Letter of None, Opposition from Council Member Squilla and Northern Liberties Association
has a proviso and a recommendation.
Alan Nockamson has been promoted.
Mr. Nocklinson, you've already been sworn in.
Just state your name for the record.
Alan Nocklinson.
Could you, oh, Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you.
Wait till he comes.
He'll be right back.
Here he is.
Mr. Holloman, could you follow up, give some follow-up questions, Mr. Nocklinson, please?
No problem, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or referral and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
All right. So I'm here to present 906 North Front Street. That property is owned by Nathaniel
Ittescu, who should be in the virtual audience. At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask
that Mr. Ittescu virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and I'll have a few questions for him.
So this zoning matter is with regards to visitor accommodations. We are hoping that the board
will grant a three-year temporary variance for this proposal.
So the first thing we'll review is a notice of refusal.
This is a single-family use and a single-family zoning classification,
and all we're looking to do is to have visitor accommodation use here.
Mr. Ittescu purchased the property in 2018 before there was enforcement by L&I
regarding these visitor accommodations,
and the change of conduct by L&I has caused us, you know, Mr. Ittescu to file an appeal
to hope to allow the legal use of the property. Prior to the change in the law, Mr. Ittescu
has used that property as an Airbnb. He's not using it now that way. But you'll see positive
reviews from him regarding this property. But in addition to the people who have used the property,
and have complimented Mr. Teskew
for being responsible short-term accommodations landlord,
we have a petition from nearby neighbors
as well as a letter of support
from the coordinating RCO
and the district council member.
We have, again,
the nearby visitor accommodation listings
to show that it's not out of character
to have visitor accommodations
in this part of Northern Liberties.
Also, we have the listing
for Mr. Teskew's property
via VRBO. We also have maps of the area. Again, we're not trying to increase density here.
There's a single-family zoning classification. We want a single-family use just on a short-term
basis. Then we'll review photographs of the property as well as the surrounding area,
both inside and out of the property. Some simple floor plans so the board can understand what
this property is about. Our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal, our decent property
showing that Mr. Teske is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax clearance
showing he's a good standing with respect to real estate taxes. At the conclusion of my presentation,
I would ask that Mr. Teske again raise his hand. All right, notice of refusal. Actually, I was
incorrect. I'm sorry. This is an RM1 zoning classification. And when I reviewed this,
Actually, you could do technically three units as of right because this is 1,082 square foot lot size, but that's not what Mr. Teskew is trying to do.
It was built as a single-family use.
That's all he wants to do.
But just so you understand, this is an RM1 zoning classification.
And then we have a letter of support from the Northern Liberties Neighbors Association.
We worked diligently with them in the presentation, as well as having a signed agreement with Mr.
Teskew, and we'll review that agreement.
But the proviso that I think is enforceable is three-year temporary variance.
They also stated a maximum of 10 people.
I don't know if that's an enforceable proviso.
I'll defer to the board in that respect.
I don't believe we have 10 people going to the property.
I don't believe we have 10 people, you know, going to the property at one point, but obviously we would agree to a three-year temporary variance.
And then, you know, as part of this process of having communications with the community and the coordinating RCO, they asked us to put a simple agreement together of, like, just rules that Mr. Teske would abide by, which he already does.
But, you know, they wanted Mr. Teske to sign it. So he has a noise monitor in his Airbnb. So in case it reaches over a certain level, he's notified and then tells obviously his tenant, you know, tenants as well to keep the sound down.
So that's something we would agree to continue with. He has quieted hours from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.
Again, that's something that he will abide by.
And when they submitted an application for the property on like an Airbnb site,
He asked the applicants how many guests will be in the property at the time they're renting it out. He'll abide by that going forward. That they would provide identification of all individuals who are going to be in the property. He'll abide by that.
and that he's not going to rent to anyone or any individuals
where the amount of the stay would be just one day.
That's where you see a lot of these nuisances.
And I think the spirit of the law is to prevent those type of nuisances.
That's not Mr. Tessue's intent.
He has a really nice house that he rents out, usually to families.
And he doesn't want this to be party central.
So he'll abide by that, that any stay has to be more than one day.
And let's see, and he'll provide his contact information to nearby neighbors.
So in case someone has to get a hold of him, because there is a nuisance type of tenant, they can reach him and then he can deal with it with the tenant.
And he already does that. He has a great relationship with nearby property owners and occupants.
And then we did a petition, not as extensive as we usually do.
I don't think there was much controversy here, but I told Mr. Teskew, why don't you go out there?
Here's a list of addresses that are considered effective properties.
Why don't you reach out to some of them, talk to them about the project and see if they support it.
And, you know, we do have a page of signatures and then some, in addition, some letters of support as well of nearby neighbors.
a lot of them on the 900 block of north front street and i think one of them is directly adjacent
to us and then again it's not out of character to have like visitor accommodation uh used nearby
and all we do is look at you know airbnb or vrbo and you know we give the board an idea of like you
know where they are and how much they're going for and then this is mr tescu's uh listing it's
You know, again, he hasn't actively used it because he can until this is this use is legal or legalized.
But you can see. Oh, I'm sorry. You can see he's at 4.8 stars out of five.
And you see some of the pictures that he has, like, you know, he keeps a really nice, clean house and he has nice furniture in there.
And he doesn't want to be a nuisance type of landlord for this type of use.
And then maps of the area, again, technically we're RM1.
There's a mix between CMX3.
It looks like some industrial use, some CMX2.5, a little bit of RSA5.
So it's a clear mix and diversity of zoning.
We're not that far off from Delaware Avenue and where Front Street is.
It's kind of a strange area.
It's a little bit commercial, a little bit residential in nature.
And here's a Google Maps perspective as well.
And then photographs of the property.
it's just single family use we have a front loading garage all legal newer construction
and then this is our property uh looking uh on north front street one direction
and then another direction and then this is proof that we posted the property of today's hearing
and then these are interior photos of our property
and then plans and drawings again single family use there is no basement use
first floor you have your garage uh you have a you have a little bedroom down here with a full
bath you go up a flight of steps you have an open floor plan of a dining room kitchen and
living room go up another flight of steps you have two bedrooms and two baths
and then just our meeting notice we met on october 30th at 6 30 p.m we emailed that notice
uh we typically try to do that um contemporaneous went the mail or so they can you know we have
um contemporaneous went the mailer so they can you know we have proof that we sent it to coordinating
proof that we sent it
rco and all other rcos as well as the district council members only eight which we did and then
51 addresses received this notice via a mailer and these are the addresses we mailed to proof of of
mailing to those addresses or application for appeal that we follow the mr test use behalf
along with the notice of refusal and the project information form, his deed to the property, showing that he's owned the property since 2018, and then finally, Certificate of Tax Clearance.
The only reason why he's showing a balance, it's not really due yet. It's just for 2024 taxes.
I will unshare my screen. I would ask that Mr. Teskew virtually raise his hand.
Mr. Teskew has been allowed to speak.
So could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Nathaniel Itescu, N-A-T-H-A-N-A-E-L, last name, Itescu, I, T as in Thomas, E as in elephant, S-C-U.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
please proceed counsel oh yes uh nathaniel you heard everything i had to state today about
yes and is it true and correct yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yes thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary
emerson not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
there are no hands chair cleaning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rm1 multi-family residential at this
location we feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship that would prevent the
property from being used in strict conformity with the code accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board deny the variance you mi 2023 004 874 906 north front street i vote yes
temporary variance expires 110 27 thomas holloman my vote is yes with proviso jane snell my vote is
Yes, with proviso.
Mr. Nockerman, could you stay on, please?
We're going to do number nine, MI 2023-005-747-1936 Watkins Street.
There is a letter of opposition from Point Breeze Community Development.
There's a letter of opposition from Council President Johnson,
and the applicant provided a petition by approximately 20 neighbors,
six form letters.
including the adjacent neighbor
at 1934 Watkins?
Yes, Alan Occamson.
I represent Ben...
Go ahead.
I represent Ben Horst,
the owner of the property.
That's Wizwith?
Yes, I'm sorry.
Yes, Wizwith, LLC.
Ben Horst is principal member.
Okay, all right.
And Mr. Holloman has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or referral and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay, let me just make sure I have the right presentation now.
all right so i'm here to present 1936 walk-in street same presentation is 906 uh front street
um this is an airbnb visit accommodation use that we're that we're trying to uh legalize um
you know so we'll review the notice of refusal we have correspondence from the point breeze
CDC. I did not receive the letter from the council president, so that is why it's not in the
presentation materials. You'll see from the letter that was from the Point Breast CDC, a couple
things. There was only seven people that attended the meeting, and it was a very close vote. It was
three to four. We were actually surprised we got a letter about opposition and people voted against
opposition that people voted against it because when we went to the meeting there really wasn't
it because when we went to the meeting, there really wasn't many questions.
many questions and it didn't seem very controversial to the people in the meeting so having anyone
against it was a little shocking but it was a close vote not many people showed up um and
we don't know how many of those people who are against the project are within the 500 uh 250
square feet of of the property the affected neighbors so it's really tough to tell like
it was just people in general if it was board members like i don't know who who voted and what
um but that's why we we always reach out to the community it's important for us to to get a
temperature from the community and all we do is you know tell our clients here are the addresses
within the affected area according to the city and we get you know people who hopefully are in
support of this project and as uh mr chair you stated like we try to get the people nearby the
people that are most directly impacted and we did get i believe the person next door to us uh so
it's really important to get an understanding and hopefully support from those people and we did
and that was 20 people which is you know again most people don't go to community meetings the
they you know we find that if if someone if it's a controversial project trust me we'll get enough
people at a community meeting here we didn't um and that means usually that um there's no there's
no real opposition, especially when you have a closed vote like that. And we're going to look
at nearby Airbnb listings. Again, it's not out of character to have Airbnbs here. Even in the
comments with the correspondence from the Point Breeze CDC, one of the comments was like, we want
Airbnbs. We just want it for out of town guests. When we make our presentation, what we found
is that people, there's two sets of individuals who use Airbnbs. One is for people from out
of town who just want to visit philadelphia and and they they want to not get you know into the