The main campus with the undergrads are about a mile and a half from here.
So this project is not intended for college students, nor do I think it'd be super attractive to them.
But in any event, so what you're looking at here is Exhibit 6 from my packet, which is an aerial image of the block from atlas.phila.gov.
But in any event, so what you're looking at here is Exhibit 6.
And what I'm going to show you in a moment is that there's a lot of land vacancy on this block.
In fact, the church that is where my cursor is in the middle on the left has since been demolished.
So it's even greater than this image represents.
the subject property has been vacant since at least 1996 according to atlas it's a 3267 square
foot property that's 25 about 25 feet wide we're planning a 35 foot tall building that would fit
into the context of the few buildings that are on the block this is what the block looks like
if you were to step outside and look down to the right towards the rest of the block.
There's a couple buildings near us. Half of them are abandoned, half are occupied. But beyond those
buildings, you've just got a tremendous amount of empty space all the way down to Allegheny Avenue
where there's some multifamily buildings. So kind of an interesting situation. One of the most
vacant blocks I've ever been involved with a project on. And then I'm going to jump to,
I think it's exhibit 14. Yes. So that this is the same aerial image, but what I did here
is I put labels for every property on our block to just tell you what's there,
because we're proposing a 10 unit building, which I'll show you in a minute. So I wanted to put that
in the context of our surroundings. So there, as I mentioned, 11 of the 19 properties on this
16th Street block are vacant land or vacant buildings that, you know, per the city's records
are uninhabited. And then among the eight buildings that are there, I think all but one
of them is multifamily. So directly next door to us is a four-unit building. The only occupied
building across the street from us is three units. There is one single family home, a couple doors
down. And then you kind of have, you know, open space all the way down to the southern half of
the block. There's a 27 unit building that I don't think construction has started, but I did see the
building permit on Atlas. And then there are some apartment buildings that are already built. So you
have an 87-unit building on the corner with Allegheny on the west side. You have a 62-unit
retirement home per the zoning permitting on the right side corner northeast with Allegheny.
And then in the southern corners with Allegheny, again, all multifamily buildings,
typically several dozen units each as are labeled in my exhibit here. So this is an interesting
context. I mean, the zoning is RSA 3, and this is probably a good time for me to show you
our refusal at Exhibit 2. The zoning is RSA 3, so that's a really tough zoning designation. Not
only does it command single-family use, but it commands a lot of open space. Half the lot is
supposed to be left unbuilt in RSA 3. So that's much more strict than RSA 5. And we just can't
design a project, particularly on a property as large as this one, that complies with the zoning
code. If we were to attempt to build a single family home, which is not economically feasible,
Yes, maybe we could comply with the dimensional rules of the open lot area and parking and all these things you see listed here.
But to build a multifamily building, which really is required in terms of what the demand is in this area, what the context is, and what my client can finance in terms of literal money financing, construction material cost and construction labor cost.
What we end up with is a relatively modest multifamily building that we did our best to meet the dimensional rules, but still, you know, fell short with the ones on this screen.
Now, as I did mention, we are obeying the height limit.
So it's only a 35-foot tall building, and we are giving the board today a two-page proviso plan, which I'm going to show you.
This plan is at Exhibit 11.
And what we did in consultation with the RCO, because we had two meetings.
What we did in consultation with the RCO, because we had two meetings, is we did reduce the project to 10 units. That's what this change cloud is about here. There is no roof deck on the building, and it provides three surface parking spaces in the rear, accessed from Westmoreland Street.
I do have the architect on the line, but in the interest of time, I'll just do my best job walking you through the elevations real quickly.
This is the front elevation, the 25-foot wide frontage on 16th.
This is the side elevation on Westmoreland, which is quite long.
There's going to be a door here that leads into the entrance lobby and the main stairwell.
That is going to serve four units on the first floor and then three units on each of the second and third floors. Those units range in sizes, about half of them are what I'd call bigger, you know, in the 900, 1,000, 1,200 square foot range, and about half of them are smaller, you know, studio or one bedroom, 500 square foot units.
One of the units is going to have an independent access because it is an ADA type B unit. This was also a change made in consultation with the coordinating RCO. So the idea here is that a wheelchair user can, with no level change, come right in off the street.
We still did want to elevate the building to match the style of the surrounding buildings and again could do so without exceeding the 38 foot height limit.
There are extensive egress window wells on the front side and that is to promote safety.
I have floor plans. I'll come back to them at the drop of the hat if you'd like in a minute.
I will go to the RCO letter real quickly. This is at Exhibit 9C. So Nicetown Tioga Improvement Team was the coordinating RCO. It was a close vote. The RCO, as they normally do in my experience, wanted to respect the vote, is supporting the project, has asked us to do some things on what I'd call the economic side.
So it's, you know, within your discretion as to whether to enter these as provisos, but we have agreed to them, you know, personally with the RCO.
One of those will be to hammer out a community benefits agreement that discusses job opportunities and caps on rent.
I think that that is essentially my presentation.
I'll stop sharing my screen.
I'm more than happy to take questions.
I do have the architect as well, as I mentioned.
Why don't you bring your client over to a doctor?
So my client's name is Nadal Hassan.
Nadal, if you could raise your hand.
I could you state your name?
We have a Nadal Hassan.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
I could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
there you go
hello my name is um nadal hassan hey nadal could you nadal could you spell your name please for
the sonographer oh i apologize yeah sure uh n as in nancy i d as in david a as in apple l as in
Larry, last name Hassan, H-A-S as in Sam, S as in Sam, E as in Elephant, N as in Nancy.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Nadal, are you authorized to represent the LLC that owns this property?
Did you hear my testimony in this zoning case today?
Was my testimony true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Would you therefore adopt my testimony as if it were your own?
Thanks, Nadal.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, Mr. Richardson. As you know, you've been already sworn. Just state your name, please.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass.
The Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance based upon
Yes, sir. The councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance based upon the RCO's letter.
Thank you very much for calling in. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Here we have someone with the phone number ending in 3552. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Proceed. Could you state your name, please?
Yes, this is Adrienne Fernandez of Swamp Little Neighborhood Process Association, RCL.
Spell your name, please, Adrienne, for the court stenographer.
Okay, I'll spell my last name. It's F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Okay. For this address, 3238 North 16th Street, we are opposed to this variant.
There are six affected RCOs for this address with one of them serving as RCO coordinator.
However, the RCO coordinator did not follow the zoning code for scheduling neighborhood
public meetings and also did not follow the Planning Commission regulations and instructions.
So therefore, the other five RCOs, including Swampwood RCO, did not participate in any of
the meetings or any agreement to do a CBA for this address. In most cases, we had other
RCO meetings already scheduled so um the coordinator did did not make any attempt to
consult with us so we could have the meeting on dates we could um all plan to be available so um
therefore we're asking for um enforceable provisos for this address uh let's see about
well I'll just name them. The first one is a limit of 10 units because this area is the variance for
multifamily is overused on this block even though there's a lot of vacancies almost all those
vacancies under redevelopment plans whether for variance or for not or not for variance by right
because Swampadour RCO along with Tauly United and North Central Philadelphia RCOs we gave
extensive meetings for over 18 months about the unusual increase in multifamily variances in this
area and on this block. Traditionally, the multifamily is restricted largely to Allegheny
Avenue, which Brandon did indicate in a large number of multifamilies that have been there for
decades. And now those multifamilies are trying to turn the corner where are mostly RSA3s,
whether you go north or south from Allegheny Avenue.
And it's just becoming too crowded.
Neighbors are complaining they can't even keep up
with going to all the meetings,
basically asking to make their lifestyles
more invaded, more crowded,
parking and traffic and other problems
that come with multifamily, especially trash.
So the first proviso we're asking for is a limit of 10 units.
The next one is that all trash and recycling
is stored indoors,
except for collection days.
The next proviso we're asking for is no rooftop decks
or other rooftop structures.
The next proviso we're requesting is bike parking
or any bike parking must be placed inside the property lines.
Also proviso for no basement living.
And the last proviso we're requesting is a limit
of 35 feet height because this one block
will have close to 100 multi-families
where there were probably about 30 single-family homes.
And that's everything that we need to let you know.
Thank you for taking the time to call in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see all the hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon.
David DeTecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change from residential single-family 3 to residential single-family 5 at this location.
Under the proposed zoning, parking would not be required, and the open area required would be less than with the current zoning.
Under the proposed zoning, if the lot could be divided, the appellant could build one dwelling unit on each lot for a total of two dwelling units.
So the City Planning Commission could support two dwelling units in this proposal.
However, the appellant has not shown that a unique physical condition or circumstance exists that would require 10 dwelling units to be built on this property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for 10 dwelling units.
Mr. Chairman, could I quickly respond?
Mr. Chairman, could I quickly respond?
You can.
You can.
Well, first of all, I just want to say thank you for your patience as I hoofed around my
house.
So now I'm standing next to my router.
But in terms of Mr. Fecto's comments, none of the other parcels on this block, to my
knowledge, are subdivided in such a manner that they're that shallow.
What we're, you know, attempting to do is basically keep a lot that is the same shape, more or less as the others in its context. And single family home use, you know, in addition to just not being possible economically, and in my opinion, not sensible on such a large lot, on a corner, it's just, it's not, it's not in context.
I mean, there's one, as far as I'm aware, single family home on this block. That's just not where we are. It's an apartment area. And then as far as Ms. Fernandez's comments, I was not aware of any of that friction between perhaps her RCO and the coordinating RCO.
But as far as the suggested provisos go, I think we, by nature of the plans, comply with all of those. We have no units that are solely in the basement. There are a few units that have some space in the basement, and I don't know if it's been fully determined whether there would be bedrooms down there.
But if there were, the basement's partially above ground and every single unit has code compliant egress window wells in the zoning plan. So I think we're in a pretty safe position as far as that goes. That's all I have for you.
Thank you. MI 2023.
Mr. Chair, just a quick note. If you are inclined to grant this, the provisor suggested by Ms.
Hernandez about the maximum of 10 units should absolutely be included along with the revised
plans that have been suggested.
Yep. Thank you.
Thank you.
All right. MI 2023-001-045.
3238 North 16th Street. I vote yes. With proviso. Revised plan, two pages, stand by ZBA, July 19th, 2023, maximum 10 units.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snow, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
So thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2023-001-069-2500 Grant Avenue.
Number one, Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Chair Alan Nockmson is coming back in as a panelist now.
Mr. Nockmson, you have already been sworn.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Alan Nockmson.
All right.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is to Coney One, doing business as Bluegrass Billiards Bar and Grill.
And in the virtual audience is Dominic Monaco.