specialize in mixed income multifamily properties in Philadelphia. We're seeking a variant
approval to convert a property that has historically been a four-unit building into
a two-unit duplex. The applicant is certified as a landlord in Philadelphia through the
PHA, Low Income Housing Voucher Program, and as a participant, the applicant has gone
through extensive training on how to come and maintain being a responsible landlord
and good neighbor. A variance is required here due to a refusal that we have for the
multifamily use. Avoid the refusal. I'll go more into the refusal in a second. Just to orient the
board into the property that we're discussing today, as you can see from this area, the property
itself, as I stated, is 1439 West Fenango Street. It's on the 1400 block of Fenango Street between
Broad Street to the east and 15th Street to the west. As I stated, the property itself,
another aerial shot, the property itself was a four-unit building since the 50s,
but it's currently vacant and blighted due to a fire that took place prior to the applicant's
ownership. This is a front, a shot of the frontage of the
property that fronts on Venango. And this is just a street
view, looking towards broad on Venango. And this is looking
towards the opposite end and looking towards 50. Now, the
Now, the prior owner did start rehabilitating this property. So once the applicant obtained it, the interior was already framed out for a multifamily use. And I just wanted to show some boards and pictures of the framing.
prior owner did start rehabilitating this property.
So what's all?
In addition to wanting to do family size units, this is part of the hardship that, you know, the applicant did not create as the property is already framed as a multifamily.
Now, as I stated, the property is zoned as RSA-5, but there's no record of this property
actually being utilized as a single-family home. It seems like it's only been a multifamily
home in all of its existence. Furthermore, the comprehensive plan, which I've shown in
the second proposes a zoning change to entire block to RM1. I obviously can't speak for planning,
but I assume part of the reason of that is because of the current existing use of not only this
property, but the properties on this block and across the street. And so just to speak to the
The historic use of this property, as you can see here, this is a zoning permit dating back to 1955, that has the property in use as a four-unit multifamily structure.
And going back even further, back into 1947, the property was utilized as, again, a multifamily structure. It looks like three units.
now as for the exist as for the neighborhood neighborhood context and how this proposed use
fits within the contextual environment you will see that essentially all the all occupied
properties on this block are multifamily they even the adjacent um properties itself
for the sake of time i won't go through every one but just to touch on a few
1426 is a two-unit building. 1425 is a five-unit building, as you can see. 1427 to 1435 ranges from three-unit buildings to two-unit buildings up and down the property.
In fact, 1435 West Venango was recently approved by this board as a triplex, as recently as last year.
And in this case, they had to demolish the structure and rebuilt it.
So in terms of the level of how de minimis it is, our case here is more de minimis because we don't need to demolish the structure.
We just need to do an interior rehab of the property to bring it back to a non-blighted condition.
As I stated earlier, the proposed use is actually in line with the 2035 comprehensive plan.
As you can see for this proposed zoning of the area, our property, I don't know if you can see my little mouse here,
but our property falls in this section a and it's actually uh it's actually right here this
is finagle street and you can see by the orange squares on both sides of the street
that actually let me zoom in so this is easier to see there you go you can see by the orange
squares on both sides of the street that the proposed change in zoning as i said is residential
multifamily, ranging between one to four. I assume it's supposed to be one. Under this proposed
zoning, the proposed variance that we're asking for today would be by right.
So what we're proposing, as I stated, is a two-family structure. We did meet with the RCO,
as you referenced earlier, Mr. Chair, and we obtained a letter of support that we actually
had for this property. We've had three meetings with RCO. Initially, we were seeking a use of
higher density and in response to the desires of the community group, and we reduced our density
to two units. BLI prized themselves on making positive community impacts and thought it was
is also important to talk to neighbors on the block.
So I'm pleased to report that we not only have this letter of support from the community
group, but we were able to obtain signatures of support from neighbors that live on the
block, I believe about 20 or so, and in immediate adjacent area, some of whom may be on the
Some of whom may be on the call today. So in conclusion, the proposed variance is a reduction of the historic density of the property. It squarely fits within the character and context of the area of this entire block being multifamily for longer than frankly I've been alive.
call today.
So in conclusion,
It supports the comprehensive plan of the city and the planning department and the most immediate neighbors and the coordinating RCO support this project.
Um, lastly, due to the physical conditions of the property, when they acquire, it does
create a hardship that they didn't create, um, that would essentially require a complete
interior teardown, um, if they had to, uh, use this property as single family.
For all these reasons, um, we are respectfully requesting that the board grants our variance
request.
Um, and if the boards have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.
Um, but I also have a representative from ownership, Mr.
Alex Robles here who can be recognized to adopt and affirm my testimony if the board doesn't have
any questions. Why don't you do that have your testimony adopted first. Okay Mr. Robles could
you please raise your hand. Please unmute yourself sir.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Sir, you will have to unmute yourself, please.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Thank you.
Yes, my name is Alex Robles, A-L-E-X-R-O-B-L-E-S.
Do you swear or affirm the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Robles, did you hear the testimony that I just provided to the board this afternoon?
Do you confirm the truth from my testimony and adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman mr chair this is hillary i i do have
one question um you mentioned that you reduced the the density after meeting with the neighbors
um the refusal says two units which is what you're asking for today is it a revised refusal
or did you go back for a new application uh so it was a revised refusal um well i guess the answer
is both so it was intended to be a revised refusal and then uh i think because of the top the the gap
for how long it took to that was that took to be done the um l and i just prompted to do it under
a new application number. In effect, it has the same effect, but this proposal has been before
the RCO a few times at a higher density, and in an attempt to revise it, it ended up having to be
done on a new application, but it's the same proposal, and we don't have, and maybe this is
why you're asking, but we don't have any plans that need to be stamped. Yeah, no, I just wanted
to make sure we didn't need to add a proviso if the board grants um for an amended refusal so but
you said there's a new application and the application was just for the two units so
i think we're fine okay all right thank you no problem questions or comments from the virtual
audience this is tanya may i ask a quick question also sure um mr bertel do you still have the
original ap number that you started with ap number uh i have a zp or zp number is the same exact one
no this is under a new zp number they had to be wondering right that's correct it had to be under
a new zp number yeah so hillary that would be necessary if we don't have if we have a different
number well sorry what would be necessary tanya on the proviso if it was under the same number
but an amended refusal um yes it would be um the new zp number would be necessary to mention if
it's different than what we have in the system now no i'm sorry let me sorry um what i'm saying
is that the the new zp number is the number that you have in the system it's it's one in the same
we don't we don't need a uh proviso or uh amended plans all righty
questions from the virtual audience chair we have charles richardson
Questions from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson.
State your name for us, please, and spell for the court reporter.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
We got confirmation from the RCO yesterday with regard to the two units, so Councilwoman is not opposed to granting the variance.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I've seen all the hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Board Members.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
the comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential multi-family zoning the recommended
zoning would allow two residential units in the existing home so the city planning commission
recommends the board grant these variants for two dwelling units thank you MI 2022 001 287
1439 West Benanga Street I vote yes Harold Tenere my vote is 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, Mr. Chairman.
Number two, MI 2021-004-663-1513 North 6th Street.
Vernon Anastasio is the attorney.
No RCO letter here.
um we'll let verne talk about that
he's coming back in as a panelist thank you
good afternoon mr chairman i could you state your name and spell for the core reporter please
of course it's verne v-e-r-n anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o it's 939 montrose street
Philadelphia 19147. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I certainly do. Could you identify your client and relationship to the property? I
represent the owner, Neely Glenn, who is present. Okay, our Vice Chair, Carl Tenere, has a few
questions. Thank you. I'm Mr. Anastasio. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy? I certainly do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of
ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes to everything but the letter i was my understanding that they were sending one to you
directly we met with the rco more than once
do we have an rca letter mr chairman no we don't we don't have it i think what we're going to do
carol we'll hear the case and we'll wait a week or so before we vote on well do you know do we
notice the set three meetings wow yeah we had three meetings mr chairman so long as we could
put a date certain on that vote um because it's been so very long and we have met three times
Yes, we will. Thank you. May I proceed, please? Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. 1513 North 6th Street is an application for a two-family dwelling in an existing structure.
I am submitting an exhibit packet of just about 60 pages. Let me take you to
the plans. This is a shell in an otherwise
difficult block. As you can see here, we've got a basement here,
and we've got the first floor with a bedroom, a bath, and then we have the second floor
with the third floor being a two-bedroom unit.
Going to go to page 29 of my exhibits. This is the property. Again, it's in a rather bad shape.
this is photo from just behind
my client's property where you can see new multi-family going up directly behind it
I also want to take a little bit of time to show you, even though you have it, the interior as it exists.
I also want to take a little bit of time to show you even though you have it
Condition is a pretty poor condition, as you can see.
in addition to the multi-family that's going up by a larger development company
behind us there it goes exceeds height of the existing properties on 6th as well
my clients are just a young couple uh purchased this property um not not a developer and would
just like to be able to get this property in good shape, breathe new life. The few people that are
on the block, they did sign in support. We did present this petition to the Registered Community
Organization. As you can see, here is the property where my cursor is. Across the street is all
multifamily. Most of the side of our block completely depopulized. More than a half of
this block is zoned RM1 multifamily. And everything behind here that says vacant,
where my cursor is now crossing, all of that has been approved for multifamily new construction.
Here is the property on the zoning map. As you can see across the street, down the block,
and now behind us here, all multifamily. The residential single-family is a rarity.
And now let's look at the history. Since the 50s, this property has been three-family dwelling,
And prior to the 50s and the 40s, it was a two-family dwelling in 1946.
In 1959, it became a three-family dwelling based on any of the recorded history of the property.
It's never been a single-family home.
I do submit to you three certified documents of three separate mailings.
We also have our deed and our flyer that went out to all households within 300 some odd feet of the property.
With that, because of the property history of always being at least two and or three family dwelling, because the block is overwhelmingly multifamily, because new construction just behind it has been a large development built as multifamily.
and because of the mass depopulation problems on our side of the block, I do respectfully request
that this appeal be granted for two-family dwelling in this existing structure. If you have
no other questions of me right now, I would like to ask my client to be identified.
Nealey Glenn, could you please raise your virtual hand?
i have a laura glenn should i allow her to speak
yes sure
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
at laura neely glenn and it's l-a-u-r-a neely n-e-a-l-y glenn g-l-e-n-n right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed thank you mr
chairman miss glenn did you hear my presentation to the board today yes is it true and accurate
to the best of your knowledge yes and would you adopt it as your own testimony if need be
yes thank you miss glenn any questions mr chair questions from the board no no mr chairman
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential multifamily zoning.