MI 2022 001 768 1625 North 18th Street.
I vote no.
Mr. Holliman will not vote on this matter.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Number three, MI 2022-165 West Seymour.
MI 2022, 165 West Seymour Street.
This is a re-vote.
I vote yes with maximum one dwelling unit and two personal services only in the two first floor commercial spaces.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell
my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shahid
my vote is yes with proviso
number four
MI 2022
002 962
4213 Germantown Avenue
I vote no
Thomas Tollman
my vote is no
James Snell my vote is no
Ishmael Shahid
my vote is no
Ishmael Shahid
Number five, MI 2022-003-932-2352 North 29th Street, I vote yes for reconsideration and rehearing.
Thomas Hull, my vote is yes to reconsideration and reconsideration.
James Snell, my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Number six, MI 2022-003-166-4847-49 Haverford Avenue, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
We're going to move to our regular list.
Number one, MI-2022-007-219-714 South 16th Street.
Sean Quarry is the owner applicant.
There's a letter of opposition from the South Street Neighbors Association.
This use is for visitor accommodation in an existing structure.
Mr. Quarry, can you raise your hand, please?
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good accident, sir.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Sean Corey, S-E-A-N-C-O-A-R-Y.
Swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, sir.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits into our offices that are required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you.
Please proceed to share your screen.
share my screen yes yeah so you want to put your documents up oh okay
and there's a green button on the bottom says share screen gotcha okay
okay take your time yeah sorry uh
you see the green button on this there you go you're good right so the the reason i'm here
today is for the visitor accommodation permit basically the short-term uh rental for properties
such as airbnb and vrbo uh as we know the city council passed uh the legislation back in 2021
that, you know, the need to rezone the area for the residents for this type.
I would like to point out, you know, that, you know, in Inquirer, when Squilla was mentioning
and talking about this rezoning, you know, the focus was, you know, we're not anti-rentals.
You know, we want more rentals.
You know, we want everyone to be in compliance.
And that's what I'm here today is to be in compliance with the rules that are in place and really just do it the right way and do it in the letter of the law and not run an illegal Airbnb.
I am here to follow the rules because we know we do have big events coming up with the World Cup coming up and the 250th anniversary.
the world cup coming up and the 250th anniversary, you know, the rentals are necessary. Uh, I've been
Rentals are necessary.
running this, uh, Airbnb for, you know, a few years, uh, and we've never had, uh, a problem,
uh, in the last three years. If we look at the incidents for, uh, this property, there were,
uh, no noise complaints. There was no, uh, complaints from neighbors. Uh, the addresses
is here really for an auto accident that, you know, was nearby. So, you know, we did not have
issues with our property running this as an Airbnb and VRBO. And a lot of that comes down to
how we run, how I run my business. I do not allow parties. You know, we have explicitly state that
there's no bachelor parties, no bachelorette parties, no birthday parties, no baby showers,
all of that to ensure that we are good neighbors with our next door neighbors.
We strive to have a good relationship with them.
We require that the guests provide us their driver's license.
So we have an ID of those people that are booking the property.
We make them sign a legal contract outlining quiet hours and number of guests in the properties.
We have security cameras and noise monitors to ensure that parties are not occurring at the property.
If you look at the RCO letter that was noted, one of the...
Why don't you put the RCO letter on?
Oh, okay. I'm sorry.
All right. So I need to new share. Sorry.
There it is. Yeah. So it occurred over two meetings and it was a healthy discussion talking about the benefits that short term rentals do provide in the city.
um you know they noticed that you know uh there's i there's no deck or no balcony uh in this uh
unit so you know we're not worried about you know loud music or people outside and even one of the
board members noticed that you know our street is extremely clean and that's because you know i have
my cleaners go out there and make sure that you know after trash day that you know the trash is
picked up. You know, as far as the support here, you know, two of the Sansa board members were
in support of it. Three did, were in opposition. And one is a near neighbor. And I want to point
that out specifically, as the one neighbor that was on the panel did not, is actually just three
doors down from me. And for years, did not even know that this was an Airbnb, just thought that
it was a neighbor. So to me, even though he was in opposition, because he's in opposition with
short-term rentals in general, the fact that, you know, even three doors down did not know that,
you know, it was an Airbnb being run, I think really speaks manners of how, you know, I've
been running this Airbnb. So he's, that neighbor was in opposition just because of the opposition
of short-term generals in, or in general, and not specifically for issues with this,
you know, property. Mr. Corey, why don't you, why don't you do this? Why don't you show some
photos oh yes sorry okay those are photos of the property okay
okay uh new share uh
So, it's a traditional, you know, three-story, you know, row home, you know, updated, you know, here with, you know, bathroom and, you know, bedroom.
You know how to turn it? Why don't you turn your screen? You know how to do that?
You go, you go.
Yeah, that's it. Okay.
so you know just traditional uh bedrooms uh you know that you know that we have uh you know for
traditional uh real home you know we provide you know a desk for uh you know people that are uh
you know coming in uh you know for let me rotate you know this again uh you know just a living room
for you know people you know to gather uh as i mentioned since we don't allow bachelor parties
bachelorette parties, birthday parties, baby showers. We get mostly families coming in during
the summer to, you know, visit Old City. We get people coming in for college visits because
Philadelphia has 85 colleges within, you know, in the city limits. We have graduations from
Temple, Penn, LaSalle, St. Joe's, all of those. We get the occasional wedding guests, but, you know,
we really focus on providing, you know, a family environment, you know, for our guests. And since
uh, you know, for, for our guests. Uh, and since we really focus on those families coming in to
we really focus on those families coming into
visit, uh, family visit Philadelphia, you know, visit colleges, you know, we haven't had issues
in the last three years. We don't have, you know, the, the police reports going there, uh, for it.
And, you know, we really focus on just providing, uh, you know, a, a home for people that are coming
to, um, you know, to visit. And I think we've been a great neighbor, uh, just shown by the fact
that, you know, one of the Sansa board members didn't even know that it was an Airbnb. We haven't
had neighborhood issues. And, you know, and we're proud of the service that we put together. And
we're trying to do it the right way by going through this, you know, this zoning process.
All right. So, questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
there are no hands at this time chair planning commission yes this is uh ron bednar the first
name r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do proceed sir so property is indicated for residential use on a city plan or
adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing uh existing zoning at this location
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request for variance not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022, 007-219-714 South 16th Street.
I vote yes, proviso.
Temporary variance expires 4-6-26.
Thomas Holliman my vote is yes with proviso James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shahid my vote is yes with proviso thank you sir thank you
Number two, MI 2022-006-841-1720 Chestnut Street.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from the Center City Residence Association with provisos.
Mr. Mattione is coming back in now, Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Mr. Mattione.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Michael Mattione, M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do could you identify your client the relationship to this property sure my client
is 17 chest 20 llc they are a tenant in this building the owner of the property 1720 chestnut
lp okay i represent good our vice chair has a few questions sir sure good afternoon counsel do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? It's a referral and yes.
Okay. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Please share your screen. Thank you.
All right. Good afternoon. And again, I represent 17 Chess 20 LLC. The principal of the organization
is Avram Hornick. We seek a special exception to be able to operate a sports-themed sit-down
restaurant with live music and dancing in the basement in this long vacant space at 1720
Chestnut Street. And in support of the application, we presented the referral, the non-opposition
letter from center city residents association the zoning plan floor plans elevation photographs
lease proof of mailing of notices of the rco meeting tenant is leasing the first floor and
lower level of the building at at 1720 chestnut street and that building
is shown in the photographs yep
And there it is, right there on 1720 Chestnut Street.
Avram Hornick is a successful operator of many restaurants and entertainment venues in Philadelphia,
including nearby establishments, Rosie's Tacos at 2020 Walnut, Harper's Garden, 31 South 18th Street, Noche at 1901 Chestnut, and Concourse Bar at 1635 Chestnut, just to name a few.
including nearby establishments, Rosie's Tacos at 2020 Walnut.
He signed a lease for the ground floor and lower level at 1720 Chestnut Street, like I said, to operate a sports bar and casual restaurant on the first floor,
an assembly and entertainment facility in the lower level for private parties such as rehearsal
dinners bar mitzvahs birthday parties and similar types of celebrations and that will include live
music and dancing in the basement the indoor restaurant use is permitted in cmx4 but because
of the overlay we are required required to seek a special exception and here is the referral
just stating that the proposed sit-down restaurant
is a special exception.
I'd like to move down and show the floor plans.
And this is, like I said, a two-story establishment.
The first floor is here.
You walk in.
This is Chestnut Street.
Stock Exchange Place is in the back.
Here's the foyer when you walk in.
You can walk downstairs to the private party room, or you can walk into the main restaurant area, and you have the kitchen, the restrooms, and another set of steps.
Then if you're downstairs, the private party room with a bar and live entertainment and dancing, and it's specifically provided for in the non-opposition letter from CCRA.
Again, as requested, CCRA is a bunch of provisors in their letter.
they requested that all cutlery and utensils be non-disposable. We agreed. We agreed to all of
these. No music to be played outside of the restaurant and no music audible outside of the
restaurant. Incidental takeout no more than 10 percent of sales. Ventilation for the kitchen
will be through the roof. Dancing and live music will be on the lower level. All deliveries will
be from Stock Exchange Place and deliveries will be after 8 a.m. Monday to Friday and 9 a.m. on
weekends. We have one requested deviation. CCRA asks that trash be stored inside. We would like
to store it outside in dumpsters. As you can see, Stock Exchange Place, virtually every establishment
on the street has a dumpster out in the back where they store the trash. We want to do the
same thing as everybody else. Mr. Hornick, who is an experienced restaurateur, can explain why that
is a better situation than having it stored inside. The restaurant will be ramped, responsible
alcohol management program certified by the LCB. And again, the special exception is a conditionally
permitted use. We believe we comply with the requirements of 14303.7 E1 and E2. Under 7E1,
this is a sit-down restaurant, so it's specifically permitted. And if you look at the street,
This block, the 1700 block of Chestnut Street, there are numerous other restaurants, including Grand Café L'Aquila, the Bruno Brothers, Ancient Spirits and Grill, Just Salad, Kura Sushi, Paris Baguette, 10 Asian Food Hall, Kava, Continental Midtown.
Again, we'll have dining, we'll have a bar, sports theme.
We will have the chef from Rosie's Tacos prepare the menu here.
and in the basement we will have special events with live music and dancing and you know 17 14
30 372 we believe these requirements are met we're not going to cause congestion in the public
streets i mean this is chestnut street in center city it's a commercial corridor it's commercial
use we're not going to overcrowd the land it's consistent with other buildings there's no new
construction here the building is not going to impair light and air to neighboring properties
uh we're not going to burden public facilities it's an existing building in the commercial
corridor again we have non-opposition from ccra will benefit the community by bringing eyes and
ears to this property that's been vacant for about four years so uh and the operation is consistent
with the mixed use zoning um the applicant we believe met its burden to show the restaurant
will not detrimentally impact the neighborhood beyond that what is normally expected from such
use and believe that the special exception should be granted.
I would like to call on Mr. Avram Hornick, Mr. Chairman.
Sir, could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter?
Mr. Hornick, please unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Hi, sir. Could you state your name and then spell it for the court reporter?
Sir, could you state your name and then spell for the court reporter?
Sure, it's Avram Hornick.
Sure. It's Avram Hornick. A, V as in Victor, R-A-M as in Mary, Hornick, H-O-R-N-I-K.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Avram, did you hear my statements?
Yes, I did.
Are they true and correct?
Yes, they are.
Do you adopt them as your testimony?
And did you have any further comment about the trash issue?
I think it's important to indicate that with internal trash storage, the trash needs to move twice rather than once.
My experience has been that if you have in this, if it was a residential area or an area where other retail stores, I think will be different.
But in this case, when it's really a service alley, it's a lot cleaner and more efficient to store the trash in the dumpster because the staff can then put the trash directly in the dumpster, whereas they're going to have to store it inside and then move it outside for trash pickup, which creates, I think, more of a problem and more detrimental to the neighbors on the property than just having the dumpster outside like the rest of the neighbors do.
I have nothing further, Mr. Chairman.
All right, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions and comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Ryan Bednar, City Planning.
The property is zoned for commercial mixed use
on the city plan, given the site's physical circumstances
and the physical circumstances
the proposed use will have no more of an impact
than would be expected to have
or specific anticipated use.
Therefore, we recommend a request for special exception.
Also, the provisos that we see are enforceable.
No exterior music, assembly and entertainment use
only permitted in basement.
Is that okay?
That's fine, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, so MI 2022-006-841-1720 Chestnut Street,
I vote yes, proviso.
no exterior music no assembly and entertainment use only permitted in basement
thomas holland my vote is yes with proviso james snell my vote is yes with proviso ishmael shaheed
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2022-0007-130, 160 to 64 North 2nd Street.
Ronald Patterson is the attorney.
We have a letter of recommendation of opposition from Old City District
and letter of opposition from council member Squilla.
Chair, Mr. Patterson is coming back in now.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Patterson, good afternoon.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Michael, you have to close your screen, please.
Good afternoon. My name is Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N, on behalf of the owner and operator of this project.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And could you identify your client, please, and the relationship to this property?
Sure. One second, please. Let me get the appropriate name here.
It is 160-64 North 2nd Street, and on behalf of the owner is Justin Vesey, V-E-A-S-E-Y,
if you could have him promoted as well today.
Sure, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance to our office?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Are you able to see my screen?
We can.
Okay, great. Thank you.
So as was mentioned, this case regards 160, that's 62 North 2nd Street. It's at the corner of 2nd and Race. It was a one-story building last used as Food and Equipment Service Center that sold restaurant and commercial food equipment and did servicing.
So, as was mentioned, this case regards 160, that's 60.
It was a one-story building and had a side parking lot over here.
This was how it was entered, and the curb cut.
The proposal, we'll just go through some of these photographs so we understand the location.
Sorry about this.
There we go.
So the proposal originally was to demolish the building, which has been demolished, to construct a six-story building,
having on the first floor two commercial spaces fronting on 2nd Street and on Vine Street of 1,285 square feet
and another one of 555 square feet, with a residential lobby on the first floor
and on floors 2 through 6, six residential dwelling units.
There's a history of approvals here that are relevant to the application.
The property is located in a CMX3 commercial zoning district and subject to a handful,
a variety of overlays, and namely the old city overlay is the one that applies here.
So the initial application was reviewed by L&I, and in the review, L&I required on-site
parking spaces in the ratio that turned out to be three parking spaces.
In order to move the application forward, we were able to locate and agree to provide three spaces off-site and nearby 304 Ray Street.
As a result, Alan, I issued the permit dated April 4, 2022, numbered ZP-2022-001706.
So with that in hand, the building was designed for six units.
with the viability projections that included parking.
The poll of the nearby neighbors, the immediate neighbors,
we concluded that parking was scarce and that parking was needed for this project.
The off-site parking turned out not to be viable and practical,
and hence we designed a plan to provide on-site parking on site.
And I'll show you the layout.
This was the original plan with the parking off-site.
It had two commercial spaces, one here on 2nd Street, one here on Vine Street.
The parking plan removed one space, commercial space, which was this space, and provided an interior parking garage for three spaces.
So we designed that and submitted the application for on-site parking.
The building design proceeded with the removed commercial space.
And L&I issued Zoning Permit No. 2, CP-2022-004660, that was issued that approved these three parking spaces.
So further relying on these permits, we finalized the building plans and obtained a building permit.
and during that review the building plans examiner said that we needed well actually what happened
was during that period we went to the historical commission for the building and the historical
commission asked if we could reduce the parapet height slightly which we agreed to do so we went
back in to amend the building permit and during that review the examiner then determined that
But not that the parking was not allowed, but we were violating this old city overlay in terms of not providing 100 percent, 100 feet worth of commercial space for a depth of 30 feet by removing this commercial space here that we originally had.
So the commercial spaces were supposed to flank the street frontage.
flank the street frontage. So the refusal that it was issued, I'll pull that up.
So the refusal letter was issued.
As you see here, we're not providing commercial space, 100% of the ground floor, 100 feet within 30 feet,
which really were a drive aisle and parking space would be used up the space that I showed you that
was in purple, which brings us to today. So we seek a variance to keep these three parking spaces
by removing the one parking space and not providing the space dimensions for commercial
on the street, as I mentioned. We believe the hardship exists in many facets. We have vested
rights, we believe, and we justifiably relied upon zoning permits one and two, or by especially
Number two, Elle and I approved the parking on site and justifiably relied upon that determination moving forward with finalizing the design and obtaining the building permit.
The property is a little peculiarly configured to both would have allowed both parking or commercial spaces.
The current conditions of past use, the proposed use, the surrounding use create not necessary hardship.
and that parking is scarce in the area therefore needed and more so as we'll hear from some
witnesses existing commercial spaces in the area are substantially vacant and therefore would not
be viable here yet we don't believe by granting this variance to remove the commercial space
that it will create any adverse impacts on the public health safety welfare and traffic and
especially as to traffic i would know the streets department approved the design and configuration
and uh and i would know that the immediate neighbors want this parking um as again parking
is scarce and valuable especially on this block uh yes we did meet uh with old city district
who's issued a letter of opposition um of course not pleased with the vote not quite understand the
vote uh we did had nearby neighbors attempt to join the meeting but could not get in
So they subsequently sent letters saying that they were in support of the application and the media neighbors being the most aggrieved neighbors, we believe, would have the loudest and most pervasive voice.
But under the rules of the OCD, they said they had to be in attendance in order for that OCD to acknowledge the vote.
So they'll be here today.
So in any event, the nearby neighbors are here now and being such that you're immediately and directly aggrieved.
Mr. Patterson, what was the vote?
I'll show you.
I don't know if I have the letter here.
I know you mentioned it in the intro.
I'd have to find it, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you.
Here it is. Hold on. There we go.
Okay. So with that, I'd like to, if you could promote Justin Vesey, my first witness.
Can you swear him in, please?
Mr. Vesey, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Chair, I don't see anyone with the last name Vesey. We have a Mr. Itzkowitz.
yeah he's with ocd um is um neil we'd also like to promote if they're there mr neil campbell
or frank swift barry belski and oleg sokolov all at one time oh sure
are they neighbors they're all meeting neighbors they all the same comments so we can have maybe
how about for the neighbors why don't you wait till i call for a virtual audience okay
Okay, sure. I was going to use that as a guess and say, here's one, and they all follow with it.
So, is Mr. Veazey there?
He just raised his hand.
Okay, fine. Thank you.
Mr. Veazey, can you please unmute yourself or wait for the chair?
Hello?
Hi, Mr. Veazey. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Justin Veazey, J-U-S-T-I-N-V-E-A-S-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth?
Proceed.
Hi, Justin. You've heard my presentation and testimony. Would you agree that it's true and accurate?
And you would adopt that as if it were your own?
And you've heard the zoning permit history. That is accurate, especially as to spending the time and money to design and build the building with the parking included?
um and um you chose parking why so i chose parking um because originally that was
so i chose parking um because originally that was what was required in the building when i purchased
it um and it was approved and again we went through this process as ron mentioned
i was talking to the immediate neighbors that's what i'm getting oh yes yes yep i spoke with i
spent a lot of time on site talking to all the immediate neighbors and even the councilman has
been involved from the start so i'm not really i know there was mention of a letter of support i'm
not really sure as to why, because he's been in conversations with me since day one on the spot.
Okay. Well, there's anything else you'd like to add? If not, then we'll move on, Mr. Chairman.
All right. Questions from the board. No, Mr. Chairman. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Who's Justin? He
didn't introduce himself. What is he? Oh, sorry. Sorry about that. Yes. Justin,
please identify your relationship with the project. So I'm Justin Beesey, and I'm a partner
and BVG Property Group, who's the developer on the project.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there any questions?
All right, questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mr. Itzkowicz.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. My name is Job, J-O-B as in boy, Itzkowicz, I-T-Z-K-O-W-I-T-Z.
I'm the executive director of the Old City District.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I just want to provide some additional factual background on Mr. Patterson's
recitation of the permit history, we have no dispute with. So I just want to make that clear
to the board. We, there is one thing that I wanted to correct. We have a process for registering for
our meetings. That process was sent to Mr. Patterson in advance. People need to register
by the same day. This has been going back since the beginning of the virtual meetings. We didn't
have anyone trying to get in later that day. We did receive those emails subsequently, but our
rules are posted about who can vote uh and that's how that vote worked out um yeah like that's that's
thanks ron um so uh the only other thing i wanted to add i'm not a voting member i'm an administrator
for the organization uh but there are two things the board did support this change to the code
several years ago requiring commercial corridors to be commercial in nature um and that's what the
hang up is on the refusal. The other thing that happened at this same time is that the board
advocated successfully for the elimination of parking minimums in this area. So there is no
requirement for there to be parking on site, nor was there when they originally signed a lease
with 304 race. The only other thing I wanted to mention was, you know, it is escaping. Oh,
with regards to scarcity, I know Mr. Patterson expressed an issue of scarcity. We have conducted
two parking studies over the last five years, one in 2017, one in 2022. Our parking studies
revealed that there's only about 55% occupancy in our lots. And in fact, that doesn't even include
the monthly permit lot right across the street underneath the Ben Franklin Bridge.
So those are the only things I just wanted to add to put in the rest of the picture. But like I said,
I'm not a voting member. I may have a board member who's on the line also, but I'm not sure
if he was able to join. All right. Thank you very much for taking the time to call. Who else in the
virtual audience? Mr. Campbell, Mr. Swift, Mr. Belsky, or Mr. Sokolov? Here we have William
Murr. And William Murr. Sure. Thank you. Sure. Okay. Mr. Murr, please unmute yourself and wait
for the chair i have unmuted could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
sure my name is william muir w-i-l-l-i-a-m-n-u-h-r right do you swear or affirm tell
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor i am proceed uh my interest
The project is I live at 240 Race Street, a series of eight townhomes adjacent to Patty's Pub on the south side of Race Street between 2nd and 3rd.
And we've seen, obviously, a lot of growth in the area, which is a good thing, and new residential coming in, the large project up around 4th and 5th, on Race between 5th and 4th.
we have the large building that's going to be opposite across the street from
large building uh that's going to be opposite across the street from uh from this new project
and uh i can tell you my concern that i see on a daily basis when i uh both when i get leave for
example this morning leaving to go to work there was a vehicle partially blocking our common drive
it's not a rare occurrence and as i walk my dog every day and as we walk through the neighborhood
we certainly see um a not insignificant amount of empty commercial storefront space
we do seem to have a lack of parking in the area and as we bring more and more uh residential in
it seems as though it makes more sense to provide the parking to these people coming into the area
as opposed to providing uh more commercial which we seem to have a plethora of so
You're in favor of the project, sir?
I am very much in favor of the project and of the parking in particular.
Thank you for taking the time to call.
Who else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Campbell, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
I'm unmuted.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
neil campbell n-e-i-l c-a-m p as in paul b as in boy e-l-l right do you swear or affirm
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do sir yes are you a neighbor
i'm the immediate neighbor to the west i'm the owner of race street cafe 208 210 race street
Sure. Proceed, sir.
I'm in favor of the project.
I, as some of the others here, have noticed the increase in population density in Old City and the parking problems have come with it.
We have a no parking zone in front of our cafe that is constantly packed with illegally parked cars.
And I could see that same thing happening around the immediate area.
And then within the immediate area, only maybe five doors to the west of us, there are two retail spaces still open.
And I think that's indicative of what's going on in Old City right now.
The need for parking outweighs the need for retail.
We've had a great relationship with Justin as he moves through this process.
We're going to be working to develop some outside dining behind our restaurant after this process gets completed.
So I'm in favor of the project.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell, for calling in.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mr. Swift.
Mr. Swift, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hello.
Could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter?
Frank Swift, F-R-A-N-K-S-W-I-F-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor, Mr. Swift?
An immediate neighbor to his south.
Are you in favor of the project?
Mr. Swift, thank you very much for calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
there we have jeffrey brown okay mr brown could you mr brown could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter yes jeffrey brown j-e-f-f-r-e-y-b-r-o-w-n do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do are you a neighbor sir yes i am okay
could you are you in favor of this project or against it i'm in favor of the development of
the project, I'm against the variance being requested for the parking. I believe that this
is an opportunity for this long, stagnant site to be developed into a beautiful building. But it's
very important that we follow the code requirements for the commercial space. I disagree that there's
a scarcity of parking. As Mr. Iskovitz said, we're using about 55% of the available parking in a
survey recently completed, and that doesn't include the hundreds of spots that are available
one block away under the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. And I think a project like this, in order
to resonate in this neighborhood should have ground floor activity not parking spaces i also
don't understand why there's any hardship in having to change plans from what was approximately
1300 square foot i'm going to object to that that's illegal so sorry so why don't we just
concentrate on
to say
Mr. Brown
Mr. Brown listen you're in favor of the project
but you don't want the parking
is that right
Mr. Brown you're muted
Mr. Brown, you're muted.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I have a question for Mr. Brown, if you don't mind.
I try to get him unmuted.
Mr. Brown.
Sorry about that.
Mr. Brown, please unmute yourself.
Hi, Mr. Brown.
Yes, sir.
Counsel has a question for you.
Yes, sir.
Hi, Mr. Brown.
You have the building across the street that's in the photograph.
I hear it's address.
It's 205 Ray Street.
Okay. And you have parking in your building, right?
We have parking that met the code requirements in the basement of our building.
We have 28 spaces. We have 145 apartments.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, sir.
Hi. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. The properties indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan are adopted. District plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location. The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence.
The unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used and conforming with the code requirements. Therefore, we recommend requests for variance not be done.
um mr patterson we've had a lot of testimony on both sides i'm going to take this back uh to next
wednesday for our executive session and we'll vote in public at two o'clock next wednesday
okay i'll remind of where about how we relied upon you on our determinations i i i we heard you sir
thank you thank you all right and mr chair this is hillary i just want to note that the record
is closed on this matter okay thank you hillary number four mi 2022 007 135 1301 east cheltenham
avenue darlene treat is the attorney letter of non-opposition from the 35th democratic ward
and letter of non-opposition from council member phillips
miss three just coming back in as a panelist now chair
hi good afternoon
good afternoon commissioners can you hear me hi could you state your name please and spell for
the court reporter? Darlene Freit, D-A-R-L-E-N-E, T as in Thomas, H-R-E-A-T-T. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Could you identify your
client, the relationship to this property? Yes, Commissioner, I have today with me Mrs. Lisa
Smith, as well as Mr. Clarence Morris, who are the proprietors of Amazing Kids Academy.
I also would like to make an amendment. When I originally filed the application,
the Church Gladding Memorial owned this property. Currently, Mr. Smith owns this property
under the name of Raising the Level, LLC.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed all the required documents
and exhibits in reference to this case
five days in advance into our office?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Can you please turn your screen on if you need to see you before you proceed
with returning your presentation? I apologize. No problem. Thank you. Please proceed.
I'll share my screen. Yes, please.
just enlarge it up a minute
that's good
here we go commissioners I submitted a exhibit package today which contains a refusal petition
of appeal, proof of mailing, deed, tax information, property information, pictures, plans, community
flyer, proof of mailing, and a letter of support.
Commissioners, I'd like to give you a little background information on this project here.
Commissioners, I'd like to give you a little background information on this project.
Amazing Kids Academy has been operating out of 1301 East Shettingham Avenue for approximately 10 years.
Amazing Kids Academy is one of the largest provider of child care services, with the exception of the School District of Philadelphia, in the city of Philadelphia.
Currently, they operate at three additional locations, one at G and Erie, one at 4719 Rising Sun Avenue, one at 7120 North Broad Street, and 1301 East Sheltonham Avenue is their flagship facility.
Again, they've been operating here for 10 years. They are funded and receive grants from the city of Philadelphia through the PHL pre-K program.
They receive grants and are funded by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through the pre-K counts program.
program. They are licensed by the Department of Education for the nursery school. They
are licensed by the Commonwealth through the PA DHS program and certified. And they currently
have the maximum rating of four star keystone rating. Here is the refusal. We applied for
the extension of the use of the daycare preschool school facilities to the entire premises currently
they operate in building number two and i'll show you those plans later we would like to extend the
use to building number one and building number three uh there's a refusal on the screen currently
and i'm just going to flip through the documents we have the application for appeal
you have the project information form
we have the deed you can see here that a gladding memorial
conveyed this to raising the level LLC and my client will testify that she is the owner
Here is the tax balance, which is currently zero.
Here is the prior zoning use permit for the daycare nursery school.
Prior application.
updated a permit again for the use permit for the daycare facility there
i'd like you to note here is some property information actually this use has really been
taking place in these facilities since 1975 as you can see here a memorandum from the city of
philadelphia is listed as church sunday school gym and nursery school and that's specific to
the entire premises because of technical reasons we had to reapply for the extension here is a
letter from gladden memorial presbyterian church indicating that the school use has been in
existence continuously in these on these premises since 1933. here we have the plan first we have
site plan and let me just reduce that so you can see it a little better I'm going to further reduce it
this is the site plan and I'll get to the floor plan a little later
as you can see this is building number two this is currently used for um the school and it's been
used for the past 10 years we would now like to extend the use to building number three which is
currently um a gymnasium and the main building which was um the church
I'm going to scroll down here to the floor plans, and I'm going to enlarge it a little
bit for you right here.
I would like to mention that the lower level
is 50% above grade.
This is currently used as a sanctuary.
We would like to extend the use of the church to the lower level of the basement here, which again I say is 50% at ground level, and I'm just going to reduce that a little.
We would like to extend the use of the church to...
I don't know, let me see, let me just enlarge it.
Here we go.
We propose to add additional classrooms so we may service additional children and members
of the community to the basement, the lower level of the sanctuary.
We plan on adding classrooms in this lower level.
As you can see, there are three different exits from the lower level here for this facility.
We would also like to extend the use to what is currently used as a gym, which will still be used for a recreational area.
We will have makeshift classrooms that we will have here for the use of the additional children.
Currently, we employ approximately 20 to 25 full-time and part-time staff.
I would note that the staff is composed of Pennsylvania certified teachers as well as
Pennsylvania certified child development associates. Here at the daycare, we serve
We serve breakfast, we serve lunch, and we serve a snack.
We also have pick up for the children, and the parents drop them off.
Here is a picture of the posting, and I would like to show you just some general pictures
of how the facility looks.
This is a side view.
That's another view for you.
I'm just going to enlarge that a little bit so you can see the pictures a little better.
That's a front view.
Here we have additional pictures for you
so you can get a full scene
of what the whole property looks like.
That's another shot for you
where you can see the entire premises.
Why don't you bring your client on
and adopt your testimony?
me. Ms. Smith, are you on the line today? Ms. Smith? Ms. Smith, if you're on the, there she is.
Okay, thank you. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Hello. Hi, my name is Lillise Smith, L-E-L-I-S-S-E, last name Smith, S-M-I-T-H.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Ms. Smith, are you the proprietor of Amazing Kids Academy, LLC?
Are you also the owner of the property under the name of Raising the Level, LLC?
Ms. Smith, have you heard my testimony as presented to the board today?
Yes, I have.
Ms. Smith, would you say that my testimony was true and correct?
And would you adopt my testimony?
Yes, I adopt your testimony.
Commissioners, we did meet with the 35th Board.
They did issue a letter of support.
We saw that.
We have that.
And Council Member Phillips also has a letter of non-opposition.
And with that, I would ask that our requested variance be granted.
Questions from the Board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
I'm planning commission.
So we're on Bednar City Planning.
The property is currently indicated for residential on the city plan, given its documented use history.
We have no objection to the granting of variance.
Thank you.
MI-2022-007-135, 1301 East Cheltenham Avenue.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much, Commissioner.
Thank you very much, commissioners.
Have a good afternoon.
Have a good afternoon.
Right.
Right.
Number five, MI-2022.
Number five, MI 2022, 007242, 3010 Baltz Street.
Alexander Perry is the attorney.
Letter of support from Brewery Town,
Sharjewa Community Civic Association.
Mr. Perry is coming back in now, Sharers.
Arceeo letter submitted separately.
the applicant provided a petition in support of approximately 31 residents in a 3,000 block of
bolts. The petition was signed by an adjacent neighbor at 308-3012. Counsel, could you state
your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Alexander
Perry, A-L-E-X-A-N-D-E-R-P-E-R-R-Y. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client, the relationship
to the property? Yes, sir. Our client, my client is Timothy and Carolyn Weeks. They are the owners
of the property and have lived there for nearly a decade. Okay. Our vice chair has just a few
questions for you, sir. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, sir. Have you emailed into our offices all the required
documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Can you see that, Mr. Chairman? We can.
I'm going to try to go through these quickly for the board's convenience.
we have a refusal letter. The refusal was regarding a eight foot setback for a third
story addition. The addition is by right, but the refusal is regarding the eight foot setback from
the street. We're requesting a variance because of the conditions of the property. Wall to wall,
the property is 14 feet wide, which is very narrow. It's only about 40 or 41 feet deep.
So the eight foot variance would represent approximately 20% of the third floor.
We filed an appeal noting the aspects of the property.
We will not be changing the use. It's still going to be a family home, and the current owners intend to reside there.
Noting COVID, they both work from home, and they needed additional space and want to stay in the neighborhood, as shown by their strong neighborhood support.
There's currently no taxes owed on the property.
Here's the deed to Tim and Carolyn Weeks.
And if we can look at this document, this is the property currently.
We're not changing any of the footprint.
As noted, it's only 14 feet wide.
And this is what is proposed on the third floor.
The third floor addition is by right with the exception of the eight feet.
When planning this, the homeowners decided to create a sloped roof line rather than straight up and down.
The top of the roof line is about five feet back, so five of the eight feet at the roof line, but it would start at the same line of the second floor.
There is a pilot house, too, for a deck, but a variance isn't required for that.
Again, this eight-foot extension is dormered out, and it's trying to create more light and air, noting the variance request, but continue and use the house to its highest use without additional eight feet, which is 20% of the usable space.
Here's a picture of the street currently.
This is the two-story house.
a three-story very tall house was just built a few years ago two doors down this is it so even
though there's going to be a third story addition it will still be far under what's permitted per
code as well as other houses along the street here's a picture of the street more recently
Here's 310 Bolt Street.
Other houses have added third-story additions.
They do have some roof decks, which extend out to the front of the property.
There's other three- to four-story homes along the street near the corner, which is just a few houses down.
Again, here's the home two doors down that was just built.
Here's our notice of posting for the zoning.
for the zoning. Here's our notice to the neighbors and support from that meeting.
And again, as the chairman stated from the RCO, there were 31 neighbors,
including the adjacent neighbors at 312 and 308 Bald Street in support of this project.
And here's the letter of support from the RCO.
I would like to call the homeowner, Tim Weeks, if we can promote him as well.
Sir, could you, Mr. Weeks, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Mr. Weeks, please raise your hand.
Mr. Weeks, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Weeks, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure. Timothy Weeks, T-I-M-O-T-H-Y, Weeks, W-E-E-K-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Tim, did you hear my statements that I just made?
Yes, I did.
Are those statements true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
They are.
And will you adopt those statements as if made by yourself?
Thank you.
Go ahead, Chairman.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission?
So, Ron Bednar, City Planning. The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan. Our adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location. The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used and conforming with the code. Therefore, we recommend Quest Ranch not be ready.
Thank you. MI-2022-007-242-3010, Ball Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Okay. Number six, MI 2022-006-749-6926 Old York Road. Carrie Nassay-Poust is the attorney. Letter of support from Council Member Phillips. Letter of support from Oak Lane Community Association with Proviso.
Ms. Pouss is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
Good afternoon.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Carrie Nace, Paust, C-A-R-R-I-E, Nace, N-A-S-E, hyphen, Paust, P-O-U-S-T, attorney with the law firm of Fox Rothschild, 2800 Kelly Road, Suite 200, Warrington, PA.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Yes, I represent Penn Asian Senior Services, who is the owner of the property.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, thank you.
Have you, do you swear to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Excuse me.
There is one typographical error in the refusal that does need to be clarified.
If I may.
No problem.
So I do agree that the reason for the refusal is that the proposed use medical dental health practitioner is prohibited in this zoning district.
L&I included a parenthetical that it was a sole practitioner, and it is not a sole practitioner.
it is, it would fall under a, I guess, group practitioner.
Understood.
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case five days in advance
five days in advance into our offices. Yes, they were submitted.
into our offices?
Yes, they were submitted.
Thank you. Please proceed and share the screen. Great. Thank you. Let me just share my screen one
moment. I have too many screens open. It's coming up. Yes, we're good. Okay, great. Thank you.
uh again i'm here this afternoon on behalf of penn asian senior services they are the owner
of the property located at 6926 old york road let's see sorry uh here also here with me this
afternoon is ken yang he is a representative of penn asian senior services and he will be
providing testimony today as well. A packet of exhibits was submitted five days in advance.
We included a copy of the refusal, application for appeal to the zoning board, the project
information form, copy of the deed, certificate of tax compliance, plans that we will go over this
afternoon photographs of the property a letter of support from the rco
let me just uh bear here uh before you is a copy of the zoning site plan
this is a copy of the floor plan which we'll go over
and here is a aerial photograph of the property. The property has frontage along Old York Road.
It is located between 70th Avenue and 69th Avenue and is also bounded by Broad Street.
It's located within the RSA 4 zoning district. As you can see, it is currently improved with
two buildings as well as associated parking and some green area between the buildings.
The owner is proposing to use a portion of the existing building for a medical practitioner.
The footprint will remain the same. No site improvements are being proposed as part of this
application other than some minor improvements to the front entrance of the one building
where the medical practitioner office is proposed.
We do have photographs of the property also showing that the zoning notice was posted
as required under the code.
This is just a photograph of the existing parking area looking down Old York Road.
Again, another view of the parking.
This is a photograph of one of the existing buildings, as well as the second building.
If I may, I'd like to have Mr. Yang admitted so that I could ask him a few questions about
the current use and the proposed use.
Mr. Yang, could you state your name, please?
it's spelled for the court reporter. Mr. Yang, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Yang. Could you state your name? It's spelled for the court reporter, please.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ken Yang, K-E-N. Last name is Y, A as in apple,
N as in Nancy, G as in Green. Right. Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do, sir. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Yang, is Penn Asian Senior
Services the owner of the property located at 6926 Old York Road? We are, Karen. And what is your
position currently at Penn Asian Senior Services? I serve as the Chief Executive Officer. Great. And
And how long has PASSE owned the property?
We purchased the property in 2012 and moved in in 2013.
Could you briefly just describe for the board the existing uses on the property?
Penn Asian Senior Services is a 5.1c3 nonprofit organization and we provide a variety of supportive
services mainly aimed towards diverse older adults to help them remain living independently
in the communities of their choice. Those services currently include home care,
an adult day center, or otherwise known as adult day care, and a senior community center, which we use the business name of Evergreen Center.
an adult day center, or otherwise known as adult day care, and a senior community.
And could you please explain to the board the proposed use that is subject to this application?
Sure. Harry, as you noted, we request variants to allow a medical health practitioner use of our existing space in the PASI building.
We propose to take an existing suite of offices, three contiguous offices, and turn that into a primary care practice that has as its goal to provide language accessible and culturally attuned healthcare services, primary care services, first starting with the clients and Evergreen Center members that we are currently serving,
but also opening up the option for our near neighbors and our surrounding community for anyone who has need of a primary care practitioner by appointment doctor's office to make use of.
Great. And will the existing uses remain on the property?
Yes, they will.
Okay. And looking at the zoning site plan here, this is Old York Road, where my cursor is. We have an existing building here. And is the area that I'm highlighting, is that the area where the proposed medical use will be incorporated?
It is. And just a slight point, I think that the street that you pointed out is Broad Street.
I'm sorry, that's Broad Street. We have Old York Road here. I apologize. So Old York Road, and here's the entrance into the parking lot, and then back into this area here.
That's right, yep.
Okay. And just briefly, if you could explain to the board, this is a floor plan showing the proposed medical offices. Could you just explain to the board what's being proposed on this plan?
Sure. The board can see the first floor of our existing PASI building, and where Carrie's cursor is now is the first room to the left of where one would enter our main lobby.
And so to the left of Carrie's cursor is where the primary, right where it is now, is where the primary care clinic is proposed to be sited.
Those are currently three contiguous office rooms. We would like to convert those rooms into the primary care clinic. And as Carrie also noted, no changes would be envisioned for the existing footprint, save for the new exterior entrance that would permit direct entry into the primary care clinic.
And in your opinion, just based on your experience and being in the community, why do you believe that this proposed use is necessary and do you believe that there is a need for this specific use?
I do believe that there is a need within the community for our proposed primary care clinic, and I think that that need is consistent with what PASI has been trying to provide, language accessible, culturally attuned access to services for our community.
And in the case of primary care, we see the opportunity to extend our supportive services, which again are home care, adult daycare, and a senior community center into the provision of direct health care.
We think that while there are some primary care practitioners that do have a diverse community focus that does include some in-language PCP provision, we have from our personal account as well as from what we hear from our clients and neighbors, there is a need for more.
And there are sometimes long wait times for seeing a doctor or seeing a nurse practitioner.
And so we would like to alleviate some of that burden and provide a convenient primary care option.
Again, starting with the clients that we are already serving and who are already coming out to our campus each day and extending that out to Oak Lane and surrounding communities, anyone who would like to see a family doctor.
Thank you. And did you meet with the RCO to review the proposed use of this property for medical practitioner's office?
We did.
Great. And submitted with the exhibits is a letter from the RCO summarizing the meeting and setting forth certain conditions that they had discussed with you. Are you familiar with that letter?
And is the owner willing to agree to the conditions that were set forth in that letter?
We are carried.
Great.
I have no further questions for Mr. Yang at this time.
Questions from the board?
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments
No, Mr. Chairman.
from the virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair planning commission this is uh ron
bednar city planning while this property is currently indicated for residential on the
city plan. We have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Counsel, I see the proviso is use limited to the provision of primary care services. Is that
appropriate? Yes. Okay. And I think our counsel has also added, this is a group practice,
practitioners? Correct. And along the lines of the first proviso, just with the caveat that the
existing uses will remain in place. Okay, sure, sure. Okay, so MI 2022-006-749-6926-Older wrote,
I vote, yes, would provide a use limited to revisions of primary care services and also
continuing services that are currently there, and also this is a group practitioner, right? Correct.
Thomas
Thomas Holloman
Thomas you broke up
Thomas Holloman
Thomas Holloman
my vote is yes
with provisos
thank you
James Snell yes with provisos
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso thank you counsel thank you okay we're going to move on
to number seven mi 2022 006 717 130 north third street katherine missomer is the attorney
letter of non-opposition from council member squilla recommendation of support from the
old city neighbors okay and we have several provisos here miss missomer is coming back in
as a panelist now good afternoon hi how are you could you state your name please and spell for
the court reporter it's katherine missomer it's m as in mary i s as in fam s as in sam i m as in
Mary ER at 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, 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 client in relationship
to this property? Yes, sir. 130 North 3rd LLC is the owner of the property. And our vice chair
has a few questions for you. Sure. Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to weigh the reading of
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. I'll just note for the record that there is a revised
refusal in this matter. It was issued back in December, so I'm sure you do have that.
Have you emailed all the required documents that are needed to proceed in this case five days in
advance to our offices? We have. Thank you. Please proceed and share the screen. Great,
thank you. Can you see my screen? Yes. Great. As mentioned, my name is Catherine Missimer. I'm
here on behalf of 130 North 3rd LLC, owner of the property at 130 North 3rd Street. With me today
are owners rep, Brian Zubek, and project architects, Gabriel Deck and Jeff Pond. Here today
within our application for new construction of a mixed-use building with ground floor commercial
space, four interior parking spaces, as well as four dwelling units. As you can see, a letter of
non-opposition from Council Member Squilla and a letter of support from the Old City District.
This property is located at the corner of 3rd and Cherry Streets in Old City. Historically,
the site was home to various commercial uses, including restaurants and grocery stores,
with accessory surface parking spaces open to the sky. The site is owned CMX3 and is surrounded
by neighboring mixed-use buildings. In a nod towards the neighborhood context, this concept
of new construction does include the historic commercial use of the ground floor and closes the
previously existing surface parking spaces to the rear of the building. You're seeing some
existing photos of the building now and also includes four multi-family dwelling units above.
This is some area context. You can see we're here on the corner.
The proposal demonstrates a single minor dimensional variance for open area.
CMX 3 requires open area of 20% at corner lots, while this proposal results in an open area of 2.6%.
CMX3 requires open area of 20% at corner lots.
While this proposal is a single minor dimensional variance for open area.
For reference, and I will jump to that as I think that's the most illustrative in our presentation packet,
we've included a lot coverage survey of surrounding lots in this neighborhood.
And once I pull that up, you'll be able to see that the bulk of the neighboring properties are all short on open area.
Their lot coverage exceeds the allowable lot coverage in the district.
As you can see, the orange and reddish colors represent lots that are currently in existence exceeding allowable lot coverage.
So they're all deficient in open area.
Only the green lots that you're seeing are compliant currently.
This lot to the rear is an open air parking space.
We do have support from that owner as well.
If you'll note directly next door is almost a full coverage building, and that's the condition along both 3rd Street as well as across Cherry Street from this location.
This is a single minor dimensional variance.
We can bring up the refusal, as you can see. As the board's aware, the standard for dimensional variances is much lower under the Hertzberg standard. Only a reasonable adjustment of the code is necessary to utilize the property in conformity with neighboring parcels.
old city district rco did hold a community meeting on this project the meeting was well attended
and we did receive a unanimous letter of support the developers shown a commitment to neighbors
in this neighborhood as well as respecting the existing context by including store as much
historic character in this new construction as possible we have included some superimposed
renderings in your packages i apologize they're relatively large files to some harder to see but
But as you can see, what we're proposing is consistent with some of the existing buildings, despite the fact that it would be new construction.
As a result, the proposed dimensional variance represents the least modification of the code necessary to utilize this property in conformity with the surrounding neighborhood.
This would be the new construction here, which looks very similar to the existing buildings on either side.
the proposed will not be detrimental to the public welfare as evidenced by our unanimous
letter of support and the councilman's letter of non-opposition we respectfully request that the
board grant the requested variances we do have revised plans today that do reflect minor
modifications to the exterior of the building made in conformity with the philadelphia historic
commission based on their comment and review they do consist of two pages we'd respectfully request
that the board grant the requested variance. I would just ask that Mr. Zubek be promoted so
that he can adopt my testimony today. Thank you. Brian, if you could raise your hand so they can
see you. Mr. Zubek, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair. Mr. Zubek, could you state
your name, please, and spell for the court reporter? Yes, Brian Zubek, B-R-I-A-N, last name
zubek z as in zebra o u b as in boy ek right do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank you brian have you heard my
testimony today yes would you agree that it's true and correct yes would you adopt it as your own
thank you brian are architects also available should the board have questions but we have
nothing further all right questions from the board no chair no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience there we have a gabriel deck with his hand up
okay that's our architect oh that's okay what we don't we we're okay without the architect is
there anyone else in the virtual audience no there's no other hands chair thank you planning
Commission. This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. The property is indicated for commercial mixed
use on the city plan based on our revised plans. We recommend aggressive variance to be rented.
Thank you. MI 2022-006-717-130 North 3rd Street. I vote yes with proviso. Per amended refusal dated
12-2-22. Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA on April 5th, 2023.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Great, thank you all.
Okay, number nine, MI-2022-006-714-2434 North 20th Street.
Okay, number nine, MI 2022-006.
Sean Whalen and Rebecca Cole are the attorneys.
Letter of opposition from All in the Family CDC.
Mr. Whalen
Ms. Cole
They're coming back in as panelists share
Thank you
Hi, Mr. Whalen. How are you, sir? Good afternoon, Chairman. I just want to make clear
Ms. Rebecca Cole will be handling this for our office. Okay, thank you. Thank you. I'm handling
the next case after this. I noticed that, sir. I know that's coming. Thank you. Ms. Cole,
could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter? Sure. My name is Rebecca
Cole, R-E-B-E-C-C-A-C-O-L-E, here with Vintage Law on behalf of the property owner. Right.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationships to the property?
The property owner is Rats Group LLC, and my client is Vince Sherman here on behalf of the LLC.
Okay. And our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
have you emailed all the required documents and exemptions that are needed to proceed with this
case five things in advance to our offices we have we received the rco letter yesterday however
okay you sent it over already and you guys have it yes all right thank you please proceed and
Thanks. Can everybody see my screen? We can. Okay. Thank you. So again, I'm here on behalf
of the property owner, RADS Group, LLC. Vince Sherman will be here to adopt my testimony at
the end. This seeks to legalize a triplex and an existing long-term triplex at the property.
We have a refusal that we received for the property. It's the single-use refusal for the
three-family household dwelling in the existing structure. And I'd just like to address the RCO
letter um initially out the gate um in that we received it yesterday it was a surprise to us
that they were not in support we had a good meeting with the rco uh with a vote of community
members at the end fully in support and i would qualify this letter as one of non-support and i
believe it is based on confusion if you'll permit me to skip to that sure go ahead
So here's the letter of non-support and the issues raised were the third story of this property,
which was the same length and an answer to a question from the RCO staff. They
wondered if the third floor was the same length as the floor plans show it being the same length.
it is in fact the same length this photograph that the rco has included is an outdated photograph
from google maps taken from a side street of the property it does not represent the current
condition of the property which is in fact shown here on google earth as you can see the third
story of the property here is in fact fully, excuse me, fully built out all the way to the
end with this gray cladding up at the top. In addition, the client took photos of the exterior
of the property dated yesterday. You can see this is the current condition of the property.
This is how the client purchased this property. So it goes all the way out in the back on the
third story as well. There's another view from the side, again showing that the third floor is built
out fully, and another closer view of the side, again showing it is fully built out on the third.
And another closer view of the side, again, showing it is fully built out on the third store story.
Therefore, the floor plans and the third floor confusion should be addressed by these questions, these photographs.
Additionally, the letter from the RCO does not show the vote.
And we believe that if it had shown the vote, it would show that all the votes were in support from community members.
We also have a community member in the audience to testify and support following my presentation.
Again, this property received one use refusal.
For context, here we are.
The property is at the Blue Dot on North 20th Street, just south of West Cumberland, north of West Hager, and just east of West Glenwood.
For more context, this is further out. You can see we are a small, narrow, rectangular lot, 16 feet of street frontage, 70 feet deep, 1,000 square foot lot roughly with 1,800 square feet of gross interior area.
The area is moderately built up residential with a mix of two and three story homes, but also many vacant lots and as you can see we're about a block away from rail lines and an ICMX industrial zone near to several sets of apartments over commercial as well on Cumberland and York.
From the zoning map, you can see we're in an RSA 5 block here, just off of Glenwood.
You can see there are scattered CMX1 corners nearby.
And moving on to photos of the property, this is the current condition of the property.
This property is currently vacant in an existing three-story brick structure.
significantly dilapidated inside and in need of extensive interior renovation which is why the
client wants to do a full rehab of the building and bring it up to speed and offer some attractive
apartments to the neighborhood the prior owner had used this as a rental from roughly 2006 to 2019
city records show that there was a license that went inactive in 2019 and that pre-existing
owner had the layout designed for three units, which it was used as before. We also had some
issues at the RCO meeting sharing interior photos, which were large format, and therefore
we had some glitching, which is why we weren't able to show the interior framing. Those are
included here. Again, here's the outside of the property. The neighborhood context is a mix of
vacant lots and multifamily residences throughout the area. Here's the property on the corner,
three stories, red brick next to one adjacent vacant lot. Further down across the street on
Hager, there's several other vacant lots. And 2048 West Hager down this street had a rental license
for two units until recently. Further south on 2000 West Boston Street, it has a current rental
license for two units. Across the street, we have a vacant parcel in here at 2439
and facing north on North 20th towards West Cumberland. Two doors down, this pink building
had a rental license for three units until recently. Several other buildings nearby also
appear to be set up for multi-family use. 2445 is set up with multiple mailboxes. 2454, 2456,
and 2463 are vacant lots. And so while there's a mix of single-family houses, there's also
multi-family houses in the neighborhood. Here's our floor plans for the project.
this is seeking to legalize the three-family use in the single-family zoning district
this three-family variance is due to the prior use and layout and the existing framing which
i will show we are not proposing any new additional construction addition excavation or height
increase to the property this will be three residential units one on each floors one through
three the existing unfinished basement will remain there is no living space in the basement
whatsoever. The first floor will have roughly 600 square feet with a two-bed, one-bath layout
with an egress in the rear and the front of the property through Sherrod Hall.
Second floor would have a 600 square foot layout with two bed, one bath also.
Second floor would have a 600 square foot layout with two-bed, one-bath also.
And the third floor, which again is the same length and runs the full length of the floor plan.
This third floor will have 600 square feet, roughly two bed, two bath layout.
We are bringing a newly rehabbed, attractively updated apartment to the neighborhood.
and that was one of the reasons why the community members supported us in their comments at the
meeting and why the vote at the end was in support of this triclex use.
Again, you can see the interior of the property now. You can see that the framing is already in
place. This is the first floor front windows. This is the condition of the property when it
was purchased.
Here's facing back on the first floor,
more of the first floor, more of the first floor,
and here are pictures of the second and third floors.
Doesn't show much, but it does show that the framing
is in here already.
This was previously used to three family units,
and the layout lends itself to that,
which is why the owner is seeking to legalize the three-family use with newly rehabbed departments in their place.
We believe the client has met the unnecessary hardship here, which requires a variance,
due to the unique physical conditions of the property.
It is a small lot on a narrow-piece property with an existing three-story vacant structure
and the dilapidated interior conditions of the property when purchased mean that the client
will need to do extensive, expensive interior renovations. Therefore, variance relief is
required for economically viable use of the property. The interior living area is too big
to rent as a single-family unit. The existing layout and prior use was as a three-family unit,
and again, this three-story structure lends itself to three-family use.
Granting this variance will not be detrimental to public welfare or impair any adjacent property use, nor will it alter the neighborhood, which is already changing from single-family to this mix of commercial and multifamily properties.
Granting the variance will, in fact, benefit the community by revitalizing this property and renewing its residential use in the neighborhood, and in addition, bringing an attractive range of apartments, which the community is seeking.
Hardship to this property cannot be cured by grants of a dimensional variance, and we believe that this is the least minimum variance.
The three units will have a de minimis impact, and the community, moreover, supported this triplex use.
As a result, the client meets the criteria for variance relief, and we would request the board grant this variance for three-family dwelling.
um i'd like to call my client to adopt my testimony sure
vince sherman okay mr sherman
yes i'm here hi could you state your name good afternoon could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter first name vince v-i-n-c last name sherman s-h-e-r-m-a-n
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Vince, have you heard my testimony?
Yes, I did.
And do you agree it's true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt it as your own?
And just to clarify some of the comments that the RCO raised, is it true you're seeking a three-unit variance based on the prior use and layout that was at the property when you purchased it?
yes and uh if the board would not approve three units today would you revise your request down
to two units for this project uh yes okay can you also tell us about any connection you have
to this neighborhood lastly born and raised around here born and raised my family and i
still have family members that live around here all right great um that that's it for our us
We also have neighbors in support if you'd like to hear from them.
I'll call for the virtual audience, okay?
Thank you.
Counsel, let me ask one question.
The original rental license, what was that for?
It was an original rental license.
I don't have access to the original rental license.
At one point, it was pulled for one license, but we know that rental licenses do not represent
exactly the use necessarily that was applicable at the property.
A license may be pulled for whatever use the property owner can receive, but it doesn't show the true use.
property owner can receive but it doesn't show the true use okay uh questions or comment uh
questions from the board no no no no mr chair no mr chair comments from the virtual audience
chair i see your hands at this time no hands
no he is here thank you planning commission uh city planning the property is indicated for
residential use on the city plan or adopted discipline recommends no change the existing
zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical
circumstances or condition of the property it would prevent it from being used in conforming
with the code therefore we recommend the question variance not being random okay mi2022
0-0-6-7-1-4-24-34 North 20th Street.
I vote yes.
Proviso, two units.
No more than two units.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with Proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you all. Right. Number 10, MI-2022-007-200-1935 Washington Avenue.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
Letter of support from the South of South Neighborhood Association.
There, Mr. Whalen is coming back in now as a panelist.
Mr. Whalen could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
Sean Whalen w-h-a-l-e-n right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth yes I do could you identify your client the relationship to the property
certainly I represent OCF Realty LLC they are the tenant of the property and this is a sub
sublease to try to get a a gym use at the property okay our our vice chair has just a few questions
for you sir good afternoon counsel do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to attack your seat yes i do have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits into our
offices five days in advance of this hearing yes i have thank you please proceed to share your screen
Thank you very much.
So again, Sean Whalen here from Vintage Law on behalf of OCF Realty.
You're looking now, I hope I see, at the existing one-story warehouse building at the corner of 19th and Washington.
We see that, sir.
This application is just for a change of use in there.
There is no additional construction or height or anything of the sort added at this point.
So, again, this just gives you some context.
You have Washington Avenue, the large chocolate factory redevelopment over here.
Here's 20th.
You have this property right here in a long line of single-story uses.
Again, just shows consistent line of use.
And the reason why we're here today is because this entire parcel and this entire block, along with several other blocks on the north and south side of Washington, remain zoned I-2.
I know this board from myself and other attorneys has seen a slew of cases talking about I2 uses and how even the PIDC reports state as far back as 2010 that I2 uses are no longer feasible on Washington Avenue.
And the change of use, the change of the neighborhood up and down Washington Avenue creates a hardship for any property here to continue to use an industrial use.
Accordingly, we received a refusal, one refusal, which states that the proposed use personal services, this is to put in a gym, which falls under the personal services category, is prohibited in the I-2 industrial zoning district.
one thing that I would note you see a lot of ICMX here this use personal services is
actually allowed by right in both IRMX and ICMX use so it's only disallowed once you get up to the
the heavy industrial uses like I2 as the chairman stated we have a letter of support
As the chairman stated, we have a letter of support.
I have to actually point this out just because I've never seen it before.
It's certainly not a case I've handled.
The proposal is unanimously supported by the RCO.
And in fact, it was a thirty nine to zero vote in support.
So I wish all my cases were were so resoundingly applauded.
So what you have here is this is the building right next door.
Open Box Athletics is operating a CrossFit style gym right next door.
They are currently seeking to expand their property or expand their offerings into that corner property that you saw.
So you can see kind of the general layout, how they handle their business.
they're exceptionally well loved in the neighborhood hence the 39 to 0 vote and what
they're doing is this building over here that you see they actually even two years ago had a
horrible fire and lost their business and then rebuilt and now are hoping to expand into this
use so we are seeking a variance just over that one use to allow a gym here
um the uh the property itself is approximately 85 by 105 it's almost a square uh building going up
19 or um up washington and up 20th and as i said before it's an existing one-story
commercial warehouse which obviously lends itself to the hardship argument and there is no new
construction. We were just converting this user, adaptively reusing, I would say, this property
and converting it to a now feasible commercial use or even light industrial use, which is personal
services. The property certainly conforms to the public health, safety, and welfare.
I think putting in a gym by definition is almost, you know, guaranteeing health, safety, and welfare
increases and is widely supported by the neighborhood. Again, this meets the least
minimum variance test in that we are simply trying to change the use and we're not impacting
the existing fabric of the property or the block in any way or seeking to overbuild the property.
So with that, I would also just say that I mentioned it in the beginning,
Even the city's own agencies, PIDC, as far back as 2010, has recognized that this avenue, this corridor of Washington Avenue, is no longer feasible for heavy industrial uses, which is what the I-2 underlying zoning district is meant for.
And that's evidenced also. There's a West Washington Avenue overlay district, which actually prohibits virtually all I-2 uses.
So there are an extremely limited number of uses that could be feasible up and down this block.
And essentially, as the board has seen, almost every building on this block and up and down adjacent blocks has required a variance.
So with that, I would like to call Ori Feibush.
Good afternoon, Mr. Feinbush.
Mr. Feinbush, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Feinbush.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Of course.
Ori Feinbush with OCF Realty.
My last name is F as in Frank, E-I-B-U-S-H.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, yes.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you very much, Chairman. Mr. Fybush, you're here on behalf of OCF Realty, correct?
That's correct, yes.
And you heard all of the testimony I already presented today?
Yes, I did.
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
I would, yes.
And would you adopt that testimony as your own?
Yes, I would.
And do you believe there's anything else pertinent that the board needs to hear?
No, I'm just, I think this is as much of a feel-good neighborhood story as possible here. These are just individuals that live in the neighborhood that wanted to open up a small business and just continue to push through adversity after adversity to make themselves successful and just really a testament to just a wonderful story all around.
All right, fantastic. Chairman, I offer Mr. Feibus or myself to answer any questions you may have.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i've seen no hands chair planning commission it's uh ron bednar city planning while this
property is currently indicated for industrialized city plan given the circumstances of the property
Circumstances of the property, we recommend, of course, for Venice be rented.
we recommend the course of advantage be granted thank you am i
Thank you.
MI 2022-007-200, 1935 Washington Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much, Chairman.
Number 11, MI-2022-003-674, 44-48 Manheim Street.
Augusta O'Neill is the attorney.
We have a letter of support from the 12th Ward RCO based on revised plans.
They noted also that the FACE CDC and Wakefield 49ers also participated in the meeting and were in support of the project.
Okay. There's a letter of opposition from Solow, but Solow does provide provisos should the board
approve it. Ms. O'Neill is coming back in now as the panelist here. Okay.
Counsel, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
so can you actually also identify i have another
you're breaking up miss o'neill
what do you want me to identify
i'm just trying to get this up can you just give me one minute one minute you're sure take your
All right, sorry about that.
Is it Neil?
Ms. O'Neal, do you have on two devices?
Ms. O'Neal, would it be okay if we came back to you and by then you could have it straightened out?
I think we're going to have it straightened out momentarily.
Okay. Thank you.
Okay. How about now?
You're still bouncing all over.
Miss O'Neill, this is Tanya. Do you guys have volume on all devices?
you might only need volume on one that might be why there's like an echo and it's better
can you hear us now it sounds better now i think they can hear us but we can't hear them
so the device that you're using is the one that needs the audio
okay can you hear us now we i heard that yeah i think they can still hear us but we can't hear
them because i okay
this is crazy chair we can give them a minute to fix theirs and you can continue
okay all right we're going to go to the next one or how do you want to do this
yes sure that's perfectly fine good good and we'll get back to them later
Number 12, MI-2022, 006-762-601-North 37th Street, Lot A, Meredith Ferrelinger is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
Recommendation of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
Councilmember Gauthier is also in support of this project.
Chair, Ms. Ferlinger is coming back in as a panelist now.
Will she be able to go over this, what we have on the screen?
She's not going to be able to share her screen.
There she is. We're good. We're good. Thank you.
Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street Suite, 3500E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Sure can. My client here today is Charles Lomax, who's here on behalf of Lomax Real Estate Partners.
Now, Mr. Lomax is a member of 3,600 Haverford Avenue Affordable Partners, LLC, which is operating pursuant to the authority granted via a redevelopment agreement with the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority for this lot.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in to our offices all the required documents to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have, yes.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much. You should see my screen, I hope.
We do.
Great. Before the Zoning Board of Adjustment today is a request for a fairly minor modification
to a portion of a project that the Zoning Board approved several years ago.
The exhibit packet that I have before you today includes 17 exhibits that I will briefly walk
you through. First, allow me to orient you to the specific lot. As you can see up on your screen at
zoning map at Exhibit 11, this particular property is at the corner of Haverford Avenue,
North 37th Street, and Mount Vernon Street. Now, more broadly speaking, this project that was
approved by the board several years ago included nearly the entire block that is CMX2 and a portion
of the block that's just to the north that's RM1. Now by way of background this project results from
a 2017 RFP that was issued by the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority seeking to revitalize
the site, the broad site, into active use to benefit the Mantua community. Now as I mentioned
the overall project encompasses nearly the entire two-block parcel from Wallace Street up at the
north, all the way down to Haverford Avenue, and from 37th Street all the way to 36th Street.
You can get a better sense of these two lots, these two large parcels at the aerials that I
have up at Exhibit 12. There is a very small piece of land that sits mid-block that is not included.
Now, the entire project that was approved several years ago includes a grocery store
just under 150 residential dwelling units, retail space, office space, a radio station,
and parking. You can see the general site layout that was approved several years ago at Exhibit 6,
and I apologize, I'm not sure why the quality was downgraded with the PDF, but you can get the
general sense here, lot C all the way along 36th Street is the lot that was approved for a radio
station and some parking. Just west of that was approved for residential. Lot A is what is before
the board today. And just to the north of that is where there was parking approved for this grocery
store. Now, overall, the project seeks to address recommendations from the Mantua Transformation
plan, which was accepted by the City Planning Commission back in 2013.
Now, as I mentioned, the request before the board today only concerns the lot, which is
labeled on the screen as Lot A.
So as you can see on the zoning permit that I have up on the screen, which was issued
back in 2020, the lot was consolidated into one new lot.
It was then approved for a new structure of 65 feet high to include a grocery store, retail use, 72 dwelling units on this particular lot, bicycle spaces, and three parking spaces with loading.
and three parking spaces with loading. Now the applicant today is now proposing some minor
Now, the
modifications to that proposal, and these are detailed on the refusal that I have up on the
screen. So the changes are detailed in the bold text. These changes stem from two main factors.
First, the prospective grocer for the space has changed, which has resulted in some modifications
to the overall site layout to accommodate the needs of this particular operator.
Additionally, instead of a partial mezzanine floor at the second level,
the project now includes a full second floor to accommodate a medical center.
There are some other minor modifications to occupied area, rear yard depth,
location of bike spaces, and an increase in the curb cut width.
However, none of those changes resulted in any additional refusals.
Accordingly, the only change that requires zoning board relief today is a very slight increase in height from 65 feet to 69.94 feet, and a special exception for that group medical use.
now regarding the height as i mentioned the zoning board did previously approve a variance
for the proposed height of 65 feet we submit that all of the arguments that we presented
during the original zoning hearing still apply with equal weight to the newly proposed height
which we submit is de minimis and it's an increase of less than five feet to ensure that the newly
identified gross or tenant can adequately support its operations at the site. Furthermore, this very
slight increase in height will also accommodate the creation of that full second floor for that
medical use, which is also consistent with the goals of the Mantua Transformation Plan.
Now, as it relates to the group medical practice, we submit that the proposed request for a special
exception, complies with the requirements of Section 14.3037 of the zoning code.
The proposed medical center use will not cause any detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what might normally be expected from the proposed use, relating to factors such as
congestion, overcrowding, and impact on the surrounding neighborhood. A floor plan of the
proposed medical center is provided at Exhibit 9 and is also up on your screen. This actually
shows the first and the second floor, so you can see the proposed grocer space as well.
I've also included in the exhibit packet at Exhibit 10 a brochure for the Greater Philadelphia
Health Action, Inc. This is a community-serving medical facility that was founded in 1970.
to provide comprehensive medical, dental, behavioral health, and child development services.
If the Board would like, I would be happy to address each of the specific requirements of
the Code that justify granting of the requested variances and special exception. However, in the
interest of efficiency, since the Board did previously see this project substantively,
unless the board objects, I will submit that we comply with section 143037 and eight of the code
in that the request will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood,
impair development of the surrounding area, or cause any detrimental impact. All of the arguments
presented during the original hearing on this project should be expressly incorporated into
our arguments made today the modification of the proposed height is de minimis and this proposed
medical center directly fulfills nearly a decade-long planning process for this critical
mantua community with respect to the community mantua civic association issued a letter of support
for the proposal which is up on your screen at tab 16. at this time if the chair could locate
uh charles lomax to adopt my testimony
hi mr lomax please raise your hand
mr lomax please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
mr lomax could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
uh charles c-h-a-r-l-e-s lomax l-o-m-a-x right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth sir yes i do proceed counsel thank you charles uh have
Thank you. Charles, have you heard all of my testimony offered before the board today?
you heard all of my testimony offered before the board
Yes, I have.
And do you agree that the testimony offered was true and accurate, and would you adopt that testimony as if it were your own?
Yes, I will.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, if you have any questions, we'd be happy to answer that.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential on the city plan.
Given the conditions of the site and no impact directly related,
we recommend that both the variances and special exceptions be approved.
Thank you.
MI 2022-006-762-601-North-37th Street, Lot A.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
James Snell, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number 13, MI 2022-2021-
MI 2022-004-751-6243 Oguns Avenue. Matthew Laley, Michael Matione, are the attorneys. Letter of support from a concerned community group.
Mr. Matione is coming back in now as a panelist here.
Thank you.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mattione, you've already been sworn. Just for the record, state your name.
Sure. Michael Mattione, M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Certainly. It's Obie Ketchik-Paley. She is both the owner of the property and the operator.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
good afternoon sir have you emailed all the required documents to receive this
case five days in advance of this hearing yes with the exception of the rco letter which we
did not receive and send over until yesterday okay thank you proceed and share your screen
And again, I'm here on behalf of Obi Ketchikpeli, who is the owner of the property at 6243 Ogons Avenue.
And we did present the tax clearance, the refusal, the RCO support letter, floor plans, photographs, use history at this property, nearby commercial uses, support petitions.
We had 47 support petitions and the appeal and our proof of mailing of all the information regarding the RCO meeting.
And this property, again, is 6243 Ogontz Avenue. Our refusal is, it says multiple uses because we have a commercial use on the first floor and a single apartment on the second floor, and the commercial use, the personal services, is prohibited in the RSA 5 district.
As we stated, we did receive a support letter from a concerned community association.
We met with them on March 28th and they supported the project.
I just want to show you photographs of the site.
Well, let me go to the floor plan first.
What we're talking about here is the first floor.
Obi would like to have a hair braiding salon in the first floor as shown here.
This is a longstanding property with a commercial use on the first floor and a residential use above.
As I will show you, there are permits going back to at least 1944 with commercial use on the first floor and an apartment above.
The only way to get into the first floor is through this door here or through the door in the back.
It's separate and distinct.
There's the stairs, which you enter here to go to the apartment upstairs, and there is
a set of stairs outside to go to the apartment in the back.
So you cannot get to the apartment upstairs from the commercial use downstairs.
They're totally separate, and the basement is part of the commercial use.
So moving down, I just want to show some photographs.
These photographs. This is the exterior of the site. There's the front door that I pointed out. There's the door that's separate to the apartment upstairs. And here are some photos showing the interior of the facility.
This is the exterior of the site.
it's not operational now but the equipment and all is being stored in there
pending hopefully approval of this application and you can see in the back there's the back
door to the first floor and there's the back door to the second floor up the steps
now obi and here's the apartment upstairs i'm sorry the separate apartment upstairs
It's been in the process of being renovated, but as you can see, it's one apartment, totally separate from the unit downstairs.
Obie has been in the hair braiding business since at least 2008.
She used to own the property right down the street at 63, used to operate out of the property, I'm sorry, at 6338 Ogons Avenue, right down the street.
This is when she used to operate there.
She lost her lease in 2021.
one. These are some photos just showing the general area around. This is Ogons Avenue and
Metairie Street, just showing what's around. And this is a traditional corner property that has a
corner store in it on the first floor, like many in different parts of Philadelphia.
And then there are several commercial uses as well. 6301 North 18th Street, which is half a
block away that's a daycare center 63 40 50 and 52 Ogons Avenue right down the other end of the
block you have a supermarket and some bacon commercial stores and then on the corner there
you have a crown chicken right there on the corner of Ogons Stenton and Shelton Avenues
and then going back down the other way in the middle of the block about half a block from her
You have 6217 Ogons Avenue, which is Cassandra's Creations, another salon, and then down a little bit more down the block, you also have a deli at 6201 Ogons and another daycare center at 6149, I believe, Ogons.
Now, moving down to Exhibit 6, you see, this is the permit from 1943 or 1944, showing that the first floor was a doctor's office with a one-family dwelling above.
So, this is 80 years of use as a commercial use on the ground floor.
The next permit was in 1960 for a retail sale of stamps for stamp collectors on the first floor with a one-unit above.
In 2003, another permit for a three-year temporary permit for a deli on the first floor with one apartment above.
In 2006, you had the legalization permanently of that three-year temporary variance, making it a permanent variance.
I want to take you down and also show you Exhibit 8.
Obi went and walked the neighborhood, talked to all the neighbors.
She's been in this community for several years, since at least 2015, when she opened her braiding store down the street.
Support petition people on Godfrey Street, Gratz Street, North 18th Street, Metairie Avenue, which is the cross street, Ogontz Avenue, the 6300 block of Ogontz Avenue.
There are 47 names in total on this petition and a map.
This is her site, and you can see all around where the people in support.
um again what you have here is a truly unique situation you've got an 80-year use of the ground
floor as a commercial space every time because it's owned rsa5 you have a new commercial space
come in you need to get a new variance because of the the rsa5 zoning even if you took this out
and made it two apartments you would still need a variance and you can't have an apartment on the
first floor there's no kitchen there's no full bathroom so it just doesn't work they're totally
separate. They've been this way forever. You know, there's a hardship to the land. This is a truly
unique site with a unique setup, long history. When you look at it, this was prior a deli. We're
going to have less foot traffic than the deli. She proposes to have seven chairs, operate six
days a week, Monday to Saturday, 8.30 a.m. to 7 p.m., four employees, trash stored inside
with commercial trash pickup. And again, there's all these commercial spaces right down the street.
So we believe that, you know, this requested variance is warranted.
It's the minimum variance required.
It's in keeping with the longstanding history of the property, you know, and really, really should be granted.
you know, and really, really should be granted. What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is call
What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is call on my client.
my client, Toby. Yep.
What is your client's name?
Toby Ketchuk-Pele, K-A-T-C-H-E-K-P-E-L-E.
Ms. Ketchuk-Pele, can you raise your hand?
Ms. Kachepele, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is OBE Kachepele, O-B-E for the first name, and the last name is K-A-T-C-H-E-K-P-E-L-E.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
obie did did you hear my statements yes i do and are they true and correct yes and do you adopt them
as your testimony yes i have nothing further for ms questions from the board no chair no
questions questions or comments from the virtual audience there we have charles richardson
Sure. Mr. Richardson, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair. Mr. Richardson, just state your name. You've already been sworn. Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Bass Room, 508 City Hall. Councilwoman is unopposed to granting the variance.
Thank you very much. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
planning commission uh ron bedmar city planning well this property is currently indicated for
residential on the city plan given the documented use history we recommend the quest for grants
thank you mi2022-004-751-6243 ogons avenue i vote yes
thomas holliman
james snell my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel thank you mr chairman let's go back to number
11 mi 2022 003 674 44 to 48 manheim street augusta o'neill is the attorney
Good afternoon. Sorry again about that delay.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure. My first name is Augusta. It's spelled A-U-G-U-S-T-A. My last name is spelled O-N-E-I-L-L.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
My client is Property Brothers 44 LP.
They are the owner of the property.
And with me this afternoon is Leonard Gay.
He's one of the principals of the Property Brothers 44 LP.
All right.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Bethany, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
you emailed into our offices all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing i did thank you please proceed
and share your screen and just for point of information we do have a letter of support
from the 12th ward democratic rco based on revised plans they also note that faith cdc
and wakefield 49ers also participated in the meeting and were in support there's a letter
of opposition from solo germantown but they do provide us with viso should we should we approve
it and proceed thank you so much chairman i also just want to point out that the 12th war democratic
rco that was picked as the coordinating rco on this application thank you thank you so much so
with that being said i'm again here this afternoon representing the owners of the property at 44 to
48 manheim street a picture of the property is up on your screens at the moment this property is
currently an empty building. The last zoning record that's available for this property
is that tab five of my exhibit package. As you can see, the last permit that's on file
shows that it was used for an office and storage. It is not currently being used for that. It's
currently just an empty blighted building in this neighborhood.
just for context here's a picture of the building in relation i'm sorry picture of the building
Here's a picture of the building in relation to the other houses on the block.
As you can see, this is kind of the eyesore of the neighborhood.
All the other houses on the block are nice and well-maintained.
And so it's our intent with this application to construct something at this location that's going to look as nice as the other properties on the block and look just as well-maintained.
This property is zoned RSA 5.
The initial application that was submitted was for a 12-unit, four-story building with parking
underneath for seven vehicles. We did meet with the affected RCOs on October 20th, as well as
the neighbors. At that time, the building that we presented looked like this in our renderings.
Again, a four-story building. And the feedback that we got from the neighborhood was that they
felt it was too tall, especially in relation to the building next door. So they wanted to see
something that was reduced in height and also had fewer units. So in response to the feedback that
was received, we are now proposing this building, which is three stories. It is 28 and a half feet
down from 38 feet that was initially proposed. It is eight units down from the 12 that my clients
initially asked for. And as you can see, we kept the parking underneath the building. We are still
proposing those seven parking spaces, which the neighbors had indicated that they wanted to see
more parking. So to meet with their concerns, we did keep the parking that was proposed.
so you're going to hear from my client lenard gay this afternoon mr gay um was the member of the
ownership entity that met most often with the affected neighbors he had multiple meetings
with the neighbors in response to the concerns that were raised um he was very responsive to
their concerns because he also happens to live nearby he's got a number of other properties
near this location, so he's very sensitive and committed to working with the neighbors,
which the RCO has noted in their letter of support.
So the refusals that were generated on this application I will bring up on my screen.
There were three refusals, one of which was for the use because we are proposing
the multifamily use in the residential district. The second refusal that was issued related to
the parking. So the parking that we're proposing is underneath of the building.
Let me just pull up the parking. One second.
So, again, we're proposing that the parking be underneath the property, if you can, if I can pull up the map, just one second.
I was trying to find the zoning map, my apologies.
Here it is.
So the property, as you can see, there's no way for us to provide any kind of alley parking
because it is kind of landlocked.
The other refusal that was generated was for the setback.
So the refusal indicates that the front setback shall not be any deeper than the adjoining, than the front setback of the principal building on the immediately adjacent lot.
So if you look at the rendering of the building, what that's saying is that we're not completely flush with the buildings, with both of the buildings next door.
We are flush with the building that's to the north, but the building that's to the south, you can see it juts out a little bit.
So that was the reason for that refusal that was issued.
So, again, we did meet with the 12th Ward Democratic RCO twice.
They are the coordinating RCO on this application.
Following both meetings, we did receive their letter of support,
which was provided to the board, I believe, on Monday.
And I just want to note a few of the highlights of the letter that was provided.
The letter commended the applicant for working with the community.
Again, we did have two meetings.
In fact, we continued our initial ZBA hearing in order to provide more time
continued our initial ZBA hearing in order to provide more time to work with the community
to work with the kids.
and be sensitive to their concerns. The RCO noted that we're going to be storing trash
in the rear of the property, having it picked up by a commercial trash company. My client is also
going to have a management company out of the property, and they've committed themselves to
being available to the neighborhood should any concerns come up related to the application.
And again, they noted that we've demonstrated a willingness, and I'll quote, to improve the neighborhood and invest in it not only by building properties, but also in other ways for the betterment of the community.
Just briefly to go over the criteria for a variance, the denial of the variance would result in an unnecessary hardship because the existing building that's there has been vacant for several years.
It has a unique location size, which makes it particularly suited to this proposed use.
And again, if you look at the zoning map, you can see how large this lot is in comparison to the neighboring lots.
We are 5,471 square feet, according to OPA records.
And just for context, the sizes of the neighboring lots are between 900 to about 1,500 square feet, which means that we're, in some cases, more than five times the size of our neighboring properties.
It's also unusually shaped. You can see it's kind of almost a keystone shape.
So that's the reason for the hardship for this application.
The variance that we're proposing represents the minimum variance that will afford relief
and is the least modification of the use regulation and issue.
It will not be substantially increasing congestion in the streets.
Again, we are providing parking.
It won't increase the danger of fire.
This building will be fully sprinklered.
And it will not otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare.
My client has made great efforts to ensure that.
The variance is not going to substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjoining properties.
Again, my client did meet with the adjoining properties, the owners of those properties, and address the concerns that they've raised in response to the initial application.
The grant of the variance, lastly, will not create any significant environmental damage, pollution, and will not significantly increase the danger of flooding.
The applicant is going to take measures to minimize any environmental damage during construction.
And with that being said, I would like my client to be sworn in, and I will just have a few questions for him.
Sarah, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Lenard Gay.
L-I-N-A-R-D.
Last name Gay, G-A-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, sir?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Chair.
Lenard, could you tell us a little bit about the development projects that you perform in this neighborhood?
I've done a number of rehabs in this neighborhood.
I grew up in the neighborhood. I'm from that. I'm from Pulaski Avenue. So one of my goals is, of course, to if I can turn a shell into a beautiful home.
And that's what I tend to do with. Man on street.
Okay. And could you tell us a little bit about the meetings that you had with neighbors following our initial application, initial meeting with the RCO?
uh the first initial meeting um i i i definitely understood their concerns we addressed them and
again the second meeting was very very it went very well it went very well um we didn't not
no voice went unheard we're complying with everything they were like and again with this
project we tried our best to conform with the neighborhood we didn't try to go with any cookie
cutter style house we wanted to we i'm from germantown so i know the nostalgic of the area
we try to keep it to to that liking okay and did you hear the rest of my testimony this afternoon
i did and was it true and accurate very okay and would you like to adopt it as your own yes i would
Thank you. And Mr. Chair, Zemir Garcia, who's our project architect, he is in the audience. Should the board have any questions for him?
Sure. So we're going to get some questions from the board. So the first question is, so when you started, you were at four floors and you went to three?
That's correct.
And you were at 12 units and you went to eight?
That's correct.
Okay. Questions from the board?
Okay. Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes. Chair, we have Charles Richardson with his hand up. Mr. Richardson, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Richardson, you've testified several times today. Just state your name and proceed.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 508 City Hall.
The Councilwoman is not opposed to granting the variance without any provisions.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Cheryl Smith.
Ms. Smith, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Ms. Smith, state your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
Cheryl Smith, C-H-E-R-Y-L-S-M-I-T-H.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Proceed.
I represent the 12th Ward RCO. That's our letter.
We had actually we had two good meetings with the the applicant and his attorney.
The first one, they were absolutely willing to go back to the table and rework their drawings and their plans.
It's a unique building, as they stated. There's some difficulty with trash being stored inside, but the way that they set it up, the neighbors seemed to be okay with how they were going to have trash collected.
and and they actually met with several of the neighbors personally and when they came back to
the table the second time the neighbors were they had questions they had concerns but they voted to
support it because they felt like it was going to be an absolute improvement to their area
with the additions that I mentioned in the letter the quiet doors or the garage and things like that
But they all supported it at the end of it. And Solo was the only opposition that we had for this project.
Thank you very much for calling and thanks for your input. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning. The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan
or adopted district plans. Recommends no change to the existing zoning of this location. The
applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of the physical circumstances or
condition of the property that we're preventing from being used and conforming with the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request for ranch not be granted. Thank you, sir. MI 2022-003-674-44
to 48 Mannheim Street. I vote yes.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. There are revised plans.
Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA on April 5th,
Thomas?
Thomas?
Thomas?
I vote yes with proviso.
Thomas?
My vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you so much, and apologies again for the tech issues.
Sure, sure, that's fine, that's fine.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called on the 2 o'clock list?
I see no handshare.
We're going to take a five-minute break, and then we're going to come back and do the remaining 3.30 list.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the CBA hearings for the 3.30 list.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
and our board member James Snell. Present Mr. Chairman. Also here is Hillary Emerson our attorney
and Tanya Sunkett our executive director. Here's our format. Be advised proceedings are being
recorded. The video will be available by contacting Tanya Sunkett at phil.gov. For the benefit of our
court synagoguers we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by a phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute.
200 appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
2-7-0-5-5-4-8. Leave your email and the address of the property in question. And finally, the
Leave your email and the address of the.
question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony, and any comments should
be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumkin. Let's look at our continuations that we
have for the 330 list. Number one, MI 2022-001-395-341 North 52nd Street. That case is
continued. Mark must be tried. And number eight, MI 2022-001-391-5221 Haverford Avenue. That case
is continued. Mark must be tried. Is there anyone has comments relative to the cases that have been
continue. I see no hands at this time, Chair. Do we have any other requests for continuance?
I see no hands at this time, Chair. And then we have a few cases that we do not have
Exhibits. Number two, MI-2022-001-710-1615 Elaine Street. No exhibits, third listing.
Equities Group, LLC.
I see no hands, Chair.
M-I-2022-001-710-1615 Elaine Street. This is the third listing. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. Number five, MI 2021-003-955-407-West Cayuga Street. We have no exhibits. This is
the fourth listing. Joel Santos is the listed owner. I see no handshare. MI 2021-003-955-407-West
Cayuga Street, I vote to dismiss. Thomas Tolman, I vote to dismiss. James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Shemel Shahi, my vote is to dismiss. Thank you. Number six, MI 2021-003-821-6811
Oxford Avenue. James Abreu is the owner. We have our lawyer, Ryan McSherry, filling in on this.
Hillary Emerson has a conflict from having worked in the area before.
No exhibits, fourth listing. We do have an interpreter here. Could the interpreter come
forward? Here we have Stephen Albain, the Spanish interpreter. Mr. Albain, please unmute yourself.
hello this is steven albain the spanish interpreter hi mr albain um could you spell
your name for the court reporter please yes sir my name is spelled s-t-e-v-e-n my last name is
spelled a-u-b-a-i-n do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do could you call for us james obray he's the owner we'd like him to appear
No one has put their hand up as of yet, Chair.
Let's try for Nicole one more time for us, James Abreu.
Así que James Albre, si puede levantar la mano o hacer clic en este para levantar la mano.
Any hands?
I see no hands, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
So, Interpreter, this is MI 2021-003-821-6811 Oxford Avenue.
This is the fourth listing.
I vote to dismiss.
could you say that so he hears that's coming and this is the interpreter speak i'm sorry
i hate to interrupt chair but do you mind if i ask a quick question
sure of the audience this is tanya um but these are you on the line and is this your client
But Disa, are you on the line? And is this your client?
Because I just got an email, but I just wanted to make sure. Thank you, interpreter.
Anytime, anytime.
So could you let him know we're going to dismiss his case, okay?
We just have a hand raised from a Juna Rosa.
tanya this is betita that's not my case okay thank you thank you all right so mi 2021
003 821 68 11 oxford avenue fourth listing i vote to dismiss tom
thank you interpreter
Thomas. Thomas Holloman, I vote to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. Number three on our list, MI2022. Interpreter, thank you very much, by the way. We appreciate your help.
No problem. Thank you for using our service, Interpreter.
Sure. Number three, MI 2022-006-889-2817 West Style Street. Megan Stevens is the owner. It's a
pro se. This is for the erection of an addition to an attached structure for use as a single
family household living, size and location as shown on the action plan.
Chair, Ms. Stevens is coming back in as a panelist now.
Right. And a letter of support from Brevytown Chargedwood Community Civic Association. And also the applicant provided a petition in support signed by approximately 24 people, 13 of which live in the 2800 West of West Stile Street.
Hello, my name is Megan Steven.
Could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
Sure. It's M-E-G-H-A-N-S-T-E-P-H-E-N-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I will.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I agree.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay, so I'm representing myself as the homeowner.
I bought the home in 2014.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
Did you read the refusal into the record?
I read the first part of it.
I'll read the refusals too.
One, it exceeds the occupied lot area in the RSA 5 zoning, 80% allowed, and you have 89%.
Two, on any given street, the distance between the front facade and the front lot line should be no greater than the distance between the front facade and the front lot line of the principal building on the immediately adjacent lot on such street with greater distance between its front facade and its front lot line.
and shall be no less than the distance between the front facade and the front lot line
of the principal building of the immediate adjacent lot on such a street with the lesser
distance between its front facade and its front lot line. The proposed enclosed supports violates
this code section. Proceed. Thank you. And can you all see my screen? We can. Okay, so the notice of
refusal that you just read was up on the screen. So what I am looking to do is to rebuild an
existing enclosed port structure. So what is on the screen right now are the mock-up plans that
my architect came up with. As you said, I did receive the support of the RCO that's also on
the screen and my architect is available if there are any questions. So to go through my documents,
this is the notice of refusal. In my appeal, I will show that there is some precedence on the
block. I apologize. The quality is not the best. So between the 2800 block and then North Newkirk
Street, there are five homes and I am one of those five homes. And of the three of those five homes
currently have an enclosed porch, which is what violates the zoning. It's the facade of the house.
um which is what violates the um the zoning um it's the facade of the house where the front door
then is and then as well as the existing square footage that is added and there's also on this
side on the right side of the screen that is another enclosed porch that is in the next section
of five homes between north newkirk and north dover on west styles um in addition to um
So this is proof that I own a home in case there are any questions.
So here are the concept plans.
They are not the most clear.
I can also share them in another form if needed.
So when the plan to rebuild the porch is to not change any of the existing foundation or the square footage of the current porch.
um so in terms of like the the basement foundation or even the support beams that are along the
porch roof there are no changes to the height or how far that sticks out and so that creates no um
like impediment or it doesn't block any of the other homes that are next to mine because all
of our porches and all of our foundations line up um let me flip this again sorry so in terms of
what the property looks like currently. I've slowly over the past nine years worked to improve
the outside of the home. The siding work was redone over the past five or six years. And so
right now, as you can see, this is the enclosed porch. It came this way when I purchased the home.
I didn't realize there were issues with it when I bought the home. It's also not in good shape. So
not only are we looking to improve the aesthetic and have it be uniform with the rest of the house,
the porch is also not in great shape and this was inherited with the purchase of the house
so those are proof that I put the notices up so this is the existing structure from the inside
as you can see there's two different types of wood there was significant water damage so the
newer wood was to replace the significant water damage that occurred prior to my purchasing the
house. You can't see this the most clearly, but none of these windows fully close. So I have to
have white duct tape up at the top to keep, you know, bugs and for temperature and rain to be
kept under control, I guess. So it's harder to see, but here are windows or closer up of the
windows that do not fully close. Here is the wall that connects me to my neighbor's adjoining house.
So these windows are actually plexiglass. They are not glass, but they are cracked and pieces have been missing.
And this has been this way since I purchased the home in 2014.
So I just have cardboard taped up in the meantime to keep animals as well as, you know, insects out.
In addition, this you can see this panel on the roof of the enclosed porch.
there have been animal issues based on animals getting in from adjoining homes and working
their way over. And so part of the proposed plan is to put up a barrier between my enclosed porch
as well as the neighbors from the roof. And then this is a side view as well. You can't really see,
but along this wall, the siding does not fully attach to the house. And so there's a gap right
here between, yeah, just a tiny little gap right there, which provides really poor insulation
and temperature control. And lastly, if you can see right here, at some point early on in
purchasing the home, there was another leak in the roof that caused some water damage right here.
So this support beam that looks relatively nice was put up over the existing porch beam because
the existing one was not in great shape so that was used to reinforce and support that
but so with this and given the state that the porch is currently in our plans are to like I
showed here to rebuild it to take it down entirely and to rebuild it but without changing any of the
current dimensions as they are and I attended my committee meeting my neighborhood association
meeting so these are the letters that I sent and distributed as well as some signatures so the
there are three pages of signatures the ones with stars on it are my neighbors who live on my street
in support the others are surrounding neighbors on other streets but as you can see many neighbors
on the 2800 block of west styles do approve and bless this project to be done
um so there are three pages of that um so yes my request is for the board to approve the
variance to allow this structure to be rebuilt questions from the board
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
It's around Bednar City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential in the city plan.
Given the site's physical condition,
and we recommend the question for us to be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-006-889-2817 West Style Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, I vote yes.
Jane Snell, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
You have your votes.
Thank you.
Okay. Number four, MI-2022-006-335-3848 Frankfurt Avenue.
Juana Rosa is the owner applicant, pro se.
There was a meeting held for 223 at Harrogate Civic.
We do not have an RCO, letters of yet.
This application is for relocation of lot lines to create two lots from two existing lots, 3848 and 3850 Frankfurt Avenue, sizes and locations as shown in plan.
For the erection of a rear addition to an existing structure, no change in the use of existing structure as a single family dwelling.
two refusals, whereas a minimum of 20% of open areas required for corner lots located
in the RSA zoning district, and two, whereas a minimum of nine feet of rear yard depth
is required for new development locations in the RSA district. I also have
there are two owners listed.
Luz Filaciano,
Bonella is also,
could they come forward too?
So I have
Juana Rosa
and Luz Bonella.
Chair, Ms. Rosa should be coming back in as a panelist now.
The other party that you called,
I do not see their name in the audience.
Excuse me. Can you hear us?
Yeah, one minute, one minute.
Juana Rosa?
Okay. Could you state your name and spell it for us, please?
Sure. My name is Juana Rosa, J-U-A-N-A. Rosa is R-O-S-A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Hillary, can we go on without the other owner being called?
is that the other owner next to her or is that someone else this is the other owner yes okay
can she give her yep her name to sell it and then we'll swear her in thank you i could
miss bonela state your name and then spell for the court reporter please
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir our vice chair has just a few questions okay okay yes good afternoon have have you emailed
all the exhibits and documents that were required to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing? Yes, we have. Okay. Can you proceed?
Could you share your screen? The green button down at the bottom.
that's good
oh that's the paperwork
I'm not going to say anything
she's going to
Ms. Rosa go ahead Ms. Rosa
tell us what you want to do
My name is Juana Rosa, resident and owner of 3848 Frankfurt Avenue, Philadelphia PA 19134.
I've been there since 2010.
Please allow my further. Wait a minute. Hold on. I've been there for many years, although now I've been there since 2010. But before that, I was renting there since 1993 as a renter.
Please allow my further...
Wait a minute, hold on, hold on.
But I wasn't aware that the property lines were not mine.
There was a problem with the property line until last year when I went to submit for changes to find out whether we can build this garage.
much. But if if you see Google view, okay, we have always used this black line for this
for a long long time lifetime binding and for this reason I secure my permit premises
and storage because drug addictions and everything that was going on with sex and stealing and
all that, not only for my place, but for my neighbor's place also. I submitted the application
last year to change the relocation of the lot lines. And for that, the whole lifeline
I've used as a legalization of the metal garage for personal use. At TASH, you will find the
application, refusal, the special exception form, project information, flyers, letters,
support from Harrogate Civic Association, certificates of mailing, pictures, survey,
and floor plans on the building views and the elevations. No change to existing property
since family dues also with me as support the property owner of 3850 is here with me
to give it okay to relocate property lines and to correct everything on the lot lines to reflect
what's there i'm unable to get a tax compliance in the system but my property taxes are all up to
date. And you can see that
with the tax revenue
department. And for
that reason, that's why I'm here.
Thank you.
I wanted to go back.
Show me what you're building here. I want to
see what that looked like again.
Hold on.
Hold on. Let me turn
this already, it's already up?
Yes, it is.
legalizing that so that's a large metal garage you built next to the house would
would have pulled down behind it's behind the property behind it behind the property
yes i'm gonna show you the plans now
yes this is what the um it was built and this is where it was built and this is what it looked like
before and it's changed now so you you you put a large metal garage behind your house is what
you're saying yes yes for my storages you know because i've been being robbed in that place and
there's too many uh drug addiction and stuff in that area okay and uh stealing people stealing
from us and this is partly on your owner's property your your neighbor's property too
yes according to the to the line no no no do me a favor let's try it is it on your neighbor's
property yes part of it is on the neighbors which we didn't know because your neighbor's okay with
that yes we've been using this for many years i mean both of you together i did yes she she has
no option. How long has this garage been there? For a year, almost two years. The garage, but
not the property line. The property line. When I bought the place back in 99.
When I bought the place back in 99, nobody from the city came and told me, you know, this is your line.
This is what you bought.
So since that place was like gated with fence, you know, I never thought anything about it because it was there.
It's not like he built it after I bought the place.
So it was always there.
Excuse me. I'm a resident also in the area. Can I
testify something that might help also the case? I'm a resident
at 3675. Are you the expediter? Yeah, and I'm
also a resident. I think we're going to stay with them, okay?
Okay. All right. Questions from the board? Okay. Yes.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i see no hands chair planning commission ron bednar city planning properties indicated for
residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to existing
zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or condition of the property that was prevented from being used
for me with the code. Therefore, we recommend
requests forbearance to not be
granted. Thank you, Mark.
I'm going to
take this to next week.
I'm going to meet in an executive session
with the board members to talk about this
issue, and we're going to vote
next week at 2 p.m.,
next Wednesday at 2 p.m., okay?
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you for your presentation.
Thank you.
And it's closed.
This record's closed, other than we're going to vote on it next week, okay?
Thank you.
Number seven, MI 2021-003-791-1534 North 17th Street.
Marquesa Carter is the owner applicant.
This application is for a family child care for a maximum of 12 children as part of an existing single family dwelling
an existing structure. The proposed family child care for a maximum of 12 children
requires special exception approval in the RSA 5 zoning area.
Ms. Carter, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
chair miss carter is coming back in as a panelist now thank you
miss carter
Ms. Carter?
Can we see her in the audience?
She was in the audience chair and I promoted her.
Okay, sure.
Ms. Carter, please raise your hand.
Ms. Carter, if you're here, please unmute yourself.
do we see anything it looked like she unmuted herself now but
okay thank you hi miss carter could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
it's no sound though chair okay miss carter
did you want to just move on to the next case and we can just
I don't I don't think we have another case. Oh, OK.
Yeah, I don't I think this is the last case.
Miss Carter.
Well, we can just give her a short continuance.
OK, why don't we do that? Let's let's let's get, you know, so we'll do a short continuance with this the best you can.
So we'll do a short continuance with this the best you can.
So MI20.
So MI 2021-003-791-1534 North 17th Street, this case is continued.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience who's, the case has not been called?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Chair, Ms. Carter has hurt.
Her hand was up. Now it's up again.
Yeah, I'm going to try to, if we can, just get it in.
Ms. Carter, could you unmute?
Ms. Carter, can you unmute yourself?
Yes, it seems like she's having a problem with her audio.
Okay, all right.
So, Lakeisha, let's see if we can get her back in as soon as possible.
Ms. Carter, we're going to continue this case.
We're going to get you back in as soon as we can.
No one else in the virtual audience?
No, Chair.
No one else has that, Chair.
Hands up, Chair.
Thanks, everyone.
All right.
Good job, Bill.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Have a good time.