Thank you. You may proceed.
Okay. I'm about to share my screen.
We're here on 1209 Snyder Avenue.
I'm here on behalf of DSPS LLC, which is the owner of the property.
I have Michael Agnall here with me to testify.
This is an existing property, zoned CMX1.
It's been long vacant, and we're looking to add an addition at the rear and above
and to use it as a three-family dwelling unit. We met with East Passion Crossing
back in earlier this month and they indicated their unanimous support for the plan
and their letter of support is located at Exhibit A in the packet. I see there's a letter of
non-option from councilman as well okay um thank you uh i will run through uh the plans uh briefly
and the refusals again we have a refusal for use as this is zoned cmx one however we're in uh
snider avenue where there are a number of multi-family uses uh in the vicinity as well
as ground floor commercial um show you some existing photographs of the property
so here's the property right here it's the one that is boarded up and vacant
and as you go to the corner there are some commercial uses at ground floor however those
commercial uses stop at the property right before us this property right here at 1207 actually has
approval for three family dwelling with ground floor commercial again we're not looking for that
floor commercial we're just looking for the three-family dwelling we also received refusals
on open area 75 percent required we're putting 85 and in the rear yard where nine feet required
we're proposing three foot eight but as i'll show in plans that three really is just a product of
But as I'll show in plans that three really is just a product of the balcony off the second floor rear, which was also a refusal for the CMX one district.
the balcony
So and here's the property and the rendering. We're showing an addition here to the rear as well as above for the roof deck.
there would be a balcony off the second floor and these steps that come off of the first floor to
the rear area and that is aside from those steps right here we have seven feet eight inches
so you know that that rear there actually is quite an ample rear yard I am just going to
hop on that list just so you can see the homes to the rear along Mercy Street all pretty much
have 100% lot coverage come right up to the property line. So we're going to be more open
than they are. And then I will just take you quickly through the floor plans. Here is the
proposed first floor plan. The enter is about a 550 square foot, one bedroom unit. The second floor
actually uh is enters through the same way but they have the rear area here with the rear yard
that's really the nicest unit it's a 726 square feet two bedrooms and uh and two baths and then
lastly you have the third floor unit which is about 584 square feet again that one's a two
bedroom one bath and that has the access to the roof deck and here's the roof deck plan
with the appropriate setbacks. Here is the zoning map, again, showing that we're right next to CMX2.
We're CMX1. Here's all RSA5. There are some duplexes mixed in. There's a large multifamily
building across the street that zoned CMX2.5, 17 units. So again, nothing out of context with
the neighborhood. We believe that this fits, and that's indicated by the overwhelming community
support we received. Here are just some more photographs of the street. You can see the width
and the, you know, some commercial uses across the street. Here's that large multifamily building
that I had mentioned a moment ago. So, and we believe that the variance is consistent with the
surrounding neighborhood and won't adversely impact the neighborhood at all, and it will
support Snyder Ave and take this long vacant property and revitalize it and bring it back
to use. I would just like to ask if Michael Agnall is here, if he could be sworn in and
adopt my testimony. If you're here, can you please raise your hand?
Mr. Michael Agnall has been allowed to speak, ma'am.
Thank you. Michael, can you hear me?
Yes, I can. Can you hear me?
Okay, yes, I can. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please?
Sure. My name is Michael Agnall, last name E-G-N-A-L. Address is 1904 Mount Vernon Street,
Philadelphia PA 19130. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing
about the truth? I do. Okay, Mr. Phillips. Michael, just a couple quick questions. First,
you heard everything that I stated a moment ago? I did. And do you agree to adopt my testimony as
your own? I do. And do you agree that everything that I said is true and correct to the best of
your knowledge information and belief? I do. And can you just briefly tell the board the condition
of the property when you purchased it? Yeah, when I purchased it late last year, there was an L&I
make safe violation that had to be addressed before anything else could be done. The entire rear
of the building was crumbling and had to be torn off and shored up before I could begin to file for
a permit, and the neighbors were understandably, you know, incensed about that. In fact, I think
some people had broken into the property at some point over the last several years and had been
kind of living inside and turned it into a bit of a squatter encampment, so it was just in really
bad shape, and it's a great block and a great community, and it was kind of holding the whole
area down so I was happy to tear the back down and fix it and again the use that you're proposing
are just three units in the three-star building that's right okay I don't have any further
that's right okay i don't have any further questions for mr agnell thank you does the
questions for Mr. Eggnall. Thank you.
board have any questions no no no planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission can you spell your last
name please b as in boy a as in apple r as in roger n as in nancy a as in apple r as in roger
d as in dog do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do okay you may proceed this property is indicated for single family residential in the
comprehensive plan we feel this proposal represents an overuse and that the property
is not unusual in shape or size we feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate sufficient
hardship accordingly we recommend against granting of the variances thank you
calendar number zero eight seven zero excuse me yes then can we hear from uh i guess the
community group or anybody else yeah sorry about that is there anyone else who would like to speak
please raise your hand
i see no hands at this time madam chair thank you calendar number is 0870 1209
snyder avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you very much thank you calendar number 2181 1322 south 53rd street the attorney is leo
Mulvihill.
Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to panelists.
Mr. Mulvihill, can you hear me?
Yes, you can.
Name and address for the record
and spell your last name, please.
Certainly, name is Leo Mulvihill,
that's M as in Michael, UL, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
Address is 315 Green Street,
first floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19123. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Do you also agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with proof of
ownership tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days
in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
with the packet's been emailed we met with the rco yesterday and i do have a letter which i
will share separately thank you you may proceed so good afternoon members of the board this is
leo mulvihill on behalf of city block acquisition 10. what i have for you today is a discussion
about the proposal that we have for this property and along with that this we will be requesting at
the at the end of our presentation a resumption hearing based on communications we've had with
council person's office since uh the meeting that we just had on i'm sorry on monday night
what i'll do first is i'll get to that letter that we received and then i'll get to my packet as
well okay a moment please so members of the board what i'm showing now is what i'm going to be
marking for the purpose of the record is applicant exhibit i guess we'll call it x just for purposes
of clarity. So we did hold this meeting. This letter is dated April 26, but I believe that
was a typographical error as we only had our meeting on Monday for this property. We did
meet with near neighbors. We are proposing a multifamily development after we had taken
several lots, six altogether, did a lot line relocation subdivision in the four lots that
were approximately 25 feet wide. We were proposing on each lot to build a multifamily residential
unit. So between the four lots, a total of 24 units. When we originally undertook this project,
this lot was zoned RM1. And by the time it was submitted, the lot had been rezoned our SA5. So
that's really the crux of our appeal here. But for the purpose of the record, again, I'm showing
into that x we had 32 attendees at a meeting with the 51st ward democratic rco there were a number
of votes in favor a number in opposition a number of abstentions but after continuing discussions
with this rco my client does wish to have containing discussions with them and the
council person's office but i will go through the remaining parts of my presentation now
that's part of the reason this was not included with the packet so back to my title page now i
I have a refusal appeal and project information form at page one area zoning maps at page 12 deeds for the properties are page 13 and they take up a substantial amount of my packet as a commercial activity license for my clients at page 126.
of my packet. It's a commercial I could be licensed for my clients at page 126.
Tax clearance is at 127. The zoning notification letter that I sent out, along with proof of
mailing, is at page 128. Photos are at page 131. Plans are at page 140. I also just want to mention
I'm not intentionally wearing sunglasses. These are my normal screen glasses, and my normal glasses
have broken. I'm waiting for a new pair. I'm not trying to be cool. This is the only way I can see.
So, for right now, I'm going to show everybody my presentation packet, including the refusal.
So, as I discussed, this is a single-family residential district.
We're proposing to erect four multi-family dwellings for a total of 24 units.
When we originally undertook this project and got everything rolling, did the subdivision, this was all zoned RM1.
and as part of council persons blackwell's uh efforts this was rezoned rsa 5 by the time we
had gotten all of that done this would have been a by right project before now it's not so now we're
in front of you essentially in this what we're proposing is for each structure two ada accessible
units in the ground story and then additional two bedroom units above um each of the units are going
be approximately 850 square feet for the two bedroom units and 650 square feet for the ground
floor units for purpose of the record i'm referring to page 5 of 147 of my packet so that we have that
all clear what's also been shown on the middle of the page here paragraph three is a number of other
multi-family properties on this block um they range in between two and five of six dwelling units
I know there's a rooming house on the corner as well, which indicate this property's multifamily history, despite the fact it's been recently rezoned as a single family, as it is largely single family home and homeownership across the street.
Going now to page 13 of my zoning packet. These are the screenshots that I took from the Philadelphia Atlas site. To the top, we see the area zoned RSA 5. I'm going to zoom in so it's less blurry.
the city zoning map doesn't yet reflect the fact that we've had this subdivision and new lot line
relocation done so the six lots that previously existed which varied from between 14 feet
to about 20 feet are now all even at approximately 25 feet looking down to the bottom of page 12
this is a screenshot showing the overhead view showing the large vacant lot which is the lot
that we're discussing, which is now currently legally for equal lots.
I'm going to skip over the several, approximately 100 pages of deeds, but I will assert for
the record that my client is the owner of all these properties.
We have received new OPA address numbers for them.
The subdivision has been completed to the best of my knowledge.
Just bear with me for one moment.
At page 124 of the packet, this is the address notice to be received with respect to the new parcels from the Office of Property Assessment.
This is my client's commercial activity license at page 126.
At page 127, this is a copy of my client's tax clearance certificate.
This is my notification dated Thursday, 22nd, 2021.
And the reverse to page 129.
At page 130, this is our proof of mailing showing that we sent out 126 letters to affected neighbors.
Going to page 132, pardon me, 131 rather, this is the property in question.
There's currently a fence.
There's large Victorian homes on the block.
On this side, the other side of the block, slightly smaller homes, not quite as grand as the large Victorians, but still very nice.
I'm just going to circle through so we have an idea of what we're looking at on the block.
This is looking towards the corner, 53rd Street.
You can see at the left of these photographs, which I apologize, are a little bit blurrier than I anticipated.
To the left, we see those larger Victorian homes, as I discussed.
At the end of the block, indicating where my cursor is, this is the larger rooming home that's been currently permitted, I believe for six units.
Across the street, these are the two family homes.
Pardon me, the two-story homes, rather.
This is looking up the block again.
back to our lot and back to the adjacent properties that show the larger Victorian homes on our side
of the block. For purposes of the record, this is an unnumbered page as it was a slip page that
was added to update our rendering at the request of an initial community meeting we had several
weeks ago with the RCO and some of the other affected residents. What we tried to do with
the terms of this design is kind of pay an homage to the existing structures on the block, a rounded
base, red brick, and try to make them look instead of like a large apartment complex,
and try to make them look instead of like a large apartment complex which we could have done if this
which we could have done if this were.
were one lot that we had built one building on when this was zoned rm1 rather we tried to take
an approach to make each of them look like a single property itself in line with what exists
already on the block which appear to be a mix of twins and row homes there have been discussions
after our community meeting on monday that there might be some revision to this facade
Specifically, some sort of addition of a porch area or an overhang in the front to try to tie into the existing structures that are adjacent on the block.
Some folks had wished that we'd put stairs or whatever else on the front.
The reason we're not, and really can't, because we want to keep the ADA accessibility for these ground story units.
And as soon as we start getting ramps or anything, pardon me, stairs or anything involved, that becomes a more difficult problem for us.
There are not basements for these units. There will not be substantial excavation or danger to the buildings adjacent.
As I referred to earlier, members of the board, this was a by right subdivision that was done a lot line relocation prior to this being rezoned RSA 5, which happened during the process of us trying to get everything together.
So we originally had one, two, three, four, five, six different sized lots, ranging in size from approximately 15 feet, indicating with my cursor, to approximately 20 feet, just shy of that.
So we took those six.
And now moving to the right side of that page, which is page 141 for the record.
Made four equal lots, each of which are in excess of what's required in this zoning district for lot size.
none of our buildings are proposed to be larger in terms of size height footprint scope open
area than what's allowed in the zoning district either so we tried to pay careful attention to
the immediate neighbors and the context of the neighborhood and designing the structures
the page 142 this is just a color version of the overhead site plan showing the front
porches that were front open areas that we're proposing perhaps we will be considering adding
some sort of decorative porch to match more in line with what's going on next door or at least
some sort of program. There's a rear yard area. That's where our air conditioning compressors
are going to be. There's an alley behind the properties. It's a common alley. The lots are
large. So it's 42, pardon me, 24 feet, 10 inches by approximately 102 feet deep. And that was what
we were thinking when putting this together, the highest best use of the lot. Considering
construction prices, considering AMI especially. My client does a lot of projects in this area
and we were very sensitive to new construction single-family homes price point versus new